I said "may" not "typically". There are reasons for using local accounts (or 
groups)...

        -----Original Message----- 
        From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
        Sent: Thu 18/05/2006 19:29 
        To: [email protected] 
        Cc: 
        Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] [OT] RAID 5 Best Practice
        
        

        >>>....but then you may have issues with the permissions on the second 
drive
        if you get a different SID on the re-build....
        
        On a file server? Do you typically use local file server accounts for 
your
        permissioning?
        
        
        Sincerely,
           _____                               
          (, /  |  /)               /)     /)  
            /---| (/_  ______   ___// _   //  _
         ) /    |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
        (_/                             /)     
                                       (/      
        Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
        www.readymaids.com <http://www.readymaids.com>  - we know IT
        www.akomolafe.com <http://www.akomolafe.com>
        Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about
        Yesterday? -anon
        
        
        ________________________________
        
        From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Dave Wade
        Sent: Thu 5/18/2006 11:12 AM
        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] <mailto:[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
        **********************************************************************
        List info   : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
        List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
        List archive: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
        

<<winmail.dat>>

Reply via email to