• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Technical Q: What's the best option...

K

KC5AV

Golden Member
or why would you do it differently?

I am getting ready to order a new server. It is going to have a 6 disk RAID-5 array. I have the option of 2 other drives in RAID-0 or RAID-1 for the OS (Win2k server). Would there be any serious difference (other than the cost of 2 extra drives) if I just install the OS on a partition and make it part of the the RAID-5 array? Will either configuration give any serious performance boosts? Can you think of any better way of doing it?

Thanks for the help.
 
Apart from the cost (like you already mentioned) I would say just create a partition within the Raid 5 array, if money is no option then Raid 1 would be your next move I would think, but obviously not as fast as Raid 5.
 
That is basically how we setup all of our clients with the need for critical up time. The os is setup as a raid 1 mirror on 2 drives, so if there is a failure, you can just pull a drive out and keep going. Then the data is on a 3 or 5 drive raid 5, so they can keep going while a new drive is found and installed if one of the drives fails.
 
Ditto the message above. Usually do Raid 1 on my boot drives - usually using 15K RPM 18GB drives (9 giggers work too if you can find them), Raid 5 on the rest (10K RPM drives). I've done my OS and everything on Raid-5 but I prefer having my OS separate on fast drives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top