• Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 1011
  • Last Modified:

RAID 1 or RAID 10 for windows 2003 server with SQL 2000 server

Hi There,
I just got a new dell Poweredge T610 server to replace our SQL server.Please find the attached
configuration.
Right now I have configured the server with RAID 10 basically two virtual disk arrays 4 each both on RAID 10.
The server has 8 15 k rpm disk.
So I had configured the first 4 as Raid 10 to use as boot drive for win 2003 and will be installing sql 2000 server.
The other 4 as raid 10 for the database.
My question is is it ok to have the win 2003 OS on RAID 10 or is RAID 1 BETTER FOR OS.
I will really appreciate any help.
Please find confi
 1 224-4855 PowerEdge T610 Tower Chassis for Up to Eight 3.5-Inch Hard Drives
  1 330-4119 PowerEdge T610 Shipping
  1 317-0229 4GB Memory (4x1GB), 1066MHz Single Ranked UDIMMs for 2 Processors, Adv ECC
  1 317-0266 DIMM Blank for PowerEdge T610
  1 317-0266 DIMM Blank for PowerEdge T610
  1 317-0266 DIMM Blank for PowerEdge T610
  1 317-0266 DIMM Blank for PowerEdge T610
  1 317-0266 DIMM Blank for PowerEdge T610
  1 317-0266 DIMM Blank for PowerEdge T610
  1 317-0266 DIMM Blank for PowerEdge T610
  1 317-0266 DIMM Blank for PowerEdge T610
  1 430-1764 Embedded Broadcom, GB Ethernet NICS with TOE
  1 317-0254 X5570 Xeon Processor, 2.93GHz 8M Cache,Turbo, HT, 1333MHz Max Mem
  1 317-1212 X5570 Xeon Processor, 2.93GHz 8M Cache,Turbo, HT, 1333MHz Max Mem
  1 317-0265 PowerEdge T610/T710 Heat Sinks for 2 Processors
  1 341-4158 HD Multi-Select
  1 341-8785 PERC 6/i SAS RAID Controller 2x4 Connectors, Internal, PCIe256MB Cache
  1 330-3491 Power Saving BIOS Setting
  1 421-0041 Windows Server 2003, Standard Edition, Includes 5 CALs, 2008Media
  1 467-8649 iDRAC6 Express
  1 330-4219 Optical SATA for PowerEdge T610/T710
  1 313-9100 16X DVD-ROM,SATA, INTERNAL
  1 330-5280 Dell Management Console
  1 330-3554 Electronic System Documentation and OpenManage DVD Kit
  1 341-8779 RAID 10 for PERC 6/i Controller
  1 330-4120 No Rails
  1 330-3549 High Output Power Supply Redundant, 870W
  1 310-9057 No Power Cord
    1 341-8720 450GB 15K RPM Serial-Attach SCSI 3.5" Hot Plug Hard Drive
  1 341-8720 450GB 15K RPM Serial-Attach SCSI 3.5" Hot Plug Hard Drive
  1 341-8720 450GB 15K RPM Serial-Attach SCSI 3.5" Hot Plug Hard Drive
  1 341-8720 450GB 15K RPM Serial-Attach SCSI 3.5" Hot Plug Hard Drive
  1 341-8720 450GB 15K RPM Serial-Attach SCSI 3.5" Hot Plug Hard Drive
  1 341-8720 450GB 15K RPM Serial-Attach SCSI 3.5" Hot Plug Hard Drive
  1 341-8720 450GB 15K RPM Serial-Attach SCSI 3.5" Hot Plug Hard Drive
  1 341-8720 450GB 15K RPM Serial-Attach SCSI 3.5" Hot Plug Hard Drive
0
Sivasan
Asked:
Sivasan
5 Solutions
 
arnoldCommented:
It is fine to have the OS on a RAID 10 but unnecessary you'll be wasting space.

I think a RAID 1 for the OS a RAID 10 for the DB ( optional transaction logs)  and a RAID 1 for the transaction logs and backups or just for the backups might be a better use of the drives.


