Terry,
I beg to differ on your RAID recommendation.
I would recommend AGAINST RAID-5 for a file-type device. Each write to a
RAID-5 set results in a write-read-write sequence because of the need to
recalculate and rewrite the parity strip. This will negatively impact your
performance.
RAID-0 (striping) gives good performance, but had no redundancy in case of
disk failure. RAID 1+0 (striping across mirror sets) gives good performance
and protection against disk failure, but tends to be expensive, as you need
2*n disks.
Wes
-----Original Message-----
From: Terry Lemons [mailto:lemons_terry AT EMC DOT COM]
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 9:28 AM
To: NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [Networker] Staging from a partition or of the folder - File
device?
Hi Sonia
When you say 'repertories', do you mean 'directories'?
To optimize a 'file type' device for maximum performance, tune the disk as
you would for a write-intensive application involving long sequential bursts
of data. So, a RAID-5 or RAID-0 disk unit would be best. Write-caching is
useless, as there is no repetition of the data (as would be the case with
small data writes). If you are using NTFS, make sure you are using the
largest block size (cluster size) it supports (which, unfortunately, isn't
very large). If the file system can become fragmented, make sure it is
defragemented on a regular basis.
Hope this help!
tl
--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
|
