Re: Must we use disk-striping

Dave Good point! Also in a failure you have to restore all of the dbspaces that reside on the drive. Stripping just adds more downtime in the event of a failure. RAID 5 is faster at reads, and slower at writing when everything is normal. However the reads go into the dumpster when there is a disk failure because it has to make two reads one of the data and one of the parity. (at least that is what I was told a while ago) -- Ron Delpiere-Smith System and Database Administrator Sloan Valve Company (remove the "nospam_" from the email address) David Kosenko <dkosenko@monmouth.com> wrote in article <3597e576.2065921@news>... > Also sprach "Rob Prop" <rprop@concepts.nl> : > :When installing/ordering a new machine for IDS should you use the following > :disk-architectures: > <snip> > :+ Striping > : Pos: Data load is balanced over a set of disks > : Neg: You don't know which data is on which disk so you can't use > :fragmantation optimal > > Another important negative to striping is that should you lose a single disk, > you could lose your entire database. You'd certainly lose any dbspaces > containing chunks that were defined on volumes that use the bad disk. If you > don't stripe, and set up your volumes such that each dbspace resides on a single > physical disk, then losing that disk only loses that dbspace; you can set your > system up to stay online when a dbspace goes down (unless it is the rootdbs or > contains logs). > > Dave > > > Dave Kosenko (posting from home) > Currently teaching folks everything I know about Informix at > Summit Data Group (an Informix Authorized Education Center) > For more info, see http://www.summitdata.com > ********** > "Everybody plays the fool, sometimes." >