RE: SQL Server 2000 STD vs RAID performance

From: Guillaume Genest (Guillaume.Genest_at_qc.teknion.com)
Date: 04/02/04 

Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 05:52:31 -0800

Hi,
       What about RAID 10, like Paul Cahill said, is
there any reason to user RAID 5 instead of RAID10?

thanks!

>-----Original Message-----
>Hi Guillaume,
>
>It depends on your requirements. RAID levels 0, 1, and 5
are typically used
>with SQL Server.
>
>A hardware disk array improves I/O performance because
I/O functions, such
>as striping and mirroring, are handled efficiently in
firmware. Conversely,
>an operating system-based RAID offers lower cost but
consumes processor
>cycles. When cost is a consideration and redundancy and
high performance
>are required, Microsoft Windows? NT? stripe sets with
parity or Windows
>2000 RAID-5 volumes are a good solution.
>
>Data striping (RAID 0) is the RAID configuration with
the highest
>performance, but if one disk fails, all the data on the
stripe set becomes
>inaccessible. A common installation technique for
relational database
>management systems is to configure the database on a
RAID 0 drive and then
>place the transaction log on a mirrored drive (RAID 1).
You can get the
>best disk I/O performance for the database and maintain
data recoverability
>(assuming you perform regular database backups) through
a mirrored
>transaction log.
>
>If data must be quickly recoverable, consider mirroring
the transaction log
>and placing the database on a RAID 5 disk. RAID 5
provides redundancy of
>all data on the array, allowing a single disk to fail
and be replaced in
>most cases without system downtime. RAID 5 offers lower
performance than
>RAID 0 or RAID 1 but higher reliability and faster
recovery.
>
>For more information, please refer to the following
article:
>Comparing Different Implementations of RAID Levels
>http://doc.ddart.net/mssql/sql2000/html/optimsql/odp_tun_
1_79pv.htm
>
>I am looking forward to hearing from you soon.
>
>Regards,
>
>Michael Shao
>Microsoft Online Partner Support
>Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
>This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and
confers no rights.
>
>.
>

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Disk Bottleneck and Avg. Disk Queue Length on Exchange 2003
    ... Check Database - Log Record Stalls/sec as well. ... If you see spikes in disk latency correlate to spikes in log record stalls, ... RAID 1 for the Logs ... >> and log files sharing a single set of disks? ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.admin)
  • Re: Splitting our Exchange 2003 Ent Database
    ... Database - Log record stalls/dec ... Physical disk transaction/sec ... RAID and RAID card) affect the speed of the Physical Disk - sec/write ... OS and transactions are on a Mirror. ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.admin)
  • Re: V880 LVM and Oracle performance
    ... >> LVM support on this box and RAID. ... >> how LVM can impact Oracle database especially regarding ... >> especially when heavy disk operations are performed by Oracle. ... This is a S/W RAID5 definition, ...
    (comp.unix.solaris)
  • Re: Splitting our Exchange 2003 Ent Database
    ... Database - Log record stalls/dec = ... fault occurs and the page is retrieved from disk. ... RAID and RAID card) affect the speed of the Physical Disk - sec/write on ... OS and transactions are on a Mirror. ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.admin)
  • RE: SQL Server 2000 STD vs RAID performance
    ... A hardware disk array improves I/O performance because I/O functions, ... Data striping (RAID 0) is the RAID configuration with the highest ... A common installation technique for relational database ... If data must be quickly recoverable, consider mirroring the transaction log ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.server)
Loading