Re: RAID for Terminal servers...

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

SCSI can have 2 commands in each channel while SATA/IDA can only have 1.
I'm not saying your config won't work, I'm saying you must be aware of how
these differences may affect the performance and number of users you'll get
on the system. In all honesty, with the amount of money your putting into
the number of channels and drives, you'd be better off going with a SCSI
RAID card and less drives and still get the same or better performance.
There shouldn't be any reason to have 6 drives in a terminal server.

Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com


"Mrpush" <Mrpush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:D3D7C19B-F638-460C-9DE2-49458F82774A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thanks for the info guys.

As for the SATA, I have 6 drives, each on its own channel on the
ocntroller.
Does this not elievate some of the bottlenecking problems with SATA?

As in the array and the striping, the commands go through 6 channels
instead
of 1 or 2 on a SCSI controller.

In this sense, is SCSI still better?

Thaks much,

Mp

"Jeff Pitsch" wrote:

Benny is correct in that there is no definitive answer. On the other
hand,
SATA is inferior to SCSI with channel bandwidth and the ability handle
multiple commands in the channel (which it cannot do). As well, I
typically
recommend 15k drives as well because disk is obviously the slowest
component of a system so the faster the better.

Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com

"Mrpush" <Mrpush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:D3C7EEDC-F1F1-49BA-9694-0FD90D22309F@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hello,

I have a TS which will have 30-50 users running at most MS
office/Outlook
and our industry Application.

I currently have 2-73 GB SATA 10K drives installed in a RAID 1 array.

Will this configuration support my users without serious performance
problems or will I need multiple arrays like Raid 1/5 or Raid 1/10?

Thanks much,

MP







.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Question on ultra160 hard drives (performances, pinout...)
    ... One server is not an other server. ... Drives in a small office desktop server ... And even 'stock' SCSI drives from 'Seagate, IBM, or whoever' may be setup differently from oneanother. ... A scsi channel only supports 4 devices simultaniously anyway. ...
    (comp.periphs.scsi)
  • slow fibre channel, router, scsi tape
    ... tape drive and some scsi disks are on on its 6 lvd-160 scsi channels. ... These are AIT-3 and Exabyte M2 drives, ... If I attempt to saturate the channel with io, in a simple form, ... I do even a bit of disk traffic to a scsi disk on ...
    (SunManagers)
  • Re: SCSI--LVD vs SE...
    ... > Concerning SCSI, are LVD and SE mutually exclusive? ... > drives with this board. ... > I get better performance from having both drives on the same channel ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: [OT] SCSI command filter: Add cdparanoia to the list
    ... > to be affected by the SCSI filter also. ... The commands cdparanoia uses are: ... 0xD4 (10-byte read on old Sony and NEC drives) ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: What do you use?
    ... I haven't used any SATA stuff yet. ... >>I can guarantee modern SCSI throughput is superior to any of the SATA ... you've got drives like the WD 'Raptor' ... so effectively need one channel per disk. ...
    (freebsd-questions)