When moving to SSD, do you keep RAID10?
We have a server with internal SAS disks in a big array:
16x600GB RAID 10
This gives us ~4.6TB of storage. It is fast (this is SQL Server).
Our SQL database is:
-- 600GB MDF -- 200+GB/Day of log files -- Heavily transactional -- Heavy read and write workload
We are looking to move to SSD (for the usual reasons: Speed, speed, and performance). We expect to use Write Intensive 400GB SSDs. (They seem to be the best cost-capacity ratio)
We believe that on SSD, there is less need for RAID10 (a big reason for RAID10 is to boost throughput, but SSDs solve for that natively).
RAID5, with spinning disks, is a performance disaster for SQL (it only made sense when disks were super expensive).
In the Dell world, we would use the "Write Intensive MLC" SSDs.
But for SSD, what is the good way to go?
- RAID10? Rather expensive on SSDs...
- RAID5? Is the write penalty manageable in an SSD environment?
In all cases, we will have one or two hot spare SSDs in the chassis.
What is the appropriate approach?
-- We understand that RAID10 is the cadillac -- We would prefer to reduce the device count (given that SSDs solve the performance issues that RAID10 is used to solve) ---- Reducing device count helps on the $ side, and on the expansion side (use fewer drive bays...)
But, will going to RAID5 on SSDs penalize us in some way?
-- We know that RAID5 performance, on platters, goes to hell when one drive dies. -- And RAID5 has poor write performance: Is that hit coming from (a) the controller (calculating parity), or (b) from the need to wait for both writes (data block and parity block) to complete? If it is from 'b' then the higher IOPS of SSD should solve, right?