Diseño de Storage en Exchange 2003
En consecuencia de la reestructuracin de las BBDD de Exchange, para abarcar ms usuarios y para mejorar el rendimiento, se propone redimensionar la SAN que actualmente tenemos y particionarla en varias LUNS. La propuesta que realizamos, siguiendo las recomendaciones del documento Optimizing Storage for Exchange 2003_ES_V1 de Microsoft, es que las BBDD estn en un disco en RAID 0 + 1, pero nuestros expertos en storage nos recomiendan que las pongamos en un RAID5, ya que comentan que la tecnologa ha avanzado y que actualmente el RAID 0 + 1 no se utiliza y es sustituido por RAID 5. Nos gustara saber cual es vuestra recomendacin en base a la experiencia adquirida, ya que muchas veces la teora no transmite la realidad. Gracias por vuestra atencin, Atentamente, Joan Fontanillas Vila jfontanillas@agbar.es tel: 93-341-40-69
December 28th, 2006 2:09pm

Hi- First off, consider using RAID1+0 instead of 0+1. (RAID0+1 is a mirror of stripes and RAID1+0 is a stripe of mirrors) RAID 1+0 is a better choice than RAID5 for random-write environments like Exchange. RAID 1+0 can flush the cache of Exchange's random write load 15-30% faster than RAID5. There are also other benefits like reduced rebuild times. Ignoring things like Write Coalescing RAID5 also has twice the I/O penalty that RAID1+0 has. Ask your storage experts to back up their claim that RAID5 had advanced to the point where it is better than RAID 1+0 with documentation from the vendor; If this is an EMC enviroment have them check out the "EMC CLARiiON Storage Solutions Microsoft Exchange 2003 Best Practices" guide on powerlink.emc.com as it clearly states that RAID1+0 is better. Documentation aside I've found that in recent installations the tide has definately swung from using RAID5 for the database files to RAID1+0 for database files; disk space has gotten cheaper and peformance over space utilization has become the deciding factor... at least for Exchange 2003...
Free Windows Admin Tool Kit Click here and download it now
January 3rd, 2007 6:25am

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other recent topics Other recent topics