Exchange
--
Questions
--
Followers
Top Experts
Raid 6 vs. Raid 10 for Exchange using SATA II drives on ISCSI SAN?
Raid 6 vs. Raid 10 for Exchange using SATA II drives on ISCSI SAN?
We are about to dump our old pop3 mail server (Raid 5) in favor of a new Exchange 2007 system for our 500 users running on a Dell/EMC CX3-20 SAN.
To our 500 users (each of whom wants a 3 gig mailbox), their stuff IS mission critical!
Even though Exchange 2007 claims to be less I/O demanding (especially running in cache mode), I'm concerned that running on a slower ISCSI SAN might be too slow.
To withstand two drive failures, we're entertaining Raid 6 but I hear it comes with a 30% performance hit.
QUESTION:
--------------
Which approach do you think makes more sense:
1) "Fast Raid using slow drives" - Fast Raid 10 which is mirrored stripes sounds like it would be faster, and provide nice redundancy, unless you lose a stripe drive and its corresponding mirror. Since it doubles the number of disks, I was wondering if we could use the cheaper SATA II drives instead of those expensive fiber channel 10k or 15k drives in a Raid 10 configuration? Or,
2) "Slow Raid using Fast Drives" – Slow Raid 6 but use fast Fiber Channel 10k or 15k SCSI drives? Or
3) "Slow Raid using Slow SATA II Disks" - Or maybe, running Exchange 2007 in cached mode makes all this speed concern a non-issue because the data/views are cached locally on their pc's. Who cares if it takes a bit longer to download new mail since they can continue to work while it's downloading?
I'm not loving the idea of playing Russian Roulette (gambling) about which 2 drives may die (especially if I'm doubling the number of disks and still vulnerable if two particular drives fail). However, in Raid 6, if 3 drives die, you lose the entire array.
Any and advice much appreciated.
Thanks,
Mike
We are about to dump our old pop3 mail server (Raid 5) in favor of a new Exchange 2007 system for our 500 users running on a Dell/EMC CX3-20 SAN.
To our 500 users (each of whom wants a 3 gig mailbox), their stuff IS mission critical!
Even though Exchange 2007 claims to be less I/O demanding (especially running in cache mode), I'm concerned that running on a slower ISCSI SAN might be too slow.
To withstand two drive failures, we're entertaining Raid 6 but I hear it comes with a 30% performance hit.
QUESTION:
--------------
Which approach do you think makes more sense:
1) "Fast Raid using slow drives" - Fast Raid 10 which is mirrored stripes sounds like it would be faster, and provide nice redundancy, unless you lose a stripe drive and its corresponding mirror. Since it doubles the number of disks, I was wondering if we could use the cheaper SATA II drives instead of those expensive fiber channel 10k or 15k drives in a Raid 10 configuration? Or,
2) "Slow Raid using Fast Drives" – Slow Raid 6 but use fast Fiber Channel 10k or 15k SCSI drives? Or
3) "Slow Raid using Slow SATA II Disks" - Or maybe, running Exchange 2007 in cached mode makes all this speed concern a non-issue because the data/views are cached locally on their pc's. Who cares if it takes a bit longer to download new mail since they can continue to work while it's downloading?
I'm not loving the idea of playing Russian Roulette (gambling) about which 2 drives may die (especially if I'm doubling the number of disks and still vulnerable if two particular drives fail). However, in Raid 6, if 3 drives die, you lose the entire array.
Any and advice much appreciated.
Thanks,
Mike
Zero AI Policy
We believe in human intelligence. Our moderation policy strictly prohibits the use of LLM content in our Q&A threads.
hello mike,
Sorry for that by i will not go with any of the methods (if I can), if it is in my hand i will choose Raid 0+1 it is the best performance and recommended approach right now.
All of the implementation i have done with MS and MCS goes for RAID 0 + 1 or RAID5
Don't use RAID6 it is very slow
Sorry for that by i will not go with any of the methods (if I can), if it is in my hand i will choose Raid 0+1 it is the best performance and recommended approach right now.
All of the implementation i have done with MS and MCS goes for RAID 0 + 1 or RAID5
Don't use RAID6 it is very slow
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
Log in or create a free account to see answer.
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
SOLUTION
membership
Log in or create a free account to see answer.
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
Thanks meyersd and jmulvey123.
Both your responses were very helpful.
Being new to Expert's Exchange, I'm not sure about the etiquette of accepting multiple solutions, but here it goes.
Thanks,
Mike
Both your responses were very helpful.
Being new to Expert's Exchange, I'm not sure about the etiquette of accepting multiple solutions, but here it goes.
Thanks,
Mike
Glad to be able to help!
EARN REWARDS FOR ASKING, ANSWERING, AND MORE.
Earn free swag for participating on the platform.
Exchange
--
Questions
--
Followers
Top Experts
Exchange is the server side of a collaborative application product that is part of the Microsoft Server infrastructure. Exchange's major features include email, calendaring, contacts and tasks, support for mobile and web-based access to information, and support for data storage.