ScottSullivanPFS
asked on
exchange server is running out of space
Our exchange server is running out of space. Should I put 2 message stores to each logical drive, or should each store have its own disk array for optimum performance? What’s the performance loss, assuming that the two stores have fewer users than the previous larger store? Is it better to use RAID 5 or RAID 1 for your message stores?
ASKER
I have 800GB of email and 1200 mailboxes. I have 16 disks to work with. Transaction logs are already on separate RAID 1e (similar to 10) disks—I think 6 of the 16 disks are used by transaction logs. I do have transaction logs from 2 of the storage groups writing to the same logical disk—would that cause serious performance issues?
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
I am getting performance issues on a storage group with 600 users. I’ll try and spread them out.
That is very objective.
I have done both, and haven't seen a significant change in either. The major performance gain comes when you split the transaction logs and the database on to separate drives.
It also depends on how many users and what size are the mailboxes.
What I would do for 10 users with 20mb mailboxes and what I would do for 2000 users with 400mb mailboxes are very different.
In an ideal, money no object world, you would have a separate array for each storage group and each set of transaction logs. Not many of us work in an ideal world.
Unfortunately you haven't really provided enough information to answer comprehensively, and it would probably be difficult for you to do so. I configure servers in a different way for most clients, based on their individual needs.
Simon.