Disk configuration and optimization

Hi,
If I have a RAID 1 configuration and a RAID 5 configuration, what is the
optimal way to setup all my paging, data files, log files, temp files, etc.
for optimal SQL Server Performance?
DoOptimal means different things depending on what you are optimizing for, =but some suggestions:
Lose the raid 5 and make it 0+1 if you want best combination of speed =and resilience.
If performance matters more than resilience go for raid 0 for sql server =data files (don't panic the log is going elsewhere)
If resilience matters more than performance go for raid 1 for data =files.
Then put log on raid 1 (always)
System drive on raid 1
SQL server data files on 0+ 1, 0 or 1 depending on your meaning of =optimal.
How far you go with this then depends on many other factors - how many =spindles, controllers etc
Mike John
"Do" <doduong12141214@.hotmail.com> wrote in message =news:OEa$vSi1DHA.3220@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> > If I have a RAID 1 configuration and a RAID 5 configuration, what is =the
> optimal way to setup all my paging, data files, log files, temp files, =etc.
> for optimal SQL Server Performance?
> > Do
> >|||So if I switch that RAID 5 to RAID 1 then I'll have two RAID 1
configurations on two separate controllers.
On my system RAID 1, I'll have my paging file and log files?
And on my other RAID 1, I'll have the data files?
So this means that I should keep my data and log files on separate disk
configurations?
Is it okay to put paging and log files on the same disk configuration?
Do
"Mike John" <Mike.John@.knowledgepool.spamtrap.com> wrote in message
news:eYC2yli1DHA.2528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
Optimal means different things depending on what you are optimizing for, but
some suggestions:
Lose the raid 5 and make it 0+1 if you want best combination of speed and
resilience.
If performance matters more than resilience go for raid 0 for sql server
data files (don't panic the log is going elsewhere)
If resilience matters more than performance go for raid 1 for data files.
Then put log on raid 1 (always)
System drive on raid 1
SQL server data files on 0+ 1, 0 or 1 depending on your meaning of optimal.
How far you go with this then depends on many other factors - how many
spindles, controllers etc
Mike John
"Do" <doduong12141214@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OEa$vSi1DHA.3220@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> If I have a RAID 1 configuration and a RAID 5 configuration, what is the
> optimal way to setup all my paging, data files, log files, temp files,
etc.
> for optimal SQL Server Performance?
> Do
>|||I would always want to keep log and data on different discs both for =recovery and performance. You don't want to be paging much anyway so =access to pagefile should not be much. If tempdb use is very high then =moving that to yet another set of drives can help as well, but you need =to know a lot more about the workload to judge that.
Mike John
"Do" <doduong12141214@.hotmail.com> wrote in message =news:egC2cvi1DHA.2528@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> So if I switch that RAID 5 to RAID 1 then I'll have two RAID 1
> configurations on two separate controllers.
> > On my system RAID 1, I'll have my paging file and log files?
> And on my other RAID 1, I'll have the data files?
> > So this means that I should keep my data and log files on separate =disk
> configurations?
> Is it okay to put paging and log files on the same disk configuration?
> > Do
> > > "Mike John" <Mike.John@.knowledgepool.spamtrap.com> wrote in message
> news:eYC2yli1DHA.2528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Optimal means different things depending on what you are optimizing =for, but
> some suggestions:
> > Lose the raid 5 and make it 0+1 if you want best combination of speed =and
> resilience.
> > If performance matters more than resilience go for raid 0 for sql =server
> data files (don't panic the log is going elsewhere)
> If resilience matters more than performance go for raid 1 for data =files.
> > Then put log on raid 1 (always)
> System drive on raid 1
> SQL server data files on 0+ 1, 0 or 1 depending on your meaning of =optimal.
> > How far you go with this then depends on many other factors - how many
> spindles, controllers etc
> > Mike John
> > > "Do" <doduong12141214@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OEa$vSi1DHA.3220@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Hi,
> >
> > If I have a RAID 1 configuration and a RAID 5 configuration, what =is the
> > optimal way to setup all my paging, data files, log files, temp =files,
> etc.
> > for optimal SQL Server Performance?
> >
> > Do
> >
> >
> >|||As mike says, using raid 10 gives the best performance, but you have to have
more hard drives... Most (non extrememe performance) folks I see simply Raid
5 the data and Raid 1 the log, and system drives.
--
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Computer Education Services Corporation (CESC), Charlotte, NC
www.computeredservices.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Do" <doduong12141214@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OEa$vSi1DHA.3220@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> If I have a RAID 1 configuration and a RAID 5 configuration, what is the
> optimal way to setup all my paging, data files, log files, temp files,
etc.
> for optimal SQL Server Performance?
> Do
>