Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
Author |
Topic |
inbs
Aged Yak Warrior
860 Posts |
Posted - 2010-04-06 : 03:00:27
|
i asked before about sepearate lod and db ,but i still feel uncomfortable with that.we have server for bi,especially we have big job that run from 00:00 to 08:00.in the day we do not have a lot of tranasaction. my consultant sepearate the DBput inDISK11. OS+tempdb on 146 G*2 RAID 1+0DISK22.DataBase+Log ON 750 G RAID 53.BackUp ON 750 G RAID 5i have additional question:can i put tempdb and transaction log and os(operation system) in the same diskmy question, i read that the recommendation is to seperate DB and log in difffrent disks/in my case can i put db and log in the same disk?(all my dbs is 250 G and log is 8 G) |
|
DBA in the making
Aged Yak Warrior
638 Posts |
Posted - 2010-04-06 : 08:10:53
|
I'm a little unsure, do you have 1 or 2 750GB raid disks?There are 10 types of people in the world, those that understand binary, and those that don't. |
 |
|
inbs
Aged Yak Warrior
860 Posts |
Posted - 2010-04-06 : 08:24:08
|
quote: Originally posted by DBA in the making I'm a little unsure, do you have 1 or 2 750GB raid disks?There are 10 types of people in the world, those that understand binary, and those that don't.
i have 6*300 giga in raid 5 (so i have 1.5T)can i put log and tempgb and OS in the same disk (146giga*2 in raid 1+0) |
 |
|
DBA in the making
Aged Yak Warrior
638 Posts |
Posted - 2010-04-06 : 08:52:16
|
quote: Originally posted by inbs
quote: Originally posted by DBA in the making I'm a little unsure, do you have 1 or 2 750GB raid disks?There are 10 types of people in the world, those that understand binary, and those that don't.
i have 6*300 giga in raid 5 (so i have 1.5T)
And that has 2 partitions? If so, as far as Hardware failure and performance goes, there's really no difference to having a single 1.5T partition. quote: can i put log and tempgb and OS in the same disk (146giga*2 in raid 1+0)
I wouldn't do that. I'd give the OS and TempDB a disk of their own if possible. Also, I wouldn't have raid 1+0 for the OS. Raid 1 should be enough. As for the log file, definitely store it on a different physical disk set to the data files. They way it is at the moment (assuming the 1.5T is partitioned into 2 logical disks), if you have a multiple disk failure on the raid 5 (unlikely, but very possible), then you'll lose the lot. Perhaps this would be better. Split the 1.5TB raid 5 into 2 * 600GB raid 5. 1 for the data + log backup, and one for the log + data backup. You'll lose a little storage space, and if that's a problem, then you might want to think about adding 1 disk to each raid 5 set. But at least a multiple disk failure on either raid 5 wont see you lose everything.There are 10 types of people in the world, those that understand binary, and those that don't. |
 |
|
inbs
Aged Yak Warrior
860 Posts |
Posted - 2010-04-06 : 08:59:02
|
why i can not put :log backup + log + data backup in same disk (600 giga)? |
 |
|
DBA in the making
Aged Yak Warrior
638 Posts |
Posted - 2010-04-06 : 09:07:53
|
quote: Originally posted by inbs why i can not put :log backup + log + data backup in same disk (600 giga)?
Because there may be transaction that have been written to the log, but not to the disk. If you lose that physical disk, then you'll lost those transactions.It would also increase the time it takes to perform a log backup, as you're reading and writing to the same logical disk. There's really not much point in backing anything up to the same physical media the original is stored on. In the event of a hardware failure, you want either the original or the backup to survive.There are 10 types of people in the world, those that understand binary, and those that don't. |
 |
|
inbs
Aged Yak Warrior
860 Posts |
Posted - 2010-04-06 : 12:57:01
|
ok,i agree with you,but i do not understand ,why i cant put log+tempdb+os in same disk |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|