I'm putting together an I/O intensive server for a client. The guy is willing to spend for the best. I need some input from you guys as to the RAID situation.
The variables to play with are as follows:
X25-m (80gb, 2G) or X25-e (64gb)?
RAID 10 or RAID 5? We need 200GB of space.
What (PCIe x16/8) controller do you recommend? Will any controller be able to handle the RAID 5 calculations? I hear Areca and Adaptec are good. Any preferences? Any others I should think about? How much RAM should the controller have?
So far I'm leaning towards 6x X25-m (comparable performance to X25-e, better performance for the money) in RAID 10 (less stress on controller) and a mediocre controller (only a RAID 10, after all)
A coworker is convinced that RAID 5 with 5x X-25e and a top controller is the way to go, but I'm not convinced.
About the workload of the server: database access for many LAN clients. Its custom software so its kind of hard for me to know about the data patterns.
Yeah, I'm a noob at this stuff. Recommended reading is appreciated.
Well I would keep an open mind to traditional HDD. While SSD's are faster their performance tends to degrade with use. A traditional HDD can defrag while to the best of my knowledge this doesn't help SSD's. Newer SSD's support TRIM and Windows 7 has this feature built in. However as far as I know this doesn't work in RAID.
IMO the type of speed you would get from such an extrensive SSD raid would require a fiber optic network. 1Gb Lan would be the bottleneck so unless he's going to drop that kinda cash for fiber channel cards, cable and switches. I would consider traditional HDDs.
What is the network is made of, (types of cable, switches routers)
How many clients will be on the network? How often will each client need to access the server?