>>>>> "AP" == Alexander Priem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
AP> Hmmm. I keep changing my mind about this. My Db would be mostly AP> 'selecting', but there would also be pretty much inserting and AP> updating done. But most of the work would be selects. So would AP> this config be OK? I'm about to order a new server. I haven't decided exactly how many disks I will get, but my plan is to get an 8-disk RAID10 with 15k RPM drives. I don't need the volume, just the speed and number of spindles, so I'm buying the smallest drives that meet my speed probably 18Gb each (sheesh! I remember getting my first 5Mb disk for my 8088 PC in college and thinking that was too much space). My mix is nearly even read/write, but probably a little biased towards the reading. This machine is replacing a 5-disk box that was switched from RAID5 to 4-disk RAID10 for data plus one system disk in January (what a pain that was to re-index, but that's another story). The switch from RAID5 to RAID10 made an enormous improvement in performance. The speedup wasn't from recreating the database: It was restored from a file-level backup so the actual files were not compacted or secretly "improved" in any way, other than my occasional reindexing. So I think your 6-disk RAID10 will be good. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Vivek Khera, Ph.D. Khera Communications, Inc. Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rockville, MD +1-240-453-8497 AIM: vivekkhera Y!: vivek_khera http://www.khera.org/~vivek/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
