Suggested configuration for RAID level

Suggested configuration for RAID level

Hallo,

I have a server 4core, 16 GB RAM, 4 discks SAS 140 GB and a EMC SAN  whith fibre channel. What is the suggested RAID level for reduncancy and  performance ?

Raid 1 + (one disk advanced for other use)

Raid 10 (is really necessary for an ESX configuration ?)

others

Raid 5 (suggested for VMFS but no for simple ESX configuration)
Raid 6 (not suggested because too slow)

Thanks


For your ESX install run a pair of SAS drives locally in the server  RAID1. You can then remove the other 2 drives as they are not really  required.

Your EMC SAN should have a lot of redundancy features built in. If you  can afford the disk use RAID 1+0 (10) for your VMFS volumes. If not use  RAID5. Configure hot spare drives with both options.


As to the local storage (As opposed to the EMC SAN) I would go with RAID  1+0 for best performance. If you have an EMC SAN you will probably be  storing most of your VMs on the SAN. Your local storage will be for your  ESX install and perhaps a datastore for testing. As such you would want  to go with a RAID that offered high performance and redundancy , even  though it does so at high disk cost, because size is not you primary  concern on the local storage.

As to your EMC (Clariion AX whatever) You will want to cut up LUNS based on performance needs of your VMs.

RAID 5 LUNS  for your regular VMs

RAID 1+0 LUNS for SQL (Oracle or MSSQL)  or Exchange VMs

Just my two cents on storage opinions vary and the right answer for you is dependent on your environment.


Agree with lightbulb. Different LUNs at different Raid level will give you the required performance and cost benefits.

Try not to run too many VMs per LUN. You should be able to get a  recommendation of the max number of VMs per LUN from EMC dependant on  the controllers you are running in your SAN.


Thanks to all for the reply :smileyblush:

This document was generated from the following thread:

Suggested configuration for RAID level

Comments

I Agree. For the rest of us who don't have a SAN at our disposal. I'm running local raid 1 for ESX OS, 12 disk Attached Pack at Raid 6. I'm not doing much for Sequential Reads and will most likely recieve a somewhat slower perfomance. However, I do get the IO from 1 more disk in the Array and can have 2 disks fail. So do I really lose out on IO? Not sure yet.

Peace of mind is high.

For me I needed to keep Lun Locking to a minimum when added future hosts. So, I break off many small manageable Luns and keep it simple with all available spindles on raid 6.

All High Perf, machines get own LUN.

For All other VM's

OS Drives go to OS LUN.

All Data Disks got to a data disk LUN.

My Cents. Your going to have to build what works for you.

Version history
Revision #:
1 of 1
Last update:
‎01-28-2009 06:48 AM
Updated by: