Are you asking if it was good for me?
-sc From: Webster [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 2:10 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: SATA RAID Performance I never recommend RAID in a multiple server Citrix farm. Use the other drive(s) for what you suggest. In a busy Citrix farm, it is amazing how much faster printing is when the spool files are on their own HD. Webster Is that better for you -sc? J From: Sean Martin [mailto:[email protected]] Subject: Re: SATA RAID Performance A colleague of mine and I finally convinced upper management that a similar methodology in our Citrix environment would be beneficial. We've been using Blade servers in our Citrix farm for quite some time. With only two local drives, they were always configured as a mirrored set because, well thats just the way they've always done it. Noticing significant bottlenecks at the disks on some of the more heavily used application servers, we advocated breaking the mirror and making full use of each individual drive (page file location, temp directories, applications, etc.). We have enough servers in each application silo that we could lose one or two to a drive failure and continue operating without a hitch. We've just started testing but we're already seeing significant performance improvements. - Sean On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Jacob <[email protected]> wrote: Actually, RAID0 does have its uses. We use RAID0 for the data on our web servers.. html files, images, videos. The o/s is on a single drive, the data is on a RAID0 with three drives. Huge performance gain. But, also... we have over 30 servers in the server farm. So if a hard drive in the RAID0 crashes, the other 29 servers can take up the slack without any issues. I lose on average about two to three hard drives a year among the 30 servers. Now, if you have one database server and you use RAID0..................... ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
