Hi, I am looking at an Ex2003 50 User solution. I am planning to use 4 x 73 GB SAS drives and am undecided on whether to have a RAID10 with all for drives or 2 x RAID 1. What would you recommend? Thanks, Alex
50 users? i would prefer raid 1 for both ... better performance. read and write. "Alex Cheng" <Alex.cheng@somewhere> wrote in message news:5A0F83FA-D5D8-44D0-9618-A2581372003B@microsoft.com... > Hi, > > I am looking at an Ex2003 50 User solution. I am planning to use 4 x 73 GB > SAS drives and am undecided on whether to have a RAID10 with all for > drives or 2 x RAID 1. What would you recommend? > > Thanks, > Alex
I would go Raid 10 as it offers better drive rebuild performance. Read and write performance will be quite good to. Raid 10 is quite popular with servers these days as disk space is quite cheap. "Alex Cheng" <Alex.cheng@somewhere> wrote in message news:5A0F83FA-D5D8-44D0-9618-A2581372003B@microsoft.com... > Hi, > > I am looking at an Ex2003 50 User solution. I am planning to use 4 x 73 GB > SAS drives and am undecided on whether to have a RAID10 with all for > drives or 2 x RAID 1. What would you recommend? > > Thanks, > Alex
What is your expected load in IOPS/user? What is the speed of your SAS drives. The safest route is to physically seperate the spindles containing the logs from those containing databases. This ensures that heavy IO on the DBs does not impact the logs. This is also the best practice. Log IO is the most end user visable aspect of Exchange 2003 performance. If performance degrades end users see the dreaded "requesting data" dialog. "Alex Cheng" <Alex.cheng@somewhere> wrote in message news:5A0F83FA-D5D8-44D0-9618-A2581372003B@microsoft.com... > Hi, > > I am looking at an Ex2003 50 User solution. I am planning to use 4 x 73 GB > SAS drives and am undecided on whether to have a RAID10 with all for > drives or 2 x RAID 1. What would you recommend? > > Thanks, > Alex
