RAID 5 versus RAID 1+0

KBing · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 2

I'm running Exchange 2003 Enterprise, Active Passive cluster on a SAN.

We have the .STM files on a separate disk set configured as RAID 5
currently. We are experiencing periodic slowdown with the .STM files to the
point where we get plenty of RPC dialog boxes on Outlook clients.

Perfwiz and the SAN analyzer both show high disk I/O latency on the disk set
that the .STM files are on. All other drives are well within the Microsoft
recommended limits <20ms.

Has anyone switched from RAID 5 to RAID 1+0? If so, what was your
performance experience? Good / bad?

Archived from group: microsoft>public>exchange2000>information>store

Simon Walsh · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 25

You are the second person to post about this in a fairly short period of
time.
Is there a common demoninator in these 2 cases? Same SP & hot fix level.
Same hardware? Same AV product?

Try and contact dgeedgee to see if he got a solution

/Simon
"KBing" wrote in message @microsoft.com...
> I'm running Exchange 2003 Enterprise, Active Passive cluster on a SAN.
>
> We have the .STM files on a separate disk set configured as RAID 5
> currently. We are experiencing periodic slowdown with the .STM files to
> the
> point where we get plenty of RPC dialog boxes on Outlook clients.
>
> Perfwiz and the SAN analyzer both show high disk I/O latency on the disk
> set
> that the .STM files are on. All other drives are well within the Microsoft
> recommended limits <20ms.
>
> Has anyone switched from RAID 5 to RAID 1+0? If so, what was your
> performance experience? Good / bad?

Mark Arnold [MVP] · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 1126

On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 10:47:02 -0700, KBing
wrote:

>I'm running Exchange 2003 Enterprise, Active Passive cluster on a SAN.
>
>We have the .STM files on a separate disk set configured as RAID 5
>currently. We are experiencing periodic slowdown with the .STM files to the
>point where we get plenty of RPC dialog boxes on Outlook clients.
>
>Perfwiz and the SAN analyzer both show high disk I/O latency on the disk set
>that the .STM files are on. All other drives are well within the Microsoft
>recommended limits <20ms.
>
>Has anyone switched from RAID 5 to RAID 1+0? If so, what was your
>performance experience? Good / bad?

Databases are, depending on your SAN, on RAID1 or better, 1+0. Think
of random reads. RAID1 is better at random reads like that.
That said, it's often down to the SAN vendor. An enormous amount of
people use NetApp on which you get RAID-DP, an implementation of
RAID6. That has some challenges and requires someone clever to work
all the volumes out. EMC is much more conventional and although the
disks can be all over the show the RAIDing is the same as on-box RAID
requirements.

Journaling output in 2K7 versus 2K3 Hey guys, It appears that the journal output in 2K7 has changed to base64 encoded winmail.dat format. I don't recall that being the case in 2K3, can anyone confirm the change? Thanks, Dan

RAID disk failure I am running Exchange 2003 on a Windows 2003 member server in an AD network. The machine has an Intel motherboard with an embedded Adaptec two-port SATA controller configured for RAID 1. Currently one of the ports has failed, so I am down to a single disk

Raid Config for Ex 2007 We’re looking at migrating from Ex 2003 to Ex 2007. Our current configuration performs reasonably well. It consists of following configuration on each of two servers: ~1000 users ~30 GB data (average 20MB limits) 3 storage groups 9 databases + 1 public

Exchange 2007 RAID Configuration We're planning a Exchange 2003 to Exchange 2007 migration and would like some advice for our RAID config. We have 8 x 146GB 10K SAS drives (for only about 40 hold-on-to- everything type users). My preference is a RAID 1 (2 drives) for OS and a RAID 1+0 (6

RAID Controller & Configuration for Exchange 2007 Ent. Ed. Hi, I will migrate to E2K7 EE in a couple of months. Below is the present E2K3 DB details. Single E2K3 behind ISA 2004 without FE. Total Mailbox 250 DB size (edb+stm) 63GB Single storage group I am looking for an HP server with an approp