cost is a little bit important but not as much as throughput. Thanks
On 8/4/06, Nick McClure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, there are other things to take into account. > > Like the controller, and what you are doing. The generic text book > answer is if there is not cost constraint go with 10. However that is > dealing with internal or direct attach SCSI systems. Realistically there > are channel constraints, and controller issues that also affect the > speed. > > For instance, say you have 6 disks attached to one controller, 3 on one > channel and 3 on the other. RAID 5 would provide good speed and more > space because the load is being distributed. > > Even better, say you have two controllers and 6 disks, and your > controllers could communicate, and you take all 6 disks and put them in > one RAID 5 array, then you are doing very good. At that point I'd say > you'd get the best of both worlds. Add in good caching and you can do > very good. Of course if cost is no object, get 12 disks, and do RAID 10. > > Here we don't use internal disks for anything that is IO intensive, also > we do a lot of clustering for big stuff. We have a SAN setup using fiber > channel to connect to the individual servers, using high quality fiber > attached SCSI drives. I can go into more detail if you want, but > basically, I have an application that runs on 4 web servers, connecting > to a back end MSSQL cluster. The app serves some 50 page views a second, > with each page view averaging 20-30 queries, and the disk queue length > on the SQL Server maintains at zero. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 11:42 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: Re: RAID Help > > > > so if throughput is higher priority than the cost of two drives, and > you > > are > > starting from scratch, you owuld want to go 10, right? Leastwise > that's > > what > > I just wrote up. > > > > On 8/4/06, Nick McClure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > A little outdated, but still makes sense in most cases. > > > > > > Disk throughput is the major bottleneck of computing, no matter what > you > > > get for a processor, the disk controller and network controller will > > > slow you down. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:212645 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
