[Scottish] Hardware question - slightly linux related :)
Colin McKinnon
colin.mckinnon at ntlworld.com
Wed Jun 13 22:30:29 BST 2007
On Friday 01 June 2007 11:46, Phillip Bennett wrote:
>
> I am looking at replacing one of my Linux servers here at the moment and
> wanted to ask people about their experiences with hardware configuration..
>
> Basically, it will have about a terrabyte or so of space available in the
> form of a RAID array, (probably RAID5)
Phillip - you've got this kind of backwards. A mopre sensible way round would
be to start with the application, then price, then start thinking about
physical arrangements and RAID levels.
> and I was wondering if anyone would
> be able to tell me the pros/cons of having all this available in just ONE
> array, as opposed to having two or more smaller arrays.
It really rather depends how you split the arrays; we don't know if RAID 5 is
the right way to go for your data. Assuming it is, then it's so small it'd be
difficult to do it in anything other than a single 'big' array. Depending on
your budget you may want to eliminate the controller as a single point of
failure - you probably don't want to put more than about 4 disks per channel
anyway for bandwidth purposes.
> Are there
> performance advantages that people know about? I realiase that with two
> smaller arrays, there is less risk to data, but more cost for disks, but
> could this be offset by buying larger (750G) drives?
? this is nonsensical. Sure, if you layer say mirroring on top of striping,
raid 5 on top of mirroring, you can get large volumes with higher
reliability, but for a 1Tb array? The more disks you split your data over,
the more reliable it should be but it doesn't follow it will be faster -
bigger disks tend to be newer and faster.
> For those wondering, it'll be a PowerEdge 2950 with all disks internal, as
> opposed to an external array. Will this make a difference?
Currently there's not much to choose between SATA and SCSI for streaming reads
but random reads / writes are still (IMHO) handled better by the latter. OTOH
there's a huge price difference.
If you're wanting something substantial to go on, then, if its a fileserver,
probably 5 250Gb SATA drives is the sensible way to go RAID5 across 4 of the
disks with one as a hot standby. For a relational, transactional database,
then RAID 1 (software) on top of RAID 0 (software or hardware) with SCSI
disks is probably the sensible way to go.
I've just had a Google - the 2950 is kind of small (2U) - and you want all the
disks internal???? Putting the disks internally is the only design constraint
you've given - but it is a big problem! Try to rethink this if you can.
C.
More information about the Scottish
mailing list