Integrated Hardware RAID-0, -1, -1E, optional RAID-5, -6, -10, -50, -60
This sounds a little worrisome to me, it sounds like a low-end RAID controller. You want a good RAID controller that can keep up with 8 fast HDDs (that's actually not a given). If you have a fair amount of writes to your DB, then you really want a Battery Backup Unit, and to enable battery-protected write caching on the RAID controller.
As for RAID disk layout, there are 2 common schools of thought:
- 2 disks in mirror for OS, 2 disks in mirror for DB transaction log, 4 disks in RAID 10 for main DB files.
- One big RAID 10 array using all disks, and all OS + log + datastore files on this array (see reasoning here, mirrored by BAARF).
I would rather not take sides on the RAID volume design, it tends to become a bit of a fact-light discussion. Ideally you should experiment with different storage layouts and benchmark them for your specific workload. My gut feel is that all disks in RAID10 is faster and more robust over multiple workloads.
One last thing, to make sure that OS partitions and RAID stripe boundaries are aligned (see here, Windows centric, but the principle is general). You can do this when you create the partitions.