Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I have 6 x 1TB SAS for my new server. I want to create 3 partitions: one for OS, one for Virtual Machines, one for share data. There are 2 options for me:

Option A: Create 3 Virtual Disks in RAID Configuration Utility

Option B: Create 3 Partitions during OS Installation

Given that the disks will run in RAID6, which option is better?

share|improve this question
    
You don't mention anything at all regarding software, what's your host OS? it matters a lot. –  Chopper3 Mar 2 '10 at 10:15
    
my host is Microsoft Windows Server 2008 R2 Datacenter x64. –  Raptor Mar 4 '10 at 7:39

3 Answers 3

Since you are only asking which of option A and B is best, given RAID6 will be used, I would recommend option B.

share|improve this answer
up vote 0 down vote accepted

I end up using the following method:

First, I tried to make 1 4TB RAID6 virtual disk, and do the partition job in Windows Server 2008 R2 installation. However, I encounter a problem. Here is my INTENDED partition layout:

  1. 100GB NTFS for OS
  2. 2TB for Data #1
  3. 1.5TB for Data #2

However, the Windows does not allow me to use all the spaces in the 4TB virtual disk. Here is the layout:

  1. 100MB : System Reserved
  2. 100GB : OS
  3. 1947.90GB : Data #1
  4. 1676.00GB : Unallocated Space

I cannot make any partition for the #4 unallocated space. Is it a limitation of Windows Server 2008 R2?

I end up splitting up the RAID6 disk group into 3 virtual disks. problem free.

share|improve this answer

You really do not want to put an operating system, virtual machines and shared data across a single RAID-6 array. The random write performance will grind you to a halt.

My suggestions is that you create 3 separate RAID1 arrays for OS, VM's and data (with whatever partition scheme you want).

share|improve this answer
    
RAID1 is slow. As in my case, we need high data speed for data sharing, so I do not prefer RAID1. –  Raptor Mar 4 '10 at 7:38
    
From where have you gotten the impression that RAID1 is slow? It's certainly not slower than RAID6, unless you are doing extreme amounts of sequential read streaming. –  pauska Mar 4 '10 at 11:23

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.