Ask them what they want the I/O rate to be and do the math. Most of the
major vendors will have a spec sheet showing you what the rate will be in
various configurations.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wes Owen [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 2:59 PM
> To:   NT 2000 Discussions
> Subject:      RE: SQL Server and RAID Levels
> 
> RAID 0+1 is faster for writes assuming you do not have enough cache for
> the
> requests.  
> 
> If you are that concerned setup the system with one, benchmark and do the
> other.  
> 
> Or, if you want to teach them a lesson, set it up as they request and tell
> them you recommend against it.  Let them live with the consequences of
> ignorance and ego.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ed Esgro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 1:47 PM
> To: NT 2000 Discussions
> Subject: RE: SQL Server and RAID Levels
> 
> 
> How about using 0+1 on the SQL Database. You get speed and redundancy at
> the
> price of space. Much faster then RAID5.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anthony L. Sollars [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 2:40 PM
> To: NT 2000 Discussions
> Subject: SQL Server and RAID Levels
> 
> 
> I am building another production SQL Server for our services team, and
> have
> configured in my default configuration:
> 2 x 18gig SCSI on RAID 1 = OS & Pagefile
> 2 x 73gig SCSI on RAID 0 = Logs & tempDB
> 4 x 73gig SCSI on RAID 5 = SQL Database
> 
> 
> The problem is the SQL engineers are questioning the performance of RAID5
> for their needs.
> 
> We are using RAID 0 on the logs because this is transactional data that is
> not important, and we don't need redundancy here just sheer speed. But
> they
> are saying that RAID 0 should be used isntead of RAID5 on the 4 drive
> array.
> The bulk of the work on this RAID5 will be data manipulation, where they
> willl run sql scripts that compress and organize the tables in the
> database.
> In my opinion RAID 5 is good for this also.
> 
> -TOny
> Thanks for any advice
> 
> ------
> You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> ------
> You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
> addressed. If you are NOT the intended recipient or the person responsible
> for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, be advised that you
> have received this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination,
> forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. 
> 
> 
> ------
> You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

------
You are subscribed as [email protected]
Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to