Re: Disk Partitioning on exch 2003

"Al Mulnick" <amulnick_No_SPAM@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:OSAxceYXFHA.580@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

> The only suggestion that comes to mind with those limitations is that
> you may want to consider changing the limitations of the disk.
> Putting the log files on the same drive partition is not a best
> practice after years of learning the hard way by many people. You
> really should consider getting some other disks to put the log files.
> If that's not possible, then putting the log files on the same drive
> as the OS would likely yield better performance than putting them on a
> RAID 5 partition. If that's not a concern either, than I can't offer
> any other suggestions :)
>


Keep in mind that most people will create a RAID1 and RAID5 array on the
same RAID controller. That does nothing for performance. I would make a
single array using all 6 drives, 3 logical partitions, the first one
around 20-30GB for the OS, a 20-30 GB for the logs and the rest for
data. If you really are that concerned about performance with the logs,
then I'd go with 2 partitions on my RAID5 array, and put a mirrored pair
of 35GB drives on a separate controler to house my logs.


> Al
> "Brett W" <Postmaster.au@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:347e01c55abc$6977d660$a401280a@xxxxxxxxxx
>> Hi All,
>>
>> We are currently implementing a new exch 2003
>> implementation. I have read that certain partioning will
>> give better performance of the exch server.
>>
>> We have a userbase of around 1200. The server has 6 73G
>> disks with a single channel raid controller. 3G of Ram
>>
>> Im thinking that it would be best to make two disks raid 1
>> for the OS and exch installation. Then making the other 4
>> raid 5 however partitioned into two with the databases on
>> one and the log files on the other.
>>
>> Does anyone have any suggestions or comments on what would
>> be the best configuration for partitioning.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Brett
>
>
>

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Installing SQL Server 2005 on Windows 2003 Server (RAID 5) - need advice
    ... available disks and set up I can put the data files on D: ... on RAID 5 which has a greater read performance ... and put the .ldf files (Log files, by their nature, are mostly written ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup)
  • Re: Debian+LVM+RAID
    ... When the swap partition quits working, ... good hardware RAID controller and likely put the swap partition onto ... Aren't you making it hard by having to partition all the disks ... I had the disks partitioned and had created RAID arrays ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: Debian+LVM+RAID
    ... When the swap partition quits working, ... I am not sure that raid1 is noticeable slower than raid0, ... Aren't you making it hard by having to partition all the disks ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: raid 1 partition lost after rebuild
    ... I use it in raid 1 mode, having 2 mirrored disks. ... partition is C, system, and secondary partition is E, files. ... which I tracked down to a problem with the raid array. ... RAID controller that does not have a clear user interface and ...
    (comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage)
  • Re: convert dynamic to basic in sbs 2003 (partition size problems)
    ... hardware RAID? ... I seem to remember that 2000 or later support access to ... software RAID created on 'basic' disks by NT4 but all software RAID created ... browse partition and properties. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
Loading