August 20, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Hello,
The disk specs for the proposed sql server for our OLTP application are as follows
C:\ 68 gb 2 disks raid 1
D:\ 136 gb 4 disks raid 5
The default location for data, logs and backup are all on the d: drive. I know it is recommended that OS, Logs, Data and Backups all be on seperate physical drives.
My thought is to break it up as follows
C:\34 gb 1 disk raid 1 for OS
D:\135 gb 4 disks raid 5 for data
E:\34 gb 1 disk raid 1 for logs
- network share for backups.
Can anyone provide how their system is configured?
thanks!
August 21, 2008 at 4:13 am
CR8NK (8/20/2008)
C:\34 gb 1 disk raid 1 for OSE:\34 gb 1 disk raid 1 for logs
how do you intend to RAID 1 with only 1 disk for each.
you could RAID 1 the os and sql logs on the same drive if
you have storage constraints
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ya can't make an omelette without breaking just a few eggs" 😉
August 21, 2008 at 9:32 am
Ok so considering the fact that I have 6 disks to work with and a heavy write work load what would you recommend?
August 21, 2008 at 10:37 am
Do you need redundancy on the drives? (ie, if a drive fails must the system continue working)?
If so, your best option is 3 RAID 1 (mirrored) arrays. It may not be possible depending on the amount of space that the data requires.
If you don't need redundency, then consider a single drive for the OS, 3 drives in a RAID 0 (striped) array for the data and 2 drives in a RAID 0 (striped) array for the log.
Be careful if you go with the second option. A single drive failure will take your system offline.
RAID 5 is not good for heavy write loads. Because of the parity it has the slowest write performance of any of the commonly used RAID levels
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
August 21, 2008 at 10:40 am
if you're limmited to using only 6 disks, I'd personally organize them in 3 pairs of RAID 1. We have a couple smaller production servers setup this way:
C:\ = OS, OS paging file, SQL Server program files, system databases
D:\ = user databases
E:\ = user transaction logs
If the total of your user databases in size is greater than or expected to quickly grow to be more than the 34 gig you'll get from a mirrored pair, you'll probably be stuck with using a mirrored pair making up 34 gig for C:\ and then 4 disks in a RAID 5 for 102 gig for D:
August 21, 2008 at 11:41 am
How have you determined if you need redundancy in the past? Based on a user requirement for allowable downtime?
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply