SQL server Database machine design
08 March 2003, 01:04 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Plymouth
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am looking into a new machine to host our SQL server database where I work. It is a critical 24x7 database serving multiple web sites so both performance and reliability are factors. I could do with some advice from somebody in the know regarding disk drives and performance.
I was planning on getting a SCSI RAID5 system to hold both the OS and data. This would provide redundancy and performance gains for both the OS and the data.
However would it be better to keep the OS separate and have just the data on the RAID5? Should i look into mirroring the OS as well?
We also looked into a simple IDE RAID mirrored system as a budget option as budget is obviously also a factor. but i am pushing for the best system we can afford so i want to get it right.
Any help would be most appreciated.
I was planning on getting a SCSI RAID5 system to hold both the OS and data. This would provide redundancy and performance gains for both the OS and the data.
However would it be better to keep the OS separate and have just the data on the RAID5? Should i look into mirroring the OS as well?
We also looked into a simple IDE RAID mirrored system as a budget option as budget is obviously also a factor. but i am pushing for the best system we can afford so i want to get it right.
Any help would be most appreciated.
08 March 2003, 01:09 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Kingston ( Surrey, not Jamaica )
Posts: 4,670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
*generally speaking* I would opt for the OS on a mirrored device, and Raid 5 for the data.
This is easy under unix - I'm no M$ expoert though, so don't know how feasible this is.
Cheers
Steve
This is easy under unix - I'm no M$ expoert though, so don't know how feasible this is.
Cheers
Steve
09 March 2003, 12:12 AM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK then...
In an ideal world run a couple [or more] of servers clustered with one drive box shared between them.
That way they both share the same data/drive array, they can do load balancing and failover giving you the 24/7 bit.
Depending on how much money you have I would run a fibre channel array.
Then create several partions - tempdb and data, transactions logs and pagefiles and all your system stuff in another.
Expensive but very resilent and with the right hardware very quick.
I am in the lucky position of selling and maintaining some seriously large db solutions which run around the above... if you want some help give me a shout..
In an ideal world run a couple [or more] of servers clustered with one drive box shared between them.
That way they both share the same data/drive array, they can do load balancing and failover giving you the 24/7 bit.
Depending on how much money you have I would run a fibre channel array.
Then create several partions - tempdb and data, transactions logs and pagefiles and all your system stuff in another.
Expensive but very resilent and with the right hardware very quick.
I am in the lucky position of selling and maintaining some seriously large db solutions which run around the above... if you want some help give me a shout..
03 August 2003, 03:05 PM
#6
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Staffs
Posts: 23,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I spec'd and look after some 24/7 SQL / IIS boxes in Telehouse.
One has 2 x 18GB RAID1 for OS, and 3 x 36GB RAID 5 for SQL / IIS.
The other has 2 x 18GB RAID1 for OS and 2 x 18GB RAID1 for SQL/IIS.
How big are the web sites? Any SQL involved or just static pages?
RAM (like talk) is cheap, so go for 1GB, if not 2GB
[Edited by ChrisB - 3/8/2003 3:06:26 PM]
One has 2 x 18GB RAID1 for OS, and 3 x 36GB RAID 5 for SQL / IIS.
The other has 2 x 18GB RAID1 for OS and 2 x 18GB RAID1 for SQL/IIS.
How big are the web sites? Any SQL involved or just static pages?
RAM (like talk) is cheap, so go for 1GB, if not 2GB
[Edited by ChrisB - 3/8/2003 3:06:26 PM]
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post