> -----Original Message----- > From: redhat-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:redhat-list- > bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Romeo Theriault > Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:40 AM > To: General Red Hat Linux discussion list > Subject: Raid question > > Hello, We are in the process of purchasing a new two new servers. One > of these servers is a database server and needs to have a Raid 1 for > the OS and Applications storage and a Raid 10 at least 146 gb for the > Database storage. My question is, Do I need to by a server with two > raid controllers? One for each of the different arrays or can one > card do this? That would really depend on the applications you are going to run on the system along with the database. If the apps do not use a lot of disk io I would say you can host both containers on the same controller. However, if the apps consume a decent amount of io, be it logging or whatever else it may do, spend a few bucks on an additional controller. In general the cost of a raid controller is low enough to just add one and eliminate that issue altogether. Depending on the amount of database access you may want to choose to deploy the database separate from your applications (different hosts). Also, your database volume is pretty "small", make sure you maximize your spindle count for optimal performance. 2 x 146 is worse than 4 x 72 is worse than 8 x 36 ... scalability concerns however may overrule io concerns in terms of spindle count -Tobias > > Thank you for any information on this. > > Romeo > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
