TrailShredder
asked on
SQL Server 2012 Raid Level?
I am setting up a new server to host a Windows 2012r2 Hyper-V VM. The virtual machine will primarily be a 2012 SQL server. What RAID level on the new host server would be recommended?
Raid 10 or Raid 50. It's the most expensive as far as disks go, but you get the read performance and fault tolerance.
I don't even recommend 50 for SQL. Tends to be a lot of small I/O and that saps performance.
If you can afford it, RAID10 for everything.
If you can't, RAID10 for logs and tempdb, and RAID5 for data, particularly data that is read more. If you have highly updated and/or critical-for-speed SQL data, you could consider RAID10 for that as well.
If you can't, RAID10 for logs and tempdb, and RAID5 for data, particularly data that is read more. If you have highly updated and/or critical-for-speed SQL data, you could consider RAID10 for that as well.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
It depends on your server hardware. What drives controller do you have?
Does your hardware support any acceleration for RAID 5 mode?
If yes, then preferred mode is RAID 5. I use RAID 5 on all my stage servers (with hardware acceleration) - this is the quite real balance between the performance, fault tolerance and space usage (installed drives).
If you need more fault tolerance then use some combinations with mirrors.
Does your hardware support any acceleration for RAID 5 mode?
If yes, then preferred mode is RAID 5. I use RAID 5 on all my stage servers (with hardware acceleration) - this is the quite real balance between the performance, fault tolerance and space usage (installed drives).
If you need more fault tolerance then use some combinations with mirrors.
Good points yo_bee !
SQL Server doesnt really care what disk technology lies beneath it - so long as it performs.
There are a couple of good whitepapers worth reading (being unsure of your hardware provider) : https://www.symantec.com/connect/articles/best-practices-optimizing-sql-server-san-environments-using-altiris-products
And :
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/1/D/61DDE9B6-AB46-48CA-8380-D7714C9CB1AB/Best_Practices_for_Virtualizing_and_Managing_SQL_Server_2012.pdf
In the one above, if you search for RAID you will find 1 entry that references RAID 5 - which you should absolutely avoid - try replacing a disk !!!!
Also worth reading is : http://download.microsoft.com/download/D/2/0/D20E1C5F-72EA-4505-9F26-FEF9550EFD44/Best%20Practices%20for%20Running%20SQL%20Server%20with%20HVDM.docx
But to your question.... RAID10
SQL Server doesnt really care what disk technology lies beneath it - so long as it performs.
There are a couple of good whitepapers worth reading (being unsure of your hardware provider) : https://www.symantec.com/connect/articles/best-practices-optimizing-sql-server-san-environments-using-altiris-products
And :
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/1/D/61DDE9B6-AB46-48CA-8380-D7714C9CB1AB/Best_Practices_for_Virtualizing_and_Managing_SQL_Server_2012.pdf
In the one above, if you search for RAID you will find 1 entry that references RAID 5 - which you should absolutely avoid - try replacing a disk !!!!
Also worth reading is : http://download.microsoft.com/download/D/2/0/D20E1C5F-72EA-4505-9F26-FEF9550EFD44/Best%20Practices%20for%20Running%20SQL%20Server%20with%20HVDM.docx
But to your question.... RAID10
ASKER
I was curious if it really mattered to SQL since it was running on a VM. The server is a Dell R720 with 16 - 600GB 10K RPM SAS Drives on a PERC H710 RAID Controller w/ 512MB Cache. Sounds like RAID10 would be my best configuration.
RIAD is needed only for the host server. For VM it is not needed.
The controller is good and may support all RAID types.
16 drives? RAID 10 required 4. I think RAID 5 should be OK.
The controller is good and may support all RAID types.
16 drives? RAID 10 required 4. I think RAID 5 should be OK.
Is this your only Hypervisor?
This is pretty much a Hyper-Converge system that you built.
What will you be using for the OS?
This is pretty much a Hyper-Converge system that you built.
