larry price wrote:
Is this for a database server doing lots of small reads and writes, or a data repository where most of the transactions are largish files that are being read more often than they are being written?
Lots of small read/writes
for the latter case raid 5 is the best choice, for a database server, the tables should live on a RAID1 volume for performance, and everything else should live on a RAID5 volume for redundancy.
Okay - good to know... is this documented anywhere i.e. in the RAID specs that I haven't bothered to read yet? <g>
also consider disk speed and size. (as fast as you can afford for performance volumes, as big as you can afford for repository space)
Yep...
If you want to get really fancy you can do a bunch of hardware specific tuning, and set per volume parameters on how much buffer space is allocated per volume and what the trigger values are for flushing the cache to disk etc. But, this may not be the best use of your time since the defaults are likely to be relatively sane.
Again, good to know.... Thanks, mj Matthew S. Jarvis IT Manager Bike Friday - "Performance that Packs." www.bikefriday.com 541/687-0487 x140 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ EUGLUG mailing list [email protected] http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug
