@lyris.sunbelt-software.commailto:exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
Subject: RE: 2010 Drive / Raid config
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 11:41:55 +
I would not put the logs on the same array as the OS/pagefile. Just consider
them separately from logs and databases.
If you haven't already, make sure
config
cool sounds good, and i assume logs n the pagefile in the C arrray as well?
Jean-Paul Natola
From: jcas...@activenetwerx.com
To: exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
Subject: RE: 2010 Drive / Raid config
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 02:08:59 +
?
Jean-Paul Natola
From: st...@stevieg.org
To: exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
Subject: RE: 2010 Drive / Raid config
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 11:41:55 +
I would not put the logs on the same array as the OS/pagefile. Just consider
them separately
The only benefit to splitting the logs and db comes from specific recovery
scenarios but with the cost and ease of a dag, that just makes more sense.
Otherwise the layout makes sense to me.
jlc
On Jun 17, 2012, at 2:36 PM, Jean-Paul N
jnat...@hotmail.commailto:jnat...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi
?? os and logs on mirror orlogs and db on raid 10?
Jean-Paul Natola
From: jcas...@activenetwerx.com
To: exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
Subject: Re: 2010 Drive / Raid config
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 00:23:21 +
The only benefit to splitting
?? os and logs on mirror orlogs and db on raid 10?
I don't like anything mixed with OS, I'd leave it on the mirror and put the
db's and logs on the r10 if I had to...
---
To manage subscriptions click here:
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to
cool sounds good, and i assume logs n the pagefile in the C arrray as well?
Jean-Paul Natola
From: jcas...@activenetwerx.com
To: exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
Subject: RE: 2010 Drive / Raid config
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 02:08:59 +
?? os and logs
