Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
The raid configuration us use will depend upon what you top priorities are. If performance is the primary goal, I would recomend a 2 drive raid 1 for your server as you mentioned, but use the remaining 4 drives in a raid 1+0 ( 2 mirrors of 2 drives that are stripped). This done correctly will give you maximum read performance, on the data drives. If your looking to maximize up time, I would run all 6 drives in a raid 6. With a raid 5 or mirror bad sectors (which often are not discovered till its to late) or a drive failure durring rebuilding will mean having to restore from backups. Overall your solution will give a good balance of reliability, speed, and drive space. Provided you have a fast means of restoring from a backup, in the event something goes wrong durring a rebuild. Sent from my BlackBerry? smartphone with SprintSpeed -----Original Message----- From: "Stephen Goldman" <sgoldman-3s7WtUTddSA at public.gmane.org> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 09:26:31 To: <discuss-mNDKBlG2WHs at public.gmane.org> Subject: Partitioning "Lamp" server Hello Jerry, There is a total of six drives : With the raid card I was planning on creating two partitions- Raid one for the OS Raid five for the data & db The why -can be subjective- I was under the impression of performance gains and redundancy with RAID 5 on the db partition. may be wrong.. Please confirm that Mysql can be configured to live on the /dev/sdb1 Thanks, Stephen I have no issues with your partitioning scheme, but a few questions. Why have /dev/sda RAID 1 and /dev/sdb RAID 5? I thought that a single RAID volume required 2 separate physical volumes volumes. Secondly, I would probably want to use LVM to give you greater flexibility so you can resize and move things around. On 10/31/2009 07:01 AM, Stephen Goldman wrote: > Hello Blu, > Request insight on partitioning a new "LAMP" server with two partitions. > Seeking input from others more experienced than me.. thanks, > Are there any posted guidelines for best performance. Wish to provide best product > > The device is a brand new Dell server with: > /dev/sda raid one 160 G > /dev/sdb raid five 270G > > 32 G physical ram > RHEL 5.3 > > My plan was to partition /dev/sda as follows: > > / 25 G > / 20 G swap > / var 25 G > /tmp 20 G > /home remainder > > /dev/sdb > > /data = 270 G > > I am provisioning the machine for others who will configure ,Apache and Mysql > > > I suggested they redirect the Apache root folders and Mysql db to run on /dev/sdb. > The researcher who is creating the site states he has only worked with both services when configured inside /var. > Limited experience. > > I know the Apache can be redirected .. but no sure of how the redirect Mysql to live on /dev/sdb -- > > Questions: > Does the partitioning scheme make sense .. > Is there performance gains running the services on the partition /dev/sdb > Is it difficult to redirect the services on /dev/sdb ? > Is it easier to place /var on /dev/sdb size it to the whole partition? > > /home does not need to be 70 G .. but the space is there // > > Thanks for you input, > Stephen Goldman Systems Administrator Department of Biology Massachusetts Institute of Technology 31 Ames Street, Cambridge, MA 02139 sgoldman-3s7WtUTddSA at public.gmane.org, (617) 452-2595
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |