|
|
Posted by John Bell on 03/18/06 23:00
Hi
I don't know about the Dell configuration but you would probably want to
look at all the other alternatives before doing this.
For instance, you don't say exactly what the disc configuration is for
instance have you put database data files and database log files on separate
spindles? Have you got different filegroups on different spindles? Have you
split filegroups into multiple files on different spindles? Are the system
database on different spindles? Is tempdb on different spindles? Have you
thought about adding extra discs to the current array? Have you checked to
see if rewriting the code would reduce the I/O?
John
"Dave" <daveg.01@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142618281.171473.156500@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>I am recommending that we change our Raid Configuration on some of our
> Servers from Raid 5 to Raid 0+1; we are experiencing severe IO
> bottlenecks.
>
> Our hardware guys are pushing back a bit. They claim that Dell has a
> weird implementation of 0+1 and told me something about one drive
> filling up before it begins to write to the next. They claimed that
> this gets rid of most of the benefits of 0+1.
>
>
> I know that 0+1 is not as good as 10 for availability, fault tolerance,
>
> and rebuilding, but shouldn't the write throughput be about the same?
>
>
> Setup:
> Poweredge 2850
> Powervault 220S
> Perc 4/DC Controller 1
> Perc 4e/DI Controller 0
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|