My boss asked me to evaluate a couple of different server scenarios, specifically RAID levels. What do I need to consider when weighing RAID 5 v. RAID 10?
I agree with MRdenny to a point. I think you expand the question back? How big, how many users, what do the tables look like. You may want another RAID for indexes, or depending on the db size and type another Filegroup RAID for specific tables
I never said a single RAID 5 for the database files. Database files (mdf, ndf) will give you best performance for the dollar on RAID 5 arrays. One you start getting into larger databases then I like to start laying this out like this.
C: - OS (RAID 1)
D: - SQL Binaries (RAID 1)
E: - High Performing Database Files (RAID 5) (Meta LUN with 15+ drive behind it)
F: - Indexes (RAID 5)
G: - Database Files (RAID 5)
L: - Database Log Files (RAID 1)
T: - TempDB, ERRORLOG, SQLAgent.OUT, etc (RAID 1)
Depending on the system needs more of less drive letters. I've got a system I'm working on now with 6 drive letters free, and I'm currently working on breaking the single large data file into 9 smaller files on various LUN mount points which will all be attached as folders on the E drive to increase performance without needing 9 more drive letters (which I don't have available).
Check out my FAQ on Disk layouts. Most of this is sovered there.
Denny
MCSA (2003) / MCDBA (SQL 2000)
MCTS (SQL 2005 / Microsoft Windows SharePoint Services 3.0: Configuration / Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007: Configuration)
MCITP Database Administrator (SQL 2005)
--Anything is possible. All it takes is a little research. (Me)
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.