RE: Client machines slow under hyper v

Hi Mike,

Thanks for your reply. Good point. I've never used RAID5 before. I better
grab myself another disk and then move the array

"Mike Moreland" wrote:

You might want considering running a raid 0+1, instead of raid 5. I too,
have 2 servers. One runs 2003 server, while the other runs 2008. I have
both servers in raid 0+1. I've run raid 5 before and had performance issues.
Due to the amount of parity calculating required, RAID 5 can seriously slow
down a system. Performance will depend to some extent upon the stripe size
chosen. Also, if your using a software raid 5 you'll experience even more
performance loss. The overhead necessary in dealing will all the parity will
continue to bog down writes. Here are some of raid 0+1 advantages.
RAID 0+1 is implemented as a mirrored array whose segments are RAID 0 arrays
RAID 0+1 has the same fault tolerance as RAID level 5.
RAID 0+1 has the same overhead for fault-tolerance as mirroring alone
High I/O rates are achieved thanks to multiple stripe segments
Excellent solution for sites that need high performance but are not overly
concerned with achieving maximum reliability.
Good luck.



--
Mike Moreland
(C) 972.271.5083
Integrated Secure


"muaddib32" wrote:

I have two servers I am running as hyper v clients on a new W2008 server.
They are running very slowly. It takes minutes for them to perform the
simplest action such as opening IE. The virtual disks are stored on a RAID5
array.

I used to have them running as clients on a Athlon3200 W2003 server with 2GB
RAM running VMWare server and they were much faster. The disk then was just
RAID0.

Can anyone suggest how I can speed them up. Without adding extra hardware
as I shouldn't have thought it was necessary.

Cheers
Ben

Host:
Windows 2008 Standard (normal not server core)
8GB RAM
Xeon 5030 processor

Client 1
Small Business Server 2003
2GB RAM

Client 2
Windows Server 2003 + SQL Server 2005
1.5GB RAM

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Windows XP RAID 5
    ... array "disappears". ... Looking at Tom's guide to Windows XP RAID 5, ... Performance alone isn;t that big an issue for me - disk ... than 500 gig, I want it all in one easy to find and organise place. ...
    (uk.comp.homebuilt)
  • Re: [opensuse] 10.2 no RAID to 11.0 RAID 1
    ... 10.2 no RAID to 11.0 RAID 1 ... you can force rebuilds in mdadm in situations where no firmware raid will ever let you. ... Send me your problem disks that you think are impossible to assemble and I bet in a little while I can tell you how to assemble the array as long as there actually is enough there to use. ... One thing I've seen, which I don't think is your problem but shows the kind of thing that happens, a disk will drop out of the array and reappear instantly as a higher drive letter than the system really has. ...
    (SuSE)
  • Re: P5LD2-Deluxe and RAID 1 rebuild...how to stop
    ... >>> When the Intel software wants to rebuild the RAID 1 array, ... >>> disk to the other disk, to resync the members of the RAID 1 ... > One thing I'm curious about, is the Intel RAID BIOS does ...
    (alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus)
  • Re: Convert RAID1 to RAID5
    ... In a typical R5 array that is installed/setup by small shops, where they have 3xDisk for R5, you are right, but, in a proper setup where you have 5xDisks or more, then you will see a LOT of read performance that you don't get out of a Mirror - this is very much the case when you have LOTS of users accessing the server or have a SQL database that users are hitting. ... then install another RAID-0 or RAID-1 or single disk for page file, it's still not as fast as a properly configured system designed for SQL use. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Installing Adaptec 1420SA SATA RAID controller
    ... neither disk nor RAID array. ... What about returning the Adaptec controller and replacing it with some ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
Loading