Re: Disk Configuration help
From: abgray (abgray_at_bigpond.com)
Date: 03/04/05
- Next message: Al Mulnick: "Re: Front-End server question"
- Previous message: Michael Mendoza: "Re: Front-End server question"
- In reply to: Al Mulnick: "Re: Disk Configuration help"
- Next in thread: mitch: "Re: Disk Configuration help"
- Reply: mitch: "Re: Disk Configuration help"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 11:12:55 +1100
Thanks Al, great advice. I really appreciate it.
"Al Mulnick" <amulnick_No_SPAM@ncDOTrr.com> wrote in message
news:%233CO50$HFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Performance is tightly coupled to disk performance. Having multiple
> stores has a low impact in most cases vs. having one large one. In a
> certain range (size of db) the performance will likely be equal, but after
> a larger store size is attained, performance would likely degrade on a
> single store vs. a multiple store configuration due to background tasks
> taking longer etc.
>
> Otherwise, the disk is the limiting factor in performance etc.
> (typically). Having a new store on a separate volume is typically a good
> way to increase performance as the two stores no longer have to compete
> for IOPS.
>
>
> I'd go with option 1 and not feel uncomfortable about it.
>
> Al
>
>
>
> "abgray" <abgray@bigpond.com> wrote in message
> news:eWR$559HFHA.3776@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> Al
>>
>> Thanks for your response. Yes, the aim is eventually to split one very
>> large database into smaller, more manageable databases - allowing for
>> faster restore times. At the moment however our main goal is to make
>> sure we don't run out of disk space. Will performance be compromised by
>> adding a new store on a different volume in the same storage group? ie
>> Option 1 as I outlined below.
>>
>> Appreciate your help.
>>
>>
>> "Al Mulnick" <amulnick_No_SPAM@ncDOTrr.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23rgIBGtHFHA.588@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>> It can use the same log files. Usually the guiding decisions are about
>>> restoration times, backup times, and do you really need more log file
>>> resources?
>>>
>>> Either should do what you want however.
>>>
>>> Al
>>>
>>> "abgray" <abgray@bigpond.com> wrote in message
>>> news:uBLkYwlHFHA.2984@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> I currently have an exchange 2000 server setup in a 2 node cluster
>>>> configuration, database and log files are stored on a SAN. The cluster
>>>> servers are current;y running 1GB RAM but will soon be upgraded to 2GB.
>>>>
>>>> Current storage setup is
>>>> 1 x 150GB partition for db - F:\
>>>> 1 x 20 gb partition for logfiles - L:\
>>>>
>>>> Situation
>>>> ---------
>>>> The database is nearing its storage capacity and I would like to need
>>>> to
>>>> create another information store on a separate drive. I have enough
>>>> disk to
>>>> create another RAID 5 array and another RAID 0+1 array for logfiles if
>>>> needed. My question is, can the newly created information store on a
>>>> new
>>>> array and new volume use the same drive for logfiles as the current
>>>> running
>>>> information store or do I need to create a new storage group with new
>>>> db and
>>>> logfiles.
>>>>
>>>> What is the best configuration option1 or option 2 or neither. I would
>>>> prefer option 1 if its possible. I really appreciate any help and
>>>> guidance
>>>> that can be offered.
>>>>
>>>> Option 1
>>>> ---------
>>>> Stroage Group1
>>>> Array1 RAID0+1 L:\ Logfiles
>>>> Array2 RAID5 F:\ Exchange DB 1
>>>> Array3 RAID5 G:\ Exchange DB 2
>>>>
>>>> Option 2
>>>> ---------
>>>> Stroage Group1
>>>> Array1 RAID0+1 L:\ Logfiles
>>>> Array2 RAID5 F:\ Exchange DB 1
>>>> Stroage Group2
>>>> Array4 RAID0+1 L:\ Logfiles
>>>> Array3 RAID5 F:\ Exchange DB 1
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
- Next message: Al Mulnick: "Re: Front-End server question"
- Previous message: Michael Mendoza: "Re: Front-End server question"
- In reply to: Al Mulnick: "Re: Disk Configuration help"
- Next in thread: mitch: "Re: Disk Configuration help"
- Reply: mitch: "Re: Disk Configuration help"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|