Re: SQL Configuration

The two drives we have are:

C: RAID 0+1 36 GB (2 - 36 GB 10,000 RPM SAS)
D: RAID 5 204 GB (4 - 72 GB 10,000 RPM SAS)


"Ekrem Önsoy" <ekrem@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3AC16AFB-D66F-4C52-9F06-7C87FBEA6D42@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
My suggestion:
1- Install OS in drive X (you could make this drive set RAID1 for
redundancy)
2- Locate SQL Server data files in drive XX (Make this RAID10 if you are
looking perf + redundancy)
3- Locate Log files of data files in drive XXX (if possible make this
RAID1 if you are looking for perf + redundancy, if perf is the only
important thing then go for RAID0)

This way gives you the best perf. If temp db is being used in your
environment, then you may be thinking to locate it on its dedicated drive
as well.

P.S.
You may not care about the suggestions in parenthesis.

If you do not have enough disks, then you could locate your OS files on
drive X, data and log files on drive XX.

--
Ekrem Önsoy



"Neil" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:oQhMi.654$VX3.602@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
We are running SQL 7 on a server, and are moving to a new server and will
be upgrading to SQL 2005 at the same time. Currently, both the old and
the new servers have two drives, one for programs and one for data.

With the current configuration, SQL 7 and the data are both installed on
the data drive, in the MSSQL7 directory. Our sys admin wants to install
SQL 2005 on the program drive of the new server, while putting our
databases on the data drive. I argue that if SQL itself is on the program
drive, then the system databases will be in one place, while our
databases will be in another. So I'd prefer to have SQL 2005 installed on
the data drive, as it is now.

I'm interested in any feedback regarding what you guys think is the
better configuration, and also if there's any performance hit from having
the program and the database on two drives of the same machine.

Thanks,

Neil




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: tempdb on C drive?
    ... performance from having the tempdb data files, User db data files and Log ... files all on different physical drives or drive arrays. ... While adding more log files to the log drive array decreases the ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup)
  • Re: Backup Error 0x800423F0
    ... So much for recommending that the database and log files be on separate ... drives. ... Now a machine that succesfully completed a ASR set backup prior ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.general)
  • Re: Install SS 2005 - log files best practice
    ... Put transaction log files on a separate drive from data files. ... people don't realize it is not two separate physical drives. ... I am a programmer, not a DBA, and have to install Sql Server 2005. ... The network guy thinks it's okay to just install everything on the C ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup)
  • Re: SQL Configuration
    ... If it's write intensive then think about RAID10 (perf + redundancy) for your data and log files. ... will be upgrading to SQL 2005 at the same time. ... Our sys admin wants to install SQL 2005 on the program drive of the new server, while putting our databases on the data drive. ... I'm interested in any feedback regarding what you guys think is the better configuration, and also if there's any performance hit from having the program and the database on two drives of the same machine. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup)
  • Re: configuration: data and log file
    ... RAID stands for Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks. ... Since neither of these drives are in a fault tolerant drive array you can ... By this I mean you want to place the log files ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup)
Loading