Re: RAID and Partition

any recommendations as to the stripe size to use for the RAID 10 set?

Kerry

"John Fullbright" <fullbrij@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23WgCh3sHGHA.1288@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> RAID 1 for OS/Page File.
> RAID 1 for Logs
> RAID 0+1 For DBs
>
> When you build out the 2800, don't use Server Assist. Server Assist
> starts with a FAT partition that is later converted to NTFS. This results
> in an allocation unit size, or cluster size, of 512 bytes. IO to the page
> file is 4K. When an IO request larger than the allocation unit size hits
> the file system driver, it splits the request into multiple smaller
> requests. In this case, each time a page is swapped that's 8 IOs instead
> of 1. You want a 4K allocation unit size on the OS partition, which by
> the way, is the NTFS default.
>
>
>
> "Kerry Hoskin" <kjho@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:%23UF9JyqHGHA.208@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> similair question.
>>
>> DELL PE2800 with 8*36Gb 15k disks around 180 mailboxes.
>>
>> Thinking of RAID 1 for OS,Pagefile
>>
>> and then either RAID 10 for the remaning 6 disks with partitions for logs
>> and DB or RAID 1 for logs and RAID 5+ hotspare
>>
>>
>>
>> "John Fullbright" <Fullbrij@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:OT3P76VHGHA.2212@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>I like to keep the logs seperate. With only 100 users you may want to
>>>consider
>>>
>>> a mirror for the OS and smtp queue
>>> a mirror for the logs
>>> a mirror for the databases
>>>
>>> If we assume 10K drives, a mirror will give you:
>>>
>>> writes = 85*2/2 or 85 IOPS
>>> reads = 85*2 04 170 IOPS
>>>
>>> With a 3:1 read/write ratio for the database applied:
>>>
>>> (170*.75) + (85*.25) = 127.5 + 21.25 = 148.75 IOPS
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "jc" <jc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:DD5FACAE-63CF-4F0A-AC93-5721FB28B39E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Can some one confirm following configuration is effection for 100
>>>> Exchange
>>>> 2003 users?
>>>> - 6 ea SCSI 73G ea RAID system
>>>> - RAID 1 (disk0 and disk1) for OS, Logs and Queue
>>>> - RAID 10 (disk 2,3,4,5) for data
>>>>
>>>> Question:
>>>> - Should I partition RAID1 to C: (20G) for OS, D: for others, any
>>>> advantage
>>>> - Is it better to have RAID 5 (instead RAID10) with HotSpare, so I have
>>>> better protection?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> JimmyChang
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: IO Bottleneck
    ... At a minimum, you should have a mirror for the OS, a mirror for the logs, ... write times on the the RAID 5 array far exceed 20ms. ... Troubleshooting Analyzer, and of course, the results indicated a disk ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.design)
  • Re: SQL Server benchmarks comparing disk setups?
    ... I will repost in a more accurate newsgroup. ... > disk arrays for a SQL server, e.g. a mirror for the OS, a mirror for the ... > transaction logs, and RAID 5 or 10 for the database files. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.security)
  • Re: Exchange Disks
    ... Logs raid 1 mirror ... consider single drives for the OS and or Logs instead of mirrors. ... Is there some sort of rule-of-thumb for setting up disks based on a number ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.setup)
  • Re: RAID and Partition
    ... best performance and still have mirror protection. ... RAID 0+1 For DBs ... logs and DB or RAID 1 for logs and RAID 5+ hotspare ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.design)
  • Re: Splitting our Exchange 2003 Ent Database
    ... you need to get your transaction logs on a seperate set of ... chance to put the RAID 5 to 10. ... an isolated set of spindles. ... OS and transactions are on a Mirror. ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.admin)