Re: SQL Server benchmarks comparing disk setups?

From: Karl Levinson [x y] mvp (levinson_k@excite.com)
Date: 02/03/03


From: "Karl Levinson [x y] mvp" <levinson_k@excite.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 10:26:42 -0500


Very sorry, wrong newsgroup. I will repost in a more accurate newsgroup.

"x y, mvp" <levinson_k@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:OZwUPs4yCHA.2292@TK2MSFTNGP10...
> I searched google and couldn't find the answer.
>
> I'm needing to make a business case to support recommending three
different
> disk arrays for a SQL server, e.g. a mirror for the OS, a mirror for the
> transaction logs, and RAID 5 or 10 for the database files.
>
> So, does anyone know of any published benchmarks showing what a typical
> difference in performance we might expect compared to, say, installing
> everything onto one RAID 5 array? [Or even if you have personal
experience
> with both types of setups that might help me... some sort of way to
quantify
> whether the increase in cost is worth it, and why and how much.]
>
> I realize that this performance will vary depending on what the SQL server
> is being used for.
>
> Also, I have a hard time figuring out how putting the transaction logs
onto
> a disk mirror will be faster, given that (1) having multiple transaction
> logs on a single mirror should disrupt the sequential writes as the drive
> heads move from log to log, and (2) disk writes are slower on a mirror
than
> on RAID 5. I'm wrong to think this, correct?
>
>
>



Relevant Pages

  • Re: IO Bottleneck
    ... At a minimum, you should have a mirror for the OS, a mirror for the logs, ... write times on the the RAID 5 array far exceed 20ms. ... Troubleshooting Analyzer, and of course, the results indicated a disk ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.design)
  • Re: Exchange Disks
    ... Logs raid 1 mirror ... consider single drives for the OS and or Logs instead of mirrors. ... Is there some sort of rule-of-thumb for setting up disks based on a number ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.setup)
  • Re: RAID and Partition
    ... best performance and still have mirror protection. ... RAID 0+1 For DBs ... logs and DB or RAID 1 for logs and RAID 5+ hotspare ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.design)
  • Re: RAID and Partition
    ... similair question. ... Thinking of RAID 1 for OS,Pagefile ... and then either RAID 10 for the remaning 6 disks with partitions for logs ... > a mirror for the OS and smtp queue ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.design)
  • Re: disk latencie problems on a brand new exchange server with 2 mailboxes!!!!!!!!
    ... Figure a mirror for the OS, a mirror for the DBs, and a single drive for the ... logs (or a single drive for the OS, a mirror for the logs, and a mirror for ... When you size disk, space ... If they're in a single RAID5 partitioned into drives that wouldn't be ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.admin)

Quantcast