New SQL Server, RAID Planning

We are installing a new SQL server. Right now, I am planning to get 10
drives:
2 - RAID 1 [Mirror] : OS
4 - RAID 10 [Mirrored Stripes] : SQL DB
4 - RAID 10 [Mirrored Stripes] : SQL Logs
There would be a dedicated controller for the OS and one dedicated two
channel controller for the SQL sets.
From everything I have been reading, this is an ideal setup for a new SQL
server.
Is there any reason to consider creating one large eight drive RAID 10 or
RAID 5 for both SQL DB and the logs? Or possibly run six drives in a RAID
10 for SQL DB and then two drives RAID 1 for the log files?
Any other considerations?
Thank You,
Kevin
you want the logs to be on RAID 1+0
Data best on RAID 1+0 also.
Your setup looks good to me.
Greg Jackson
PDX, Oregon
|||Hi Kevin
You generally don't get much from striping the log unless you have an app
that tends to read the log heavily for rollbacks or transactional
replication. So your second suggestion to have 6 drives in RAID10 config and
RAID 1 for log files may have more merit as you'll get the benefit of having
more physical drives to perform the regular data file read / write activity.
You'd still get the redundancy you're after on the log with RAID1 but you'd
be giving the extra spindle to the main data array where it's probably
needed more.
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
"Kevin Hammond" <kghammond@.nrscorp.com> wrote in message
news:c6jnf2$gfo$1@.grandcanyon.binc.net...
> We are installing a new SQL server. Right now, I am planning to get 10
> drives:
> 2 - RAID 1 [Mirror] : OS
> 4 - RAID 10 [Mirrored Stripes] : SQL DB
> 4 - RAID 10 [Mirrored Stripes] : SQL Logs
> There would be a dedicated controller for the OS and one dedicated two
> channel controller for the SQL sets.
> From everything I have been reading, this is an ideal setup for a new SQL
> server.
> Is there any reason to consider creating one large eight drive RAID 10 or
> RAID 5 for both SQL DB and the logs? Or possibly run six drives in a RAID
> 10 for SQL DB and then two drives RAID 1 for the log files?
> Any other considerations?
> Thank You,
> Kevin
>

New SQL Server, RAID Planning

We are installing a new SQL server. Right now, I am planning to get 10
drives:
2 - RAID 1 [Mirror] : OS
4 - RAID 10 [Mirrored Stripes] : SQL DB
4 - RAID 10 [Mirrored Stripes] : SQL Logs
There would be a dedicated controller for the OS and one dedicated two
channel controller for the SQL sets.
From everything I have been reading, this is an ideal setup for a new SQL
server.
Is there any reason to consider creating one large eight drive RAID 10 or
RAID 5 for both SQL DB and the logs? Or possibly run six drives in a RAID
10 for SQL DB and then two drives RAID 1 for the log files?
Any other considerations?
Thank You,
Kevinyou want the logs to be on RAID 1+0
Data best on RAID 1+0 also.
Your setup looks good to me.
Greg Jackson
PDX, Oregon|||Hi Kevin
You generally don't get much from striping the log unless you have an app
that tends to read the log heavily for rollbacks or transactional
replication. So your second suggestion to have 6 drives in RAID10 config and
RAID 1 for log files may have more merit as you'll get the benefit of having
more physical drives to perform the regular data file read / write activity.
You'd still get the redundancy you're after on the log with RAID1 but you'd
be giving the extra spindle to the main data array where it's probably
needed more.
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
"Kevin Hammond" <kghammond@.nrscorp.com> wrote in message
news:c6jnf2$gfo$1@.grandcanyon.binc.net...
> We are installing a new SQL server. Right now, I am planning to get 10
> drives:
> 2 - RAID 1 [Mirror] : OS
> 4 - RAID 10 [Mirrored Stripes] : SQL DB
> 4 - RAID 10 [Mirrored Stripes] : SQL Logs
> There would be a dedicated controller for the OS and one dedicated two
> channel controller for the SQL sets.
> From everything I have been reading, this is an ideal setup for a new SQL
> server.
> Is there any reason to consider creating one large eight drive RAID 10 or
> RAID 5 for both SQL DB and the logs? Or possibly run six drives in a RAID
> 10 for SQL DB and then two drives RAID 1 for the log files?
> Any other considerations?
> Thank You,
> Kevin
>

New Server Setup

I am trying to install two new SQL 2000 servers, but need them to be
mirrored. I had asked the question a while back and it was suggested i use
Virtual servers , which to be honest i havent found much on how it would
work. Can anybody explain how this can be done or recomend some reading
material that i may look at
The reason for the mirroring is , we deal with electronic payments and if
one server goes down i dont want ant intruption in service to our clients. I
suppose im trying to replicate the way the old Novell mirrored servers work.
Also i would want a rthird off site server kept in the loop and updatedIn SQL 2000, you can use fail-over clustering to provide high-availability.
This feature is implemented in conjunction with OS clustering and is
described in detail in the Books Online. Be aware that the OS and hardware
requirements necessitate careful planning. All hardware must be MSCS HCL
certified.
SQL 2005 introduces a database mirroring feature, which is essentially a
software solution. This feature is scheduled to be released in the first
half of this year but can also be enabled for evaluation purposes in the
current release by using a trace flag.
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Peter Newman" <PeterNewman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:803B26A4-D2AA-4707-B61A-64ED12EFD180@.microsoft.com...
>I am trying to install two new SQL 2000 servers, but need them to be
> mirrored. I had asked the question a while back and it was suggested i
> use
> Virtual servers , which to be honest i havent found much on how it would
> work. Can anybody explain how this can be done or recomend some reading
> material that i may look at
> The reason for the mirroring is , we deal with electronic payments and if
> one server goes down i dont want ant intruption in service to our clients.
> I
> suppose im trying to replicate the way the old Novell mirrored servers
> work.
> Also i would want a rthird off site server kept in the loop and updated
>