We are looking to build a new SQL 2008 R2 server for our office. Currently we are running Windows 2003 with a SQL 2000 Server.
Currently the system is a HP DL380 G5
Dual Xeon 2.8Ghz
2x 36GB SAS drives
We are planning to upgrade the RAM with another 16GB, leaving the CPU's in tact.
The database is primarily a read database- reports pulled from the data. Would expect approx 20-30 people on it at any given time- this is an estimate.
The System has 8 total hard drive slots- 2 being taken by the 36GB drives
Upon looking at the quick spec's from HP we can go with 15K RPM 147GB SAS drives (largest possible in 15K) or 10K 300GB SAS drives (largest possible in 10K).
Total drive on the SQL 2000 server is 410GB, with 220GB free. All logs, DB, etc sit on the D:\ drive. The C:\ drive only holds the OS and Application, and is using around 15GB total.
My question is this...
Which storage config would be more recommended:
6x 147GB 15K RPM in RAID 5
6x 147GB 15K RPM in RAID 10
6x 300GB 10K RPM in RAID 5
6x 300GB 10K RPM in RAID 10
On those storage configs can I partition out separate drives for Logs, DB, etc, even if they are all on the same RAID LUN, does that even matter? I am sure the database will only grow in physical size, although I would assume it will always be a more "Read-centric" database.
Any help would be appreciated!!