Re: SQL 2000 on SAN
- From: kghammond@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 1 Feb 2006 08:05:32 -0800
>>From what I am reading, most people say that you should treat your SAN just like local disks. So the best disk layout we could ask for would look like this: One LUN with RAID 10 space for log files & tempdb One LUN with preferably RAID 10 space, but RAID 5 is ok for DB files I just understand the theoretically ideas behind a SAN. Can one set of fault tolerant controllers mount two separate LUNs that connect to two different sets of disks. Now the above would assume that the provider has multiple SAN segments that are divided into RAID10 or RAID 5 space, correct? If they have all the SAN in one big RAID 5 set then the above is impossible... Also, I have read in a few places about optimizing disk I/O on databases and tempdb by creating one file per CPU so your disk I/O is better threaded. Is this still the case when your database files are located on a SAN volume? Thank You, Kevin .
- Prev by Date: Re: Database Mail SQL Server Agent Operator Alerts
- Next by Date: Re: SQL 2000 on SAN
- Previous by thread: Re: installation of reporting services
- Next by thread: Re: SQL 2000 on SAN
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading