February 1, 2010 at 4:21 pm
We generally use Raid 5 for our databases because single disk recovery is a breeze.
We are about to start a new project involving a very large database. Some of the tables will have perhaps 100 million records.
I'm wondering if it would be more efficient to use filegroups to horizontally partition these tables based on a key or use RAID 5 or perhaps 10 to stripe the tables across the disks on the server. I don't think doing filegroups and raid makes sense.
Any recommendations?
When the snows fall and the white winds blow,The lone wolf dies but the pack survives.
Once you've accepted your flaws, no one can use them against you.
February 1, 2010 at 6:36 pm
The basic answer is that Raid 5 is slower, but has better recoverability. Raid-10 is a bit less good for recoverability, but is substantially faster to write to.
That said - that's where the easy answer stops. Depending on your usage patterns, you may find one is substantially better than the other.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 1 (of 1 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply