Hi all,
The new server, Win 15, has 2 x 75GB RAID drives… I assume they’re in a failover arrangement, not for 150GB storage overall… so is 75GB enough for a server?
Of couse depends how many accounts are on it, but if it’s true that there’s roughly 75GB per server, then that’s a very pleasant surprise! It would imply the servers don’t get crammed with like 1000 sites each… sounds good! :thumb:
Actually, its 73GBx3 RAID5. That means 146GB of storage. RAID5 means the system can take 1 disk failure
This is a really solid server 
Hi Yash, thanks. So the drives are all part of one storage space - there’s no mirroring for failover?
[edit] sorry I didn’t read your post properly!! So with 3 drives, you mean 1 drive is the failover? How does that work - I mean how does it know what data to be mirroring from the other two? 
(note - I know nothing there is to know about raid drives lol)
No, its RAID5 If one disk failes, there is no data loss.
RAID5 is a mirroring system that involves writing data across all RAID5 disks in what’s called stripping..
It’s faster than RAID1, and gives you more storage.. And its reliability is as good as RAID1 provided you are using good RAID cards, which we are
ahhhh I see.. I think. Might go and read up on what raid 5 does. If all drives are used for mirroring of the other drives, yet they’re all used for live storage as well, then it seems to me that if one drive fails, you lose the live data plus whatever it had mirrored from another drive… but I have no idea so I should probably go back to my programming now… 
Data consists of parity bits.. used for error checking.. so basically, RAID5 works in a manner that the data and parity is spread across disks such that a loss of a disk would mean loss of parity data, but not actual information..
Once the damaged disk is replaced, the RAID5 card rebuilds the parity data…
We use hot-swap cards/drives and technically we could have a disk failure and replacement without customers knowing..
Let me also add that we’ve never had an issue with RAID5. Our CP Server is running using RAID5 on a slower/older system for 2+ years without a single issue..
We have a few other servers running RAID5, never had issues. On the contrary, RAID1 has given us some issues over the years, as some of you know.
I have always been biased against RAID5, but after reading and researching alot on actual RAID5 performance and reliability, and talking to people that use RAID5 clusters.. and after Stephen and Tanmaya said extra storage would be nice.. we decided to move forward with RAID5.
I think a good opton for storage would be an array of scsi drives, maybe for back ups.
yash are these hardware raid setups or software raid?
thanks
Our mail standby runs SCSI, while backup servers run SATA RAID-5 and they all work pretty well, where we move many GBs of data to them daily.
We run hardware RAID for all servers at the moment.