Re: New Server RAID setup

Tech-Archive recommends: Fix windows errors by optimizing your registry

From: Andrew J. Kelly (sqlmvpnooospam_at_shadhawk.com)
Date: 07/11/04 

Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 20:20:58 -0400

That will be depend solely on what controller you have and the software
supplied to support it. I would refer you to the manufacture for that. 

-- 
Andrew J. Kelly  SQL MVP
"RAJ" <RAJ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:346D0BE9-CC56-4B76-B253-9A16FA4BC0A5@microsoft.com...
> I know that was supposed to be the last question, but, can you refer me to
where I can obtain instruction on configuring RAID 10 using HD's?
> -- 
> RAJ
>
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
>
> > A Raid 10 is a series of Mirrored drives (Raid 1) that are then striped
in a
> > Raid 0.  Ultimately it is treated as a single drive array but under the
> > covers it really is implemented as two different arrays.  This allows
for
> > high performance due to the Raid 0 but has the fault tolerance of Raid 1
for
> > each of the stripes in the Raid 0.
> >
> > -- 
> > Andrew J. Kelly  SQL MVP
> >
> >
> > "RAJ" <RAJ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:ED7350C9-7946-4394-AFB3-D912A2D46B0D@microsoft.com...
> > > Just one last question regarding RAID 1+0 (10).  Am I correct in
saying
> > RAID 10 is setup on ONE RAID array?  I believe it is one array.  I ask
> > because a in-depth tech. document referres to the mirrors in a RAID 10
as
> > "sub-arrays"
> > > Please advise.
> > > Andrew thank you for all your help!
> > > -- 
> > > RAJ
> > >
> > >
> > > "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> > >
> > > > Again it all depends on lots of thinks that I have no knowledge of
about
> > > > your situation.  Ideally yes it would be best to have IIS etc on
another
> > > > machine.  If you have one all set up already and it won't affect the
> > current
> > > > apps performance then maybe it is easier that way.  Then you don't
have
> > to
> > > > administer two servers with IIS and ASP and won't have to worry
about
> > > > sharing resources with SQL Server.  But you will know that much
better
> > than
> > > > I. There is always the ideal or wishful scenario and then there is
real
> > life
> > > > where you make due with what you have.
> > > >
> > > > -- 
> > > > Andrew J. Kelly  SQL MVP
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "RAJ" <RAJ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:B4B305DC-7905-4692-A307-06C4C9A444CA@microsoft.com...
> > > > > Ok, it is NOT recommended that IIS & ASP .NET be running on the
same
> > > > server as SQL for performance & security reasons.  If in fact I go
with
> > ASP
> > > > ..NET & IIS running on the same server as SQL I should install more
> > memory.
> > > > Point taken, I got that.
> > > > > I have IIS running on another, under utilized server.  Would you
> > recommend
> > > > I user that server for IIS & ASP.NET functionality of this project?
> > > > > -- 
> > > > > RAJ
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > While you can certainly run IIS, ASP etc on the same server as
SQL
> > > > Server it
> > > > > > is never recommended if performance is a consideration not to
> > mention
> > > > > > Security.  I don't know how large your DB will be and how much
> > memory
> > > > IIS
> > > > > > and ASP will eventually use but I would say you will want more
than
> > 1GB.
> > > > > > And make sure you set your MAX Memory setting in SQL Server to a
> > value
> > > > that
> > > > > > will leave plenty of ram for the OS, IIS and ASP.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > Andrew J. Kelly  SQL MVP
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "RAJ" <RAJ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:0D0EDE25-7FF2-451B-91A1-AA2FDD470575@microsoft.com...
> > > > > > > Great, I'll proceed w/ RAID 1+0 (10).  The server currently
has 1
> > gig
> > > > of
> > > > > > memory.  It's going to be running .NET serving up Active Server
> > Pages
> > > > (ASP)
> > > > > > inside IIS.  Do you think 1 gig of memory is sufficient?
> > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > RAJ
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The number of users does not mean much either, it's what
they
> > will
> > > > be
> > > > > > doing
> > > > > > > > and how often they will be doing it.  By RAID 1+0 I meant
Raid
> > 10
> > > > and no
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > don't want to create a Raid 0 and a Raid 1.  If those are
the
> > only
> > > > disks
