Hi, I have a question regarding transaction logs. Background: I have a server with 6 - 72 GB drive. Raid 5 with the first 4 drives creating a 50 GB C drive and 160 GB D drive. Mirror the last 2 drives and created a 72 GB E drive. _C dirve : OS and Exchange program files - space is doing fine. _D drive : priv1 and pub1 (both .edb and .stm) files - running out of space _E drive : indexes, transaction logs and archive files - space is doing fine _Small unused space on raid 5 Plan: _Move indexes to C drive _Create new partition from small unused space and move transaction log files there _Move archive files some where else _Move pub1.edb and pub1.stm to E drive Question: 1) Can it be relocated to another server via drive mapping or unc path? 2) If not, can I put it on its own partition but on the same array as the priv1.edb? 3) Will that impact the performance negatively? Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. Kit

You did not list out where you C, D, and E drives live, so we have noi dea what parition is on which physical RAID LUN. 1) Can what be relocated? If by "it" you mean the whole Exchange server, then yes you can move Exchange storage to an external server provided it is a NAS solution that is WHQL certified: http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/Exchange-NAS-Proved-Approved.html I doubt "another server" that isn't a NAS solution would qualify, and probably the other server wouldn't be optimized to support heavy file I/O from a remote application. You could try it, but MSFT probably won't support it. 2) Again not sure what you mean by "it". Why would you create another partition on the same RAID LUN? Carving upa single RAID 5 into multiple partitions has caused you to run out of space in one of the partitions already. Additionally creating multiple partitions on the same RAID LUN has not given you any performance benefit, in fact it probably has hurt your performance. We know best practices say to move the logs and database off to other drives, but they mean physical drives not logical. The reason behing having the logs and databases on seperate physical disks is for performance and also in case one of the drives in the RAID goes bad and corrupts the drive. In your case that would take down the entire RAID 5. My recommendation is to have one parition per RAID LUN, and to quit using multiple paritions on the same RAID LUN as that only limits you in the flexibility of your usable space. 3) I read once long ago that additional paritions take up blocks farther and farther away from the center of the hard drive. So in theory, the more paritions you add, the worse the new ones will perform. Now that was before RAID came into the mix, but I can't see how more paritions will help performance. The last customer I had that was limited to 6 drives, built the entire thing as a RAID 1+0, and created a C, D, and E parition (against my recommendation). They claimed this allowed them to give the speed of a 3 disk RAID 0 to all three drive letters at the same time. I never sat down to perform the calculations. If was going to build your server, I would build the C: drive as a mirror, and then the D: drive as a 4 disk RAID 5 and put the logs and databases on there. It isn't perfect, but when you are limited to the number of disks you have, you work with what you got. As for your confiigration, I cannot make a specific recommenation since you did not list out how your C: D: and E: drives are laid out on your RAID 5 and RAID 1. Goos luck!