I think you should use raid 1 with the 9gig drives x 2. One arm for the OS
and one arm for the logs. Even at 400 users I could see the performance
increase by putting the logs on a different arm. Why would this save you
money? Even if you put the Logs and OS on the same Channel but different
a
I don't think that you can/should put your OS on a RAID5. Standard practice
is Mirror the OS, RAID5 everything else.
GL!
-Original Message-
From: Vincent Avallone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 3:56 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Getting Close to my final
have a few 9gig drives
available.
-Original Message-
From: Waters, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 4:03 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Getting Close to my final configuration
I think you should use raid 1 with the 9gig drives x 2. One arm for the
I'm starting to see that now.
-Original Message-
From: Joe Rojas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 4:10 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Getting Close to my final configuration
I don't think that you can/should put your OS on a RAID5. Standar
I think it's poor design. Use Raid 1 for the logs. If you're short of
spindles put the OS on the same volume as the logs (Raid 1 for the OS is
still a good bet).
I've never seen such a document. I wrote one once while still at MS; it
wasn't approved for publishing because TPTB thought it was too
Its your server, do what you'd like.
I fail to understand why skipping 1 9 GB drive (at what, $250?) and
incurring a performance and recoverability penalty would be a consideration.
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis
-
> From: Vincent Avallone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 4:13 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Getting Close to my final configuration
>
>
> What do you mean on each "arm"?
> My original plan was to put the OS and Logs o
Thanks guys.
I am using (2) 18gig RAID-1 for the OS and Logs and (3) 36gig RAID-5 for
the IS.
-Original Message-
From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 8:18 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Getting Close to my final configuration
Then
@;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Vincent
Avallone
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 1:13 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Getting Close to my final configuration
What do you mean on each "arm"?
My original plan was to put the OS and Logs on a 9gig mirrored drive and
the IS on the 36RAI
9 matches
Mail list logo