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > have then I would keep it as a Raid 10 and your only choice
will
> > be
> > > > to
> > > > > > place
> > > > > > > > every thing on drive array.  Is this server going to host
the
> > > > > > application as
> > > > > > > > well?  If so make sure you have enough ram for both.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > > Andrew J. Kelly  SQL MVP
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "RAJ" <RAJ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > news:2664451A-AC77-45B3-9EA3-0E980A7919F3@microsoft.com...
> > > > > > > > > The server is going to be used as a .NET server, for
document
> > > > > > managment.
> > > > > > > > The utilization, I believe is going to be low.  There are
going
> > to
> > > > be at
> > > > > > > > most 150 users utilizing the server.  As far as RAID 1+0, am
I
> > > > correct
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > saying the OS & SQL application be placed on a RAID 0 array
&
> > the
> > > > log
> > > > > > files
> > > > > > > > be placed on a RAID 1?
> > > > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > > > RAJ
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > How you should configure the drives depends a lot on
what
> > your
> > > > going
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > > > with them.  If you app is relatively small or only has a
few
> > > > > > > > transactions
> > > > > > > > > > per second that approach sounds fine.  The more trans /
sec
> > you
> > > > get
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > more
> > > > > > > > > > likely you will see disk issues unless you place the log
> > file on
> > > > > > it's
> > > > > > > > own
> > > > > > > > > > Raid 1.  I would say start witht he Raid 1+0 and see how
it
> > > > goes.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > > > > Andrew J. Kelly  SQL MVP
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > "RAJ" <RAJ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > >
news:281E5061-F153-4635-82D4-2EB720D27A4B@microsoft.com...
> > > > > > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > > > > > > I have a new IBM eServer w/ 5 identical HD's.  I'm new
to
> > SQL
> > > > and
> > > > > > I'm
> > > > > > > > > > researching the best HD configuration.  I've come to the
> > > > conclusion
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > using 4 of the HD's for a RAID 10 configuration and
keeping
> > the
> > > > 5th
> > > > > > > > drive as
> > > > > > > > > > a hotswap backup drive.  With that said I have two
> > questions.
> > > > > > > > > > > 1.  Can I go wrong creating a RAID 10 & a hotswap
drive?
> > > > > > > > > > > 2.  I there anything else I should consider regarding
the
> > > > config.
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > HD's?
> > > > > > > > > > > Any and all suggestions welcome!
> > > > > > > > > > > Thank You!
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > > > > > RAJ
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >

Relevant Pages

  • Re: SQL Server file setup across different volumes
    ... Having two logical drives on a single array can give false ... logical drives you should be OK since they don't do much writing. ... But unless you need more space a Raid 1 would probably be a better choice. ... Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup)
  • Re: SQL Server file setup across different volumes
    ... > other and the log file should be on it's own Raid 1 array. ... > Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP ... C: and D: are the same physical array ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup)
  • Re: New Server RAID setup
    ... I know that was supposed to be the last question, but, can you refer me to where I can obtain instruction on configuring RAID 10 using HD's? ... Ultimately it is treated as a single drive array but under the ... > Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP ... >>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup)
  • Software RAID-1 with Mandrake9.0 problems - LONG
    ... I have configured RAID -1 ... md: md0: raid array is not clean -- starting background reconstruction ... ...trying to set up timer as Virtual Wire IRQ... ... host bus clock speed is 132.8612 MHz. ...
    (comp.os.linux.setup)
  • Re: Problems with software RAID on SATA
    ... Connected to this are two 320GB drives ... >>which I want to turn into a RAID1 array. ... >>I'm almost certain it's a problem with initting the RAID arrays at boot. ...
    (Debian-User)