RAID setup question...

[elmurado]

Hi,
we're upgrading to a new ML350 Porliant server--win2003 and will have about 30-40 clients hooked up to it.
We only run one small app from the server and everything else is basically file/print.
We don't place a huge load on it(ie read/write) so I was thinking that having RAID 5 setup might be overkill. What I was wondering was whether it would be best to have two drives mirrored for the OS (ie 2x36 G HDD's) and two for data/apps ie(2x72Gb) does that look feasible? Our current server has two 36 Gb drives mirrored but each is partitioned to have OS on one partition and then Data on two other partitions. This has worked perfectly well so far.

Thanks for any advice angles etc...

 

[Walter349]

The proposed arrangement would give better recovery options in the event of the unthinkable. but there is the thought 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it'

 

[ntinlin]

Depends more on how much space you want in total really and what drives you have available, cost issues basically. For your situation it sounds as though there would be no real problem running one big RAID5 array either. It is a little slower for OS to be on RAID5 but not massive issue.
3 or 4x72Gb in RAID5 will obviously give you more space than the 2x36 and 2x72Gb.

Personally I always put OS on mirror wherever possible and data on RAID5 but for a small server it doesn't much matter.

I would advise getting the battery backed write cache module for the ML350 though, by default only reads are cached on the G3.

Neill

 

[TheLad]

Don't forget, it is better to have drives the same size for a RAID5 configuration otherwise you loose the extra diskspace.

For example, if you had 2 x 36.4Gb disks and 2 x 72.8Gb disks, the RAID5 would be configured as if all of the disks were 36.4Gb disks giving you about 109Gb of diskspace to use. The extra diskspace on the 72.8Gb disks would not be used or accessible.

Saying that, is your OS really going to use 36Gb of diskspace on your smaller mirror?

-----------------------------------------------------
"It's true, its damn true!"
-----------------------------------------------------

 

[ntinlin]

It's annoying how big standard disks are getting nowadays. What was wrong with the good old 4Gb 10K rpm Wide-Ultra drives? Eh, eh. :-D

As you say with a 36Gb mirror set you virtually have to use the rest of the space for files etc. or the beancounters start moaning. But it does kind of defeat the purpose of keeping the OS separate for speed.

Saying that one of my colleagues has just gone entirely the other way built a new ML530 G2 with a 200Gb RAID 5 C: drive and no other drives. I'm afraid to ask why in case I get infected somehow too.

Neill

 

[elmurado]

cheers guys--that's cleared it up for me--I will go with the mirrors for both at the mo--if in the future we need heaps of extra space or start dropping apps on there as well then I might go RAID 5. Cost as ever is an issue--I have to balance the fact that EVERYONE'S bonus is linked to costs...
>>I would advise getting the battery backed write cache module for the ML350 though, by default only reads are cached on the G3.

Thanks for that bit of advice too--will check on that.
And the way that the server is going to be supplied to us--we get three disks for 'free' --all 36Gb though the OS won't use it all up--not sure what I could do with the rest...

yeah whatever happened to the 4Gb drives...you should see some of the equipment we've got here which is no longer in use...notebooks with no network ports...there's a 386 somewhere too...

 

[ntinlin]

I believe we still have some 286's with specialised data capture cards. They will only work in an 8bit ISA slot. :-(

 

[Shady66]

Sounds like a good door stop....lol

Lead, Follow of get the %&*#%$ out of the way !!

 

[elmurado]

hah! I still remember having to load games on my spectrum zx48 by playing them on a tape recorder! Jet pack etc!

 

[Walter349]

I can beat that wi still have IBM 4702s and IBM PS/2 30s around and in use, scary or what. Hands up anyone who knows what they are....

 

[ntinlin]

MCA bus. Yuck. Actually I don't think it was that bad a standard but the problem was it wasn't a standard. Poor IBM.

 

[elmurado]

I remember my friend's dad building an altair(I think) in his garage. It had lights on it. Woo. Can't remember much else about it.

 

[jamesbird]

Getting a bit off message here, but the 1st PC I built was an Apple II, standard build was with 48k (yep k not m) of RAM, and I splashed out on 64k - didn't know what I could use a whole 64k for but I was reckless! My memory was it cost me around £100 for the chips - ho hum.