RE: Logging - to RAID vs. mirrored non-raid disk.

On Friday, June 07, 1996, Mike Segel wrote... > Dave K. Lahoti wrote: > > > > Glenn Travis wrote: > > > > > > We are having a debate over whether it is better to put the log files on > > > cached RAID, or mirrored non-raid pairs. While some RAID controllers have > > > fast write cache and compensate for the 25% decrease in write rates, is is > > > still better to thave heavily written files (logs) on non-raid disk? > > > > > > What are most people doing and why? > > > -- > > > > > > > I think you would have to look at your particular situation. > > > > If your writes are so heavy to the point that you no longer benefit > > from the fast write cache, then I would stick to mirrorred non-raid, > > otherwise Raid would be a good choice since you would get fast > > throughput together with parity backup. A lot less costly than 2x disk > > when using non-raid mirroring. > > > True, but since we are only talking about your log files, I would say > that the cost of mirroring only the logs is minimal. 2 gig drives are > what? ($500 apiece) 1 GIG drives are less. Anyone have > 2 gig log > files ? > > -Mikey > I may be asking out of turn but if you are mirroring data why would you mirror logs ? Lanny