A party? Where? They got beer?
-- O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Laura E. Hunter Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 8:31 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] DC Configuration "...whichever party that may be." On 6/22/06, Gil Kirkpatrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ethics? Thats the stuff the guys in the other party don't have. > ________________________________ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > joe > Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 3:52 PM > > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DC Configuration > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > joe > Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 3:52 PM > > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DC Configuration > > > Exactly... > > Congress: Ethics? What's that? > > > -- > O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - > http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm > > > ________________________________ > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Darren Mar-Elia > Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 6:25 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DC Configuration > > > Yea, it seemed an awful basic question for you joe. And, of course I fell > for it. Agreed though that software RAID is like Congress creating its own > ethics rules--just a bad idea all around. > ________________________________ > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > joe > Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 3:16 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DC Configuration > > > ROFL! > > That was more of a case of purposely refusing to acknowledge software RAID > versus truly understanding what it is. I have had far more than my share of > times trying to rebuild software raid configs. > > -- > O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - > http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm > > > ________________________________ > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Darren Mar-Elia > Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 6:14 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DC Configuration > > > Software RAID is where the OS (in this case) handles the striping of the > data rather than the hardware (usually the controller). > > > ________________________________ > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > joe > Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 3:05 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DC Configuration > > > o Software RAID? What's that? > > o Yeah I am not a fan of mirrors. I like lots of spindles. But then I tend > to work with big busy directories with Exchange beating on it. Being 64 bit > you don't have to worry _as much_ assuming you have enough RAM to cache your > entire DIT but you still have to load that baby in the first place so I > would still recommend RAID 0+1, 10, or 5 or if you don't care about fault > tolerance the fastest is RAID-0. > > o I would say if you are going 64 bit, make sure you make it a priority to > get enough RAM to hold your entire DIT. That is the cool thing about getting > 64 bit. > > > > -- > O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - > http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm > > > ________________________________ > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Al > Mulnick > Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 5:12 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] DC Configuration > > > There would be a little more to gain than that but often that's the reason. > joe might point out that a two mirror configuration is not his optimal > configuration. I'm pretty sure he'd also point out that compared with > software raid, that he'd take that option. :) > > I can honestly say I'd agree with him on this one. Software mirroring for > this type of application is never a good idea. The slower spindle speeds > likely won't be enough of an issue to matter in your configuration. Unless > you have a very large DIT <queue jokes here> or applications that pound the > snot out of the individual servers spindle speed won't be nearly as > important. Since it's 64 bit you're after, spend some money on the memory > and take advantage of the cache as much as you can. > > Al > > > On 6/22/06, Noah Eiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What would the partitions on the first configuration gain you (over just a > > single C:)? I thought the idea behind placing NTDS, etc on something > > _besides_ C: was to get the performance benefits of extra spindles (as in > > #2). > > > > -- nme > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Al Lilianstrom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > > Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 1:24 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [ActiveDir] DC Configuration > > > > We have some budget money to replace domain controllers this year. Not > > all of them but probably half of them. We've pretty much decided on 64 > > bit Dell PowerEdge servers. Most of the discussion is about disk > > configuration. Two schools of thought exist here. > > > > 1) 2x73GB 15K drives in RAID1. Carve up the volume at the OS level with > > 20GB or so for the OS and the remainder for NTDS, Sysvol, and system > > state backups > > > > 2) Two sets of 2x73 10K drives in RAID1. The first set is for the OS, > > the second is for NTDS, Sysvol, and system state backups. > > > > I've always liked physically separating the OS from the application > > data. Others here like carving up the volume at the OS. > > > > Any thoughts, opinions, suggestions? > > > > tia, al > > -- > > > > Al Lilianstrom > > CD/CSS/CSI > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.2/370 - Release Date: 6/20/2006 > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.2/370 - Release Date: 6/20/2006 > > > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx > > > > -- ----------------------- Laura E. Hunter Microsoft MVP - Windows Server Networking Author: _Active Directory Consultant's Field Guide_ (http://tinyurl.com/7f8ll) List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx
