SQL Server Buildout/Config

Experts,

Getting ready to upgrade our primary application and going off of some guildlines for their recommend build out configuration and this is what i've got. Any input on this would be great. This is a SQL 2005 box that takes a pretty hefty load.

1. HP DL580 G5, Quad DC Xeon's at 2.8ghz, 64GB of RAM
2. RAID CONFIG

(4) 74GB 15K RPM Drives in RAID 1+0; Operating System + Page File
(4) 74GB 15K RPM Drives in RAID 1+0; LOGS, SQL LDF's, W/ 16 GB
(10) 74GB 15K RPM Drives in RAID 1+0 on HP Storage Works SAS; SQL.EXE and DB's

3. Windows Server 2003 Enterprise 64bit, SQL Server 2005 Standard 64bit

This may seem overkill to some, but it is required. I am more concerned about how the load is spread between raid ie - should SQL be installed on seperate raid for optimum performance. Any input in this regard would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance~
LVL 4
ValleyENTAsked:
Who is Participating?
 
Auric1983Connect With a Mentor Commented:
ValleyEnt,

How many users and what size are your DB's?

I noticed you are allocating 10 x 74gb for the DB's and only 4 x 74gb for the log files?
0
 
Netman66Connect With a Mentor Commented:
Quite honestly, you seem to have a good configuration there now.  Logs can be large, but if you are not setting up full recovery model then the logs shouldn't be unmanageable.

0
 
Auric1983Commented:
I would agree with Netman, that the config looks good, I was just wondering about the log file drive.

Are you also going to get the HP ILO license? well worth the additional $$

0
Upgrade your Question Security!

Your question, your audience. Choose who sees your identity—and your question—with question security.

 
Netman66Commented:
Good point!  Buy the iLo Advanced license for that and you won't regret a penny of the cost.
0
 
ValleyENTAuthor Commented:
I will be configuring ILO for sure. The log files are much smaller than the database so I didn't think I would need more that 4 drives and wouldn't require the massive quanitty of spindles.
0
 
ValleyENTAuthor Commented:
Thanks.
0
 
Auric1983Commented:

I guess the last piece of the puzzle is why Server 2003 and SQL 2005?

0
All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.