|
|
sybperl-l Archive
Up Prev Next
From: "Patrick S dot Leung" <pleung at easygroup dot com>
Subject: Re: Question about RAID levels using Sybase 11.9.2....
Date: Jul 7 2000 10:09AM
I worked for an US investment bank before, and there they used mirror for their
sybase. They are on Solaris. I never tried to find out why they weren't on
RAID. It may be the fact that they use raw device and RAID may prevent
recoveribility? Just my speculation, please correct me if I am wrong.
Patrick
Robert Banniza wrote:
> Guys,
> I have a question here and I don't mean to start a religuous RAID war
> either. I got into a discussion with my company's data center manager the
> other day and we started talking about RAID. One thing led to another and I
> told him that I was going to build a particular Sybase installation using
> RAID-5 on a Sun E450 (using the built in hardware RAID controller). The next
> thing I know, this guy starts telling me how stupid of an idea this is and
> the only way to build a database installation is using RAID-1. In the shops
> that I have worked in as either a programmer or sysadmin. in the past, we
> have always used RAID-5. I did my research and several sites were pointing
> to using RAID 0+1 (striping+mirroring). Can someone tell me what RAID level
> most Sybase shops use? This particualr Sybase installation will be writing
> from some big files with more a lot of reading (BulkStats project). Either
> way, I would appreciate any information as I want to know the best way to do
> this and the reasoning behind it. I'm looking for ease of data recovery and
> performance whilst configuring my RAID levels. Thanks for any help.
>
> Robert
>
> P.S. I know this is a Linux/Sybperl list but I have gotten some great
> information in the past from here.
|
