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?
TrailShredderIT ManagerAsked:
Who is Participating?
 
yo_beeDirector of Information TechnologyCommented:
Your title asking about SQL, but your question is about the Host Hypervisor.

What is your environment look like?
Do you a SAN or is all the disks local to the Hypervisor?
I would say for the guest no RAID.  
For the Host if there is no SAN and only internal storage.
  • OS= RAID 1
  • Storage RAID 0 + 1 (No RAID 5) (Fast disks if possible)

As a VM Guest SQL I would adhere to the  three disk methodology.
C:\ (OS),
E:\ (Transaction Log)
F:\ (Databases)
0
 
Tom CieslikIT EngineerCommented:
Like for all servers

Minimum should be Raid 10 or Raid 50
Do not set Raid 1 or Raid 5
1
 
Scott CSenior Systems EnginerCommented:
Raid 10 or Raid 50.  It's the most expensive as far as disks go, but you get the read performance and fault tolerance.
0
Has Powershell sent you back into the Stone Age?

If managing Active Directory using Windows Powershell® is making you feel like you stepped back in time, you are not alone.  For nearly 20 years, AD admins around the world have used one tool for day-to-day AD management: Hyena. Discover why.

 
Cliff GaliherCommented:
I don't even recommend 50 for SQL. Tends to be a lot of small I/O and that saps performance.
0
 
Scott PletcherSenior DBACommented:
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.
1
 
Alexander ArdatovSoftware ManagerCommented:
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.
0
 
Mark WillsTopic AdvisorCommented:
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
1
 
TrailShredderIT ManagerAuthor Commented:
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.
0
 
Alexander ArdatovSoftware ManagerCommented:
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.
0
 
yo_beeDirector of Information TechnologyCommented:
Is this your only Hypervisor?  
This is pretty much a Hyper-Converge system that you built.
What will you be using for the OS?
0
 
Alexander ArdatovSoftware ManagerCommented:
correction:
RAID 10 should fine too: 16/4 - 4 notes for stripe - 2.4TB in total
0
 
yo_beeDirector of Information TechnologyCommented:
Edit to my last post:
When I asked "What will you be using for the OS?" I meant what drives will you be setting this up on.
With 16 drives at RAID 10 you will only get 50% and it is not recommend to install the OS on the same logical disk as the storage.
With that you lose 2 more drives giving you only 4.2 TB.  Not sure if that is enough space for you.
0
 
Mark WillsTopic AdvisorCommented:
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
1
 
TrailShredderIT ManagerAuthor Commented:
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)?
0
 
yo_beeDirector of Information TechnologyCommented:
Yes 100%.  I would never setup a Hypervisor OS on the same disk as the Hypervisor Storage (Local or SAN).
1
 
TrailShredderIT ManagerAuthor Commented:
Any suggestions on an enterprise SSD?  Since the OS will be the only data on it, it can be small, I'm thinking.
0
 
yo_beeDirector of Information TechnologyCommented:
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.
0
 
Mark WillsTopic AdvisorCommented:
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 :)
0
 
Gerald ConnollyCommented:
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
0
 
Seth SimmonsSr. Systems AdministratorCommented:
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
0
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.