Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.databases.pick > #2260

Re: Server-Virtualization and RAID for MV and non-MV

Show all headers | View raw

On Feb 9, 8:22 am, JJCSR <JCro...@ktp.com> wrote:
> I have a REALITY environment installed on a RAID 10 environment, and
> use RAID 10 on all of my other servers, as well.   I'm about to move
> all but REALITY (at least for the time being) to Virtualization.   The
> proposed server has 16 drive bays.   Proposed solution by vendor is to
> use 4 x 300GB 10k RPM drives, using RAID 5.   My experience for so
> many years has been with RAID 10, and everything I read, basically,
> says that RAID 5 can/will be slower in response to "writes".
>
> I have asked to increase the number of drives, since the bays are
> available, and reduce the capacity of each drive (e.g., instead of 4 x
> 300GB, go to 6 x 200GB), or some such arrangement.   The change would
> require 12 bays to be occupied (for RAID 1), but would allow for more
> efficient use of RAID 0 (striping).   And, yes, I realize there is
> more cost involved, but my major concern isn't so much for "what are
> we paying", rather, "what's the best method to protect our
> invenstment".
>
> Does anyone have any experience with virtualization, be it with MV or
> any other arrangement?
>
> Thanks, in advance,
> Jim Cronin
> DIR. MIS, Kittery Trading Post

I'm a bit confused.  A fair bit of the post pertains to RAID
configurations but it appears the base question is in regards to
virtualization.  I can't speak to the performance issues in regards to
number of drives and RAID config but we do have some experience with
virtualized d3 servers.  We have a number of customers running Win200x
server and either Hyper-V or VMWare virtuals with d3/linux.  I know it
seems silly to use Windows as the server O/S but this is how we avoid
d3/NT problems (spare me the outcry) in places that "must" run MS.
The oldest of these installations is about 2 years now and have had no
problems.  Actually, we did have a problem where one of the customer's
IT guys put a snapshot from an earlier time in place and all data from
the last 3 months "disappeared".  Mr Peabody threw the switch on the
wayback machine.  They hadn't been moving the backups off the virtual
either.  Boy was that a heart stopper until it was figured out and the
current snapshot restored.  It's really great if you are installing
the same base software on multiple servers.  Set up the first one,
snapshot it and restore the snapshot onto the other servers.  The O/S,
db and valued added software are instantly there.  All you need to do
is configure it for that location and activate.  That has worked well
with no issues.  Quick too.  There was a fair bit of trepidation the
first time we used this configuration but I have no qualms about doing
them now.

Back to comp.databases.pick | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Server-Virtualization and RAID for MV and non-MV JJCSR <JCronin@ktp.com> - 2011-02-09 08:22 -0800
  Re: Server-Virtualization and RAID for MV and non-MV JJCSR <JCronin@ktp.com> - 2011-02-09 11:49 -0800
    Re: Server-Virtualization and RAID for MV and non-MV Ross Ferris <rossf@stamina.com.au> - 2011-02-09 15:49 -0800
  Re: Server-Virtualization and RAID for MV and non-MV GlenB <batchelg@bellsouth.net> - 2011-02-11 18:38 -0800
  Re: Server-Virtualization and RAID for MV and non-MV RichC <cheseroo@hotmail.com> - 2011-02-09 10:27 -0800
  Re: Server-Virtualization and RAID for MV and non-MV x <lucian_pata@yahoo.com> - 2011-02-10 08:57 -0800
    Re: Server-Virtualization and RAID for MV and non-MV JJCSR <JCronin@ktp.com> - 2011-02-10 11:47 -0800

csiph-web