Re: RAID v Mirror disks

Alan Stewart wrote:
>
> And if you use Raid 5 does this mean you needn't worry about mirroring
> your control files and having multiple members within your redo log
> groups?
>
> In article <G1dt4.1817$p4.31868_at_news1-hme0>, No_at_Mail.Please says...
> > What is the 'best' disk subsystem to use on an NT box, considering advances
> > in disk technology?
> >
> > RAID
> > Mirror
> > Single disks
> >
> > Thanks
> > Jack
> >

        Only if you can live with relatively poor performance. I worked with an all RAID 5 system (an AIX box configured by a very stubborn systems administrator who insisted that everything be on RAID 5) on a four processor IBM S70 that was fine with 50 or so interactive users, but died as soon as the job mix changed to 2 batch users and more than 6 interactive users.

        Only after the outraged users threatened the systems administrator, hist boss, his first born son, etc., etc. did he relent and move the redo logs to mirrored disk. Performance improved to the point where the system was able to handle over 100 interactive users and at least 4 batch jobs (probably could have handled more, but thats all there were at any one time) without any complaints from the interactive users.

-- 
Jerry Gitomer
Once I learned how to spell DBA, I became one.