Re: SQL server RAID
From: Richard Ding (rding_at_acadian-asset.com)
Date: 08/12/04
- Next message: Peter The Spate: "RE: same job does not run on new server?"
- Previous message: Hari Prasad: "Re: way to get log and data file sizes?"
- In reply to: V: "SQL server RAID"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 11:28:37 -0400
Neither solution sounds a good option to me. You want to avoid putting data
and logs on the same disk array, as well as using RAID 1 for data file
because it's hurting write performance. Use RAID 5 or better yet, RAID 10/01
for data files. RAID 1 is good for log file placement.
"V" <v-chong@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:4ff501c48071$2cf21960$a601280a@phx.gbl...
> Can anyone point me to where I can find article on which
> RAID to be use with SQL server. I want to know if there
> is a performance difference by having the database and
> log on 1 RAID 5 or put them on 2 seperate RAID 1.
- Next message: Peter The Spate: "RE: same job does not run on new server?"
- Previous message: Hari Prasad: "Re: way to get log and data file sizes?"
- In reply to: V: "SQL server RAID"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
