locked
RAID 0 RRS feed

  • Question

  • Dear All,

    I am thinking to install Windows server 2008 R2 Standard with AD & DNS on Hardware RAID 0 for my both Primary Domain Controller and for Secondary Domain Controller.

    As i have two Domain Controller, so i think i must not worry about disadvantage of RAID 0 ( as i have backup DC ), if any of the DC Hard disk fails.

    What do u suggest? should i go for it?

    Other detail:- 500 Domain user, with standard Group PolicyObject


    Thanks & Regards,
    Param
    www.paramgupta.blogspot.com



    • Edited by Param022012 Saturday, March 24, 2012 9:20 AM
    Saturday, March 24, 2012 8:39 AM

Answers

  • Hello Param,

    I am not sure about best practice on the domain controller, but the Performance Tuning Guidelines for Windows Server 2008 document states:

    We recommend that the Active Directory database folder be located on a physical volume that is separate from the Active Directory log file folder. In the Active Directory Lightweight Directory Services installation wizard, these are known as data files and data recovery files. Both folders should be on a physical volume that is separate from the operating system volume. The use of drives that support command queuing, especially SCSI or Serial Attached SCSI, might also improve performance.

    I would generally recommend a 4 disk RAID 10 configuration instead because it makes the best use of IOPS. Having said that, I've also seen a 2 disk RAID 1 configuration in place in many smaller organisations.

    Hopefully this can be useful.

    Scorpio


    Thanks and Regards
    Scorpio_Milo
    MVP (File System Storage)
    HP Enterprise Services: Solution Architect
    Microsoft Storage Team - File Cabinet Blog
    View my MCP Certifications
    My Blog
    Contact me

    • Proposed as answer by Scorprio_Milo Saturday, March 24, 2012 9:16 AM
    • Unproposed as answer by Param022012 Saturday, March 24, 2012 9:20 AM
    • Proposed as answer by Jayawardhane Saturday, March 24, 2012 3:27 PM
    • Marked as answer by Param022012 Monday, March 26, 2012 7:32 AM
    Saturday, March 24, 2012 9:14 AM
  • hello, 

      Thanks for your post. 

    Since we have a Secondary domain controller we can bring the network up to operational . Raid 0 is cheap and faster as said above. 

    But its highly recommended to go with some other Raid like RAID-1 or RAID-5 to achieve high redundancy and less production impact. 



    Visit here for more troubleshooting steps!


    Thanks
    Jagadeesh


    Please VOTE as HELPFUL if the post helps you and remember to click “Mark as Answer” on the post that helps you, and to click “Unmark as Answer” if a marked post does not actually answer your question. This can be beneficial to other community members reading the thread.

    • Proposed as answer by Jagadeesh Devaraj Saturday, March 24, 2012 10:15 AM
    • Unproposed as answer by Param022012 Saturday, March 24, 2012 10:37 AM
    • Proposed as answer by Jayawardhane Saturday, March 24, 2012 3:33 PM
    • Marked as answer by Aiden_Cao Tuesday, March 27, 2012 2:32 AM
    Saturday, March 24, 2012 10:15 AM
  • Dear All,

    I am thinking to install Windows server 2008 R2 Standard with AD & DNS on Hardware RAID 0 for my both Primary Domain Controller and for Secondary Domain Controller.

    As i have two Domain Controller, so i think i must not worry about disadvantage of RAID 0 ( as i have backup DC ), if any of the DC Hard disk fails.

    What do u suggest? should i go for it?

    Other detail:- 500 Domain user, with standard Group PolicyObject


    Thanks & Regards,
    Param
    www.paramgupta.blogspot.com




    You should also think about if one was to fail and it was you role holder then you have a right faff to seize them. Just because you have two doesnt mean that you should be okay with one failing as you will only have one PDC and all the rest will be BDC's for the most part a raid1 is okay, but if you are after perfomance i would go with Scorpio_Milo and raid 10
    • Proposed as answer by Rishi Bele Sunday, March 25, 2012 8:17 AM
    • Marked as answer by Aiden_Cao Tuesday, March 27, 2012 2:32 AM
    Saturday, March 24, 2012 5:03 PM
  • Hi XIAO SHEN,

    Thanks for ur reply.

    I think Raid 0 has better IOPS as compare to Raid 10 as well as Raid 1 will not provide me better IOPS.

    So, i thought to go for Raid 0 ( as it is cheap also )

    What do u suggest?


    Thanks & Regards,
    Param
    www.paramgupta.blogspot.com

    Agree with Scorpio_Milo's suggestion.

    For a small sized AD infrastructure IOPS doesn't make much difference until and unless you plan to run some database applications on domain controllers ( which is not recommended by the way ;-) ).

    If not RIAD 10 you should consider RAID 1 for disk level redundancy.

