Are SQL Server RAID Best Practices really necessary for a database with only a few users?

Is separating the data and log files on different drives/virtual disks really necessary if we only have 6 database users?
Who is Participating?
Russ SuterConnect With a Mentor Commented:
Short answer, probably not.

Longer answer, even 6 users could potentially submit a lot of transactions to a database. Number of users isn't the only consideration. Total number of transactions, redundancy, backup plans, overall performance, all should be taken into account.

I hardly ever separate the data and log files. I don't really see the benefit.
lcohanConnect With a Mentor Database AnalystCommented:
RAID's are used for redundancy so think that if you have only 1 user working against a database that is critical for business and the single disk where you have it all - DB files and backups - is failing ...then what will you be doing to recover it? Is not only the speed/parallel IO that needs to be considered but redundancy from recovery and up-time/on-line point of view.
FYI - RAID1 - or mirrored disks with parity works pretty well and all you need is 2 identical disks so is one fails the other one is there until replaced and RAID is rebuilt.
Just make sure in any case (with or without RAID's) you take and keep FULL DB backups somewhere else (different disk).
computerconceptsAuthor Commented:
Thanks guys!  I appreciate your input.  I'll most likely not separate the data and log files and go with a RAID5 for the SQL database storage.  Thanks again.
Russ SuterCommented:
That should be fine. Performance won't suffer and the RAID 5 storage will give you the redundancy you need.
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.