Woah, many thanks to all the responses! First, as to the matter of mirroring swap. I had several responses, but the majority said to go ahead and mirror swap, in that if swap somehow failed, Solaris would fail and there goes the reliablity of RAID. They also all said that the performance hit wasn't that noticable on RAID1+0. *note* - RAID 1 IS mirroring All the responses warned me against RAID5. The various comments were that RAID5 will slow it down heavily - "perofmred like a dog", particularly on writes. The only real reason to go with RAID5 would be if you needed more space than a RAID1+0 system could offer. This means that a RAID1+0 system size is limited to the maximum size of a single disk. For larger systems, you would need to either use hardware RAID5, a SAN, or some other solution. If we get to that point, an external SAN might be a better choice for us than using the internal disks. Another few notes on RAID controller cards - no real consensus on these, in that some said there wasn't a card, others said there were. Generally, it sounds like Software RAID though is typical and acceptible, and that hardware RAID is unavailable from Sun. Mounting options are mostly fine, but several mentioned adding "logging", which I'll start looking at. Aside from that, the default options work. As for VxFS and VxVM, the general commentary is yes, it's faster, better, etc. but for the cost, not always necessary. The SDS system works perfectly fine for most uses, and only one the really higher loads and higher end systems would we need to look at VxFS. Soft partitions were one idea presented by Carl Marino. Here's the link he sent to me. It's something we'll definitely look at: http://sysunconfig.net/unixtips/soft-partitions.html As for a partioning scheme, there's several ideas, none of which recommend using RAID5. I also used some of the DiskSuite tools, and found that the only drive getting any hit at all right now is Oracle. The general thought after discussions and testing is to do something like this: / 15GB, RAID1+0 on D1, D2 swap 6GB, RAID1+0 on D1, D2 /oracle 10GB, RAID1+0 on D1, D2 /oracle/oradata 36GB RAID1+0 on D3, D4 For most, it sounded like a separate /var partition is unnecessary, although there was no firm response one way or the other. The comments on the /var partition were that the majority of logging, as well as Oracle installation information is in there, and thus having it separately isn't a bad idea, but probably unnecessary today. A /usr/local or other partition was also said to be unneccessary considering the purposes of our system. Additionally, if I have to, I can just get more drives for other partitions, and move things around for something like websphere or other stuff. Further, I may look at soft partitions, and rethink the majority of the above. Last, almost everyone who said anything about solaris said go with Solaris 9, if nothing else due to the improvements in UFS and SDS and other components. Thanks to the list for the information, and special thanks to the following people for responding: ________________ Hichael Morton Jay Lessert Carl Marino Darren Dunham Brett Lymn Tim Chipman Kevin Buterbaugh Paul Roetman Frank Foerster Andrew Stueve Regards, Jason McIntosh -- /--------------------------------------|---------------------------\ | Jason McIntosh | CELL: 573-424-7612 | | Webmaster, thinker, Programmer, etc. | WORK: 573-884-3865 | | http://poetshome.com/ | | |------------------------------------------------------------------| |"How should I know if it works? That's what beta testers are | |for. I only coded it." | |(Attributed to Linus Torvalds, somewhere in a posting) | \--------------------------------------|---------------------------/ -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) mQGiBD5AMRERBACcxAJ7hiB6udEDefnAksb49o6BDVC2bxdUTwkxP9jS0BmLqbQL egYYt09WjEJtn4eRuVdkku7A0fi/G8NIsXnE9oMKnWkqg2tjQ8q65D64Cass5zEU WG6j8qABpxpZNP9HGSTqm0yeYTR9f0dGaS6jZbxgme6hU0XDOGH3ug6/qwCg0j1h gYkkNl3jbPuwtpCrTIxSUYsD/0J18alKrswomFJfoRgjA7S9AezlV7YJoU3dCLSV 6D19SAVwmseTRltJm0S8e8Yf6Bq9l+1OdsJCHtT+HYBVuB0PmL8PDhJg6vAzIZlt 5c3hkfJrSSCssRSMBIr+8Hl2HBU4tKB79L2cI3Nrij+5DJTVzIa5QpvsFDAIO2Cp Ma/hA/9vOPY2PyoAWKb3JAQV8T2h7/rjzePxOv0WYI2/6THdgh2lLUP+GJ4FdH76 I/8d+qtiAzul/Zq2LkFvpejnu41dDZn+yhgsVTkz/xTRKWQX9sOud0QjvyN0nHD9 KqisFRgs1ByINQcWNK8KpwgLcBRLVS4EALDn5R6yL6AT6poT7bQ8SmFzb24gTWNJ bnRvc2ggKFByb2dyYW1tZXIvQW5hbHlzdCkgPE1jSW50b3NoSkBtaXNzb3VyaS5l ZHU+iF8EExECAB8FAj5AMREFCQHhM4AECwcDAgMVAgMDFgIBAh4BAheAAAoJEGZP +3FaGjd1P9IAoJQL5kaHEjG1TNVSt20bAXDx/DzmAJ4pVTDnpWUPNCxk+/kMBlGe bO97ObkCDQQ+QDEfEAgAjl6vRTDWrMTUfXyngnWAgU/3wRZmjcKONhCGcpqFOFR/ 2CiMeeJOnNXgSzrPxIfUJphlh00vBm1K/ngllg3MGFI9hOffuLuHXiw8e/Yc87uz YdtglWHeUz/9YQCe4ndKohtk7nZHUoxQd5OspJxYJH5J5cysSuH2V839NtNPJKBZ ai0VhyTFZKD3v9xTC8ZyMEO022bpkhWz1cs/9l5z4g2eg7mOwe+hJstMQFHk77Zr GbkPwi+gWwM/b2pxigz1xhQpHpR5HrO/4yM8zWYZHUbUGwxiuTJqKktFEVUKUFDD xopIpOAMOy0qVs+wXS5buJSduSgDxPmKq0xZFsJiZwADBwgAi66pXMCTolMQzn50 MAs9KRK6+3XphI+InmzfN+/OVknwzkAkGhRfisYI0DyN/26wSkn+zyoE87NBuUQt xtcNOpwwxS2WCqBx3PhtpVJ6yvaeFmSe3QC2lUf8418B2C6GR/e6IOPNhVW1cnhP IR0/yY8c8zQrJxEZNhBtj2SrkLY6Ps7j97lI8n+u21YC2/a5P3TPCa3x0w0m0APB zJrhXuNGwPcNtxqKZDz7m9KuROSijx0Xm1buQkGfDZqkqA1D8ljN2vdA+jx/v1eq H27iXk2iZ+i8bOyoiflniKh6nrd2UlVPvzmLscpiUf0rEGQuBV0Sq5AUUqO7MQM+ L8jCYYhMBBgRAgAMBQI+QDEfBQkB4TOAAAoJEGZP+3FaGjd1yhMAnjAwU37EIok3 WZu1BXhaD9y1ryjBAKC7fnv7AdrVrxdXkmdgdA5jxUFXOg== =ueqZ -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- [demime 0.99c.7 removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc] _______________________________________________ sunmanagers mailing list sunmanagers@sunmanagers.org http://www.sunmanagers.org/mailman/listinfo/sunmanagersReceived on Tue Feb 18 15:56:39 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Mar 03 2016 - 06:43:03 EST