    If you still think you know the answer better than others then, this question it self would become obsolete ;-)

    No offence but hope I am making some sense here :)


    Knowledge Seeker

    • Proposed as answer by Rishi Bele Sunday, March 25, 2012 8:17 AM
    • Marked as answer by Aiden_Cao Tuesday, March 27, 2012 2:32 AM
    Saturday, March 24, 2012 3:31 PM

All replies

  • Hello Param,

    I am not sure about best practice on the domain controller, but the Performance Tuning Guidelines for Windows Server 2008 document states:

    We recommend that the Active Directory database folder be located on a physical volume that is separate from the Active Directory log file folder. In the Active Directory Lightweight Directory Services installation wizard, these are known as data files and data recovery files. Both folders should be on a physical volume that is separate from the operating system volume. The use of drives that support command queuing, especially SCSI or Serial Attached SCSI, might also improve performance.

    I would generally recommend a 4 disk RAID 10 configuration instead because it makes the best use of IOPS. Having said that, I've also seen a 2 disk RAID 1 configuration in place in many smaller organisations.

    Hopefully this can be useful.

    Scorpio


    Thanks and Regards
    Scorpio_Milo
    MVP (File System Storage)
    HP Enterprise Services: Solution Architect
    Microsoft Storage Team - File Cabinet Blog
    View my MCP Certifications
    My Blog
    Contact me

    • Proposed as answer by Scorprio_Milo Saturday, March 24, 2012 9:16 AM
    • Unproposed as answer by Param022012 Saturday, March 24, 2012 9:20 AM
    • Proposed as answer by Jayawardhane Saturday, March 24, 2012 3:27 PM
    • Marked as answer by Param022012 Monday, March 26, 2012 7:32 AM
    Saturday, March 24, 2012 9:14 AM
  • Hi XIAO SHEN,

    Thanks for ur reply.

    I think Raid 0 has better IOPS as compare to Raid 10 as well as Raid 1 will not provide me better IOPS.

    So, i thought to go for Raid 0 ( as it is cheap also )

    What do u suggest?


    Thanks & Regards,
    Param
    www.paramgupta.blogspot.com

    Saturday, March 24, 2012 10:09 AM
  • hello, 

      Thanks for your post. 

    Since we have a Secondary domain controller we can bring the network up to operational . Raid 0 is cheap and faster as said above. 

    But its highly recommended to go with some other Raid like RAID-1 or RAID-5 to achieve high redundancy and less production impact. 



    Visit here for more troubleshooting steps!


    Thanks
    Jagadeesh


    Please VOTE as HELPFUL if the post helps you and remember to click “Mark as Answer” on the post that helps you, and to click “Unmark as Answer” if a marked post does not actually answer your question. This can be beneficial to other community members reading the thread.

    • Proposed as answer by Jagadeesh Devaraj Saturday, March 24, 2012 10:15 AM
    • Unproposed as answer by Param022012 Saturday, March 24, 2012 10:37 AM
    • Proposed as answer by Jayawardhane Saturday, March 24, 2012 3:33 PM
    • Marked as answer by Aiden_Cao Tuesday, March 27, 2012 2:32 AM
    Saturday, March 24, 2012 10:15 AM
  • Hi XIAO SHEN,

    Thanks for ur reply.

    I think Raid 0 has better IOPS as compare to Raid 10 as well as Raid 1 will not provide me better IOPS.

    So, i thought to go for Raid 0 ( as it is cheap also )

    What do u suggest?


    Thanks & Regards,
    Param
    www.paramgupta.blogspot.com

    Agree with Scorpio_Milo's suggestion.

    For a small sized AD infrastructure IOPS doesn't make much difference until and unless you plan to run some database applications on domain controllers ( which is not recommended by the way ;-) ).

    If not RIAD 10 you should consider RAID 1 for disk level redundancy.

    If you still think you know the answer better than others then, this question it self would become obsolete ;-)

    No offence but hope I am making some sense here :)


    Knowledge Seeker

    • Proposed as answer by Rishi Bele Sunday, March 25, 2012 8:17 AM
    • Marked as answer by Aiden_Cao Tuesday, March 27, 2012 2:32 AM
    Saturday, March 24, 2012 3:31 PM
  • Dear All,

    I am thinking to install Windows server 2008 R2 Standard with AD & DNS on Hardware RAID 0 for my both Primary Domain Controller and for Secondary Domain Controller.

    As i have two Domain Controller, so i think i must not worry about disadvantage of RAID 0 ( as i have backup DC ), if any of the DC Hard disk fails.

    What do u suggest? should i go for it?

    Other detail:- 500 Domain user, with standard Group PolicyObject


    Thanks & Regards,
    Param
    www.paramgupta.blogspot.com




    You should also think about if one was to fail and it was you role holder then you have a right faff to seize them. Just because you have two doesnt mean that you should be okay with one failing as you will only have one PDC and all the rest will be BDC's for the most part a raid1 is okay, but if you are after perfomance i would go with Scorpio_Milo and raid 10
    • Proposed as answer by Rishi Bele Sunday, March 25, 2012 8:17 AM
    • Marked as answer by Aiden_Cao Tuesday, March 27, 2012 2:32 AM
    Saturday, March 24, 2012 5:03 PM