No offense but I'd love to see some actual performance
data on this rather than opinion.
John T (Lists) wrote:
Sorry,
make that Raid5 is poor on write.
It is
great on read.
Spool and
mailboxes have a lot of write
activity.
John T
eServices
For You
"Seek, and
ye shall
find!"
-----Original
Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of John T (Lists)
Sent: Thursday, February 23,
2006 12:57 PM
To:
[email protected]
Subject: RE: [IMail
Forum] New
Server Specs
For spool
and mail boxes, faster is
better.
Do not
user Raid5 for spool or mail
boxes. Raid5 is poor on read.
Search the
archives. There has been a
lot of discussion about this in the past.
John T
eServices
For You
"Seek, and
ye shall
find!"
-----Original
Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Jim F.
Sent: Thursday, February 23,
2006 12:13 PM
To:
[email protected]
Subject: [IMail Forum]
New Server
Specs
I haven't gotten any responses to any of my
other questions that I've
sent to the group, hopefully this one will.
I'm trying to spec out a new server and had a
question for the group in
regard to HDD configuration. What kind of RAID setup works best on a
mid-size Imail installation? Is RAID-1 acceptable or is RAID-5
recommended? Also, would 15K RPM disks make a huge difference as
opposed to 10K
RPM disks?
|
- Re: [IMail Forum] New Server Specs Matrosity Hosting
-