What will you be using for the OS?
correction:
RAID 10 should fine too: 16/4 - 4 notes for stripe - 2.4TB in total
RAID 10 should fine too: 16/4 - 4 notes for stripe - 2.4TB in total
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Yep. Though, was hoping for enterprise level SSD's :) Segate Nytro or Toshiba PX04 - my next plaything :)
And memory is vitally important for SQL Server, so if you havent yet read those whitepapers, it is worthwhile.
Cheers,
Mark
And memory is vitally important for SQL Server, so if you havent yet read those whitepapers, it is worthwhile.
Cheers,
Mark
ASKER
4.2 TB is plenty of storage capacity, even enough to spare for spinning up a second VM. Should I consider adding another physical disk for the OS (Which is Server 2012r2)?
Yes 100%. I would never setup a Hypervisor OS on the same disk as the Hypervisor Storage (Local or SAN).
ASKER
Any suggestions on an enterprise SSD? Since the OS will be the only data on it, it can be small, I'm thinking.
The issue is not the OS disk, but the data store disks.
The Hypervisor is just give the guest resources. You can run the OS on a SD card if you like.
VMware is such a lightweight OS that it works great with SD card and giving you all the disk bays for your data stores.
I am not a Hyper-V guru, but I do know the OS is a bit more being that you have a GUI and all, but standard SAS drives that you already have will work fine. The only thing is they are large for an OS and there would be lots of wasted space.
The Hypervisor is just give the guest resources. You can run the OS on a SD card if you like.
VMware is such a lightweight OS that it works great with SD card and giving you all the disk bays for your data stores.
I am not a Hyper-V guru, but I do know the OS is a bit more being that you have a GUI and all, but standard SAS drives that you already have will work fine. The only thing is they are large for an OS and there would be lots of wasted space.
Your RAID 10 drive configuration sounds fine as is.
Enterprise SSD's can get very expensive. I like Seagate Nytro or Toshiba PX04* series. Both companies have various sizes and option. Most of the big name companies are all getting in on the bandwagon. So lots to choose from.
But it will blow you away with just how good SSD'S have become - it is a different world...
https://toshiba.semicon-storage.com/us/product/storage-products/enterprise-ssd.html
https://www.seagate.com/au/en/enterprise-storage/nytro-drives/
But we could chat about that for days and now a different question :)
Enterprise SSD's can get very expensive. I like Seagate Nytro or Toshiba PX04* series. Both companies have various sizes and option. Most of the big name companies are all getting in on the bandwagon. So lots to choose from.
But it will blow you away with just how good SSD'S have become - it is a different world...
https://toshiba.semicon-storage.com/us/product/storage-products/enterprise-ssd.html
https://www.seagate.com/au/en/enterprise-storage/nytro-drives/
But we could chat about that for days and now a different question :)
As said previously DO NOT use RAID-5!!!
Since the advent of disks over 750GB, RAID-5 has not been recommended for use at all. Because of the extended rebuild times of these big disks the risk of a second disk failing while the first is rebuilding, has become unacceptably high.
Use RAID-6 or RAID10
Since the advent of disks over 750GB, RAID-5 has not been recommended for use at all. Because of the extended rebuild times of these big disks the risk of a second disk failing while the first is rebuilding, has become unacceptably high.
Use RAID-6 or RAID10
No comment has been added to this question in more than 21 days, so it is now classified as abandoned.
I have recommended this question be closed as follows:
Split:
-- yo_bee (https:#a42401675)
-- yo_bee (https:#a42402603)
If you feel this question should be closed differently, post an objection and the moderators will review all objections and close it as they feel fit. If no one objects, this question will be closed automatically the way described above.
seth2740
Experts-Exchange Cleanup Volunteer
I have recommended this question be closed as follows:
Split:
-- yo_bee (https:#a42401675)
-- yo_bee (https:#a42402603)
If you feel this question should be closed differently, post an objection and the moderators will review all objections and close it as they feel fit. If no one objects, this question will be closed automatically the way described above.
seth2740
Experts-Exchange Cleanup Volunteer
Minimum should be Raid 10 or Raid 50
Do not set Raid 1 or Raid 5