DMS-X
asked on
Raid 5 or Raid 1 for file server and exchange server
I have already purchased a raid 5 server with 4 SCSI drives on a perc4-dc card. I was planning on using this server for running exchange on. Our mail storage size is around 8 gigs. So its not very much. Would I see any performance gain at all if I was to go with a raid 1 setup instead for my exchange server? I have been told with small databases and mostly read and very little write to the hard disk that raid 5 is the best option. How big does my database file need to reach before it become beneficial to go with raid 1.
Also, I need a file server. Mostly I see people using raid 5 for file servers. Would I be better off using raid 1 or raid 5 for this file server. This is for a new company with only a few employees. This server will also double as a domain controller. I was thinking that if I was better off using raid 1 in the exchange server I could then use the raid 5 server for my file server.
Thanks,
DMS
Also, I need a file server. Mostly I see people using raid 5 for file servers. Would I be better off using raid 1 or raid 5 for this file server. This is for a new company with only a few employees. This server will also double as a domain controller. I was thinking that if I was better off using raid 1 in the exchange server I could then use the raid 5 server for my file server.
Thanks,
DMS
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
>The other advantage to Raid 5 is that it is easy to increase size, and typically the file server is the one that needs to be increased.
Very good pint x86fix, thanks.
>Bang for the buck, Raid 5 is a better way to go and will give you a small performance increase over Raid 1.
samccarthy, I always heard different, I always read that raid 1 is better performance than raid 5. Raid 5 for bigger files and reading the disks while raid 1 is better for bigger files and writing to the disk. But were talking about milliseconds here : )
>Going for Raid 1 would have Data Tolerance but the performance is compromised.
Thats 3 people against me when I say raid 1 has better performance. I guess I am wrong!
Thanks guys!
Very good pint x86fix, thanks.
>Bang for the buck, Raid 5 is a better way to go and will give you a small performance increase over Raid 1.
samccarthy, I always heard different, I always read that raid 1 is better performance than raid 5. Raid 5 for bigger files and reading the disks while raid 1 is better for bigger files and writing to the disk. But were talking about milliseconds here : )
>Going for Raid 1 would have Data Tolerance but the performance is compromised.
Thats 3 people against me when I say raid 1 has better performance. I guess I am wrong!
Thanks guys!
defentitly use RAID5
RAID5 and raid 1 are both fault tolerant for disk crashes.
RAID5 needs a litle more time when writing information to the disks.
If we talk about Reading then both give almost the same result in performance
RAID5 is more expandeble then RAID1
so choose RAID5
for example :
in my company we use only RAID1 for Application Servers and RAID5 for Mail and File Server
RAID5 and raid 1 are both fault tolerant for disk crashes.
RAID5 needs a litle more time when writing information to the disks.
If we talk about Reading then both give almost the same result in performance
RAID5 is more expandeble then RAID1
so choose RAID5
for example :
in my company we use only RAID1 for Application Servers and RAID5 for Mail and File Server
https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/20639126/RAID-5-vs-RAID-1.html