Ian Michael Gumby wrote:
> Ok, so I have this client who has a need.
>
> High speed access for OLTP and data retrieval and a slower access for
> document retrieval. (.pdfs).
> Looking at the new(er) generation of SAS Raid controllers, I can mix
> and match SAS and SATA within the same backplane.
>
> So does it make sense to split the database spaces against the two
> types of disks? RootDB, TempDB, some appDBs on SAS, then some appDBs
> that contain the tables for the blobs on the SATA?
>
> Then use RAID 10 on SAS and maybe raid 60 on SATA? (Art will probably
> kill me for mentioning anything but raid 10... ;-)
Probably! Why not a RAID10 for the historical documents? Are they
somehow less im****tant than the table data? I'd guess more so, and
since the drives and individual docs will be access less frequently than
the table data, there's more likelihood that a grave RAID5/60 problem
will cause hidden data loss.
>
> Does anyone see any performance tuning issues?
> I can see doing this set up for a medical office in a box system.
> (Not that this is the application for the client. For some reason they
> are extremely "hush hush")
>
> TIA!
>
> -G
--
Art S. Kagel
Oninit (www.oninit.com)
IIUG Board of Directors (art@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
)
