RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] RAID 5 Best Practice

Thu, 18 May 2006 11:38:05 -0700

These are good questions.  With all the DFS goodness in R2 maybe it is better to use, say RAID 1 and replicate out to other disk arrays elsewhere on the network (e.g. NAS).  Which brings up the whole question of 'where is the weakest link?' - it is it the disk, the controller, the backplane, the Cat5, the switch, the fiber, etc.
 
Tim

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Wade
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 2:12 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] RAID 5 Best Practice

These days I am much more curious as to the benifits of RAID5? It slows the I/O down. It can really crawl if you loose a drive and the server has to rebuild the missing volume?
 
As for multiple partitions, I can't actually see any real advantage on a file server. You can easily move the files to any drive and just re-share the folders. I guess it does make for an easier wipe and build, but then you may have issues with the permissions on the second drive if you get a different SID on the re-build.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Timothy Foster
Sent: Thu 18/05/2006 18:28
To: [email protected]
Cc:
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] RAID 5 Best Practice

Thanks, Brian.  That makes sense.
 
So if I have a 4 disk array on a single backplane, and given that I want the benefits of RAID 5, is there any argument for configuring more than one partition on the array?  I realize that this is potentially too much of an open-ended question, but I'm curious :-).  The basic premise is that this server would be a workhorse domain member/file server.  Would one partition - C: - combined with carefully configured share and NTFS permissions provide adequate security? Or is it better to put the OS on C: and the shares on D: ?  Or does the benefit of partitions lie somewhere else - for example, if I wanted to wipe C: and reinstall the OS without touching D: ?  (I'm not sure if I like this idea, but as I mentioned, I'm curious...).
 
Thanks,
 
Tim

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Desmond
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 12:53 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] RAID 5 Best Practice

Tim-

 

It doesn’t really matter. The RAID controller has no idea about the partition table. It just presents a LUN to the OS and the OS writes to it.

 

Thanks,
Brian Desmond

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

c - 312.731.3132

 

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Timothy Foster
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 12:19 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [ActiveDir] [OT] RAID 5 Best Practice

 

Using a RAID controller's configuration utility I can build and initialize a RAID 5 container.  When installing the OS, I can, if I choose, create a partition.  Is this a good or bad idea?  In other words, if I partition RAID 5 container during the OS install will it make any difference if I ever need to replace a drive and rebuild the array?  Will the partition table be recognized during the rebuild?

 

Thanks for your input.

 

Tim

 

 

**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.
If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport e-Services via [EMAIL PROTECTED] and then permanently remove it from your system.
Thank you.
http://www.stockport.gov.uk
**********************************************************************

Reply via email to