0
 
hkunnanaCommented:
In short, to answer your question, it is totally up to you, but you need to understand the difference before you decide.

RAID 0 is to accumulate all the Disk in that array into one contiguous  logical disk that has the space of the SUM of all Disks in that array. This is good if you need one contiguous space, but there is no redundancy in that, meaning if any of the Disks in that array fails, you loose everything.

RAID 1, is to mirror 2 Disks so it is MIRRORing the disks, this way you have a total space in the resultant logical disk that equal the space of one of the mirrored disks, so you lost half the space you have, but you have a redundancy, if any of the disks fail, you loose nothing, unless both disks fail.

RAID 10 is actually making a RAID 0 of a set of disks that are actual a RAID 1 Disks, so :
RAID 10 = (RAID 1) + (RAID 1) +(RAID 1)....

This way you will have the advantages of both RAID levels (one large HD, and redundancy)

in your case, you created 2 virtual (logical) disks with RAID 10 , each having 4 physical HDs. So, it is like this:
V-Disk1= RAID 0((RAID1 (disk1-disk2) + RAID1 (disk3-disk4))

So you have total contiguous space that equals the sum of two physical HD's according to RAID 0, and have redundancy and performance increase according to RAID 1.

hence using the RAID 10 approach you will have 2 virtual Disks each equal to size of 2 physical Disks

RAID 1 approach have the max limit to use 2 Disks, so if you use all to be RAID 1, you will have 4 Disks with each having the size of one physical disk.

I hope you can decide which RAID level to use, and as long you are still deciding, please also consider the other RAID levels (if your controller supports them) RAID 5, 50, and 6.
Also, consider leaving one of the disks as a hot spare (if the server supports that) or at lease have a spare drive on the shelf (off-line) for emergencies.
0
 
Patmac951Commented:
I completely agree with Arnold.  Raid 10 is overkill for the OS, Raid1 which is bascially a standard mirror is fine for the OS.  Raid 10 should be used on the database to ensure proper redundancy.  As mentioned Raid 1 for all transaction logs and backups...if you use Raid 10 for these you will be creating unnecessary disk I/O.  Finally if possible all Index datafiles should be on Raid 1 if you can separate them....Index files will cause intense disk I/O and the less disks you are writing to the better. The ideal situation is to separate your index files on another volume and disk controller if possible for the best performance.  Index files can always be recreated from an application script if necessary.  I am more familiar with Oracle databases running in Windows environments but I can tell you that my Oracle clients all use either Raid5 or Raid10 for their database data files and Raid1 or even Raid0 for their index files and the performance is outstanding.  You want your database DATA files to be heavily redundant and Raid10 would be the best option for them.
0
 [eBook] Windows Nano Server

Download this FREE eBook and learn all you need to get started with Windows Nano Server, including deployment options, remote management
and troubleshooting tips and tricks

 
DavidCommented:
I will go further .. .RAID10 is not overkill for the O/S, it is incorrect, and hurt performance.  RAID1 is the correct way to go for that, and additional RAID1s or RAID10, depending on the architecture and configurable settings of your RAID controller and nature of your database.  In general as long as the NTFS is set up for allocation size of 64KB, and is aligned, and the RAID controller allows you to configure RAID10 for chunk size of 32KB per disk, then go with RAID10.
0
 
jgpdCommented:
as best practices here we installed Win OS on array 1,  don't waste your space it will be enough for your OS, now we have here  several SQL and Oracle  server's on Array 5 of course if space is not problem for you then I recommends to Install  SQL on array 10
Regards,
Jose
0
 
SivasanAuthor Commented:
Wanted to know more about performance aspect. How Raid 10 would affect OS vs having it on Raid 1.
0

Featured Post

Prepare for your VMware VCP6-DCV exam.

Josh Coen and Jason Langer have prepared the latest edition of VCP study guide. Both authors have been working in the IT field for more than a decade, and both hold VMware certifications. This 163-page guide covers all 10 of the exam blueprint sections.

Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now