Just curiousity - RAID arrays and partitions

I'm just curious what others are doing or thinking in these terms.

Let's say you have a server with (3) 36GB SCSI drives and a RAID controller card.

Let's say you set it to a simple RAID 5 array.

Now comes the question and thought:

Once this is set, regardless of the logical drives and partitions I create, it's still going to access the entire array for read/writes, correct?

I mean, a D: drive for data isn't going to do much good if it's still on the same RAID array, right?  Other than maybe saneness on my part from a management aspect.

I guess I always found it funny that MS and others would recommend things like the Pagefile on separate disks, Exchange logs on separate disks, etc.  That to me would mean that you would need multiple array controller cards, and multiple arrays on each card, with quite a few physical disks, just to actually get separate disk I/O to happen.

Again, I'm not needing an answer to a problem...just curiousity as to whether my theory is right, and what others do.  I'll split the points based on decent comments.
LVL 23
Who is Participating?

[Product update] Infrastructure Analysis Tool is now available with Business Accounts.Learn More

I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

There would be no performance gain with a pagefile on a different volume on the same array, no.

For I/O performance gains you need to think "spindles".  Physically different drives will perform better as reads and writes can occur simultaneously across them.

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
The only benifit of partionioning your raid array is for organistion, you will gain no performance improvement.
Microsofts suggestion to move page file and logs to another drive will help, but as you sya you would need a seperate array. A number of raid controllers allow you to run 2 or more different arrays from 1 controller, so seperating your drives this way would allow you to do as MS suggests and would give you a performance increase. Obviously having multiple controllers and multiple drives is the best option.
TheCleanerAuthor Commented:
Yeah, that's what I figured...I just was curious what others do.  Do you actually bother with more than 1 or 2 partitions/volumes if they are on the same array?
IT Pros Agree: AI and Machine Learning Key

We’d all like to think our company’s data is well protected, but when you ask IT professionals they admit the data probably is not as safe as it could be.

Not normally, no.  Two for sure, perhaps three depending on how big your drives are or how many you can load into the server - but normally two on one RAID 5 array.  Keep in mind that many controllers come with more than one port on them.  Depending on how you do this, you can connect an external storage enclosure for more options.

We normally put 5 drives in our servers.  Disk 0 and 1 are mirrored for the OS, the other 3 are RAID5 and can be one or two logical drives depending on how big they are.

TheCleanerAuthor Commented:
Understood, so on your RAID5 with 2 logical drives it is simply for simplicity/management sake, not for disk I/O performance....
Yes, exactly.  Speed comes with separation.  If you have room for (say) 10 drives, you can create 2 arrays of 5 drives each.  In this instance you improve performance since each array is addressed independant of the other.  Throughput of the controller itself (even though it's the same controller for both arrays) won't be the bottleneck as the I/O from both arrays simply could not saturate the channels.  It does present a single point of failure though.

Picture this;

Your server is one large RAID5, single volume array.  You hose the server installation somehow.  Your data is ...... hopefully on tape!

If you partition 2 logical volumes, then the data goes on (let's call it) D:\.  Hose away!  You can still reformat C: and reinstall without losing the second partition.  The same applies to your normal desktops as well.

Also, if you want to install something like RIS, you require a second partition to store the images on - this isn't optional for this service.  

The only thing that can improve if you have a separate partition for the pagefile on the same array is fragmentation.

If you only have the pagefile in the partition then it'll have no framentation

Only a suposition

TheCleanerAuthor Commented:
Thanks guys...that'll work for me...thanks for the confirmations and insights.
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Windows Server 2003

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.