Re: Directors and Realservers - Do they need RAID?

To: " users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Directors and Realservers - Do they need RAID?
From: "Scott J. Henson" <scotth@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2005 17:49:59 -0400
Gavin Henry wrote:

>Dear list,
>Just spec'ing some machines, as we need two Directors and two Realservers.
>I had planned on using Dell 1850 with 1GB RAM and Dual Xeon 3.GHz for the 
>DIrectors, but they don't do RAID. 
>Would that be needed?
>Also, for the two realservers doing PHP and Apache, I had planned on using 
>Dell 2850 2GB RAM and Dual 3Ghz RAID 5/10
>fs RAID is advised on the DIrectors, then 2850's all round are needed.

That depends.  If your using your directors in fail over mode, then raid
really is over kill.  Especially if your not having any data on the
directors(which I would assume your not).  Also raid might be over kill
on the Realservers as well.  If both will be serving the same data and
you will be keeping them in sync, then you may not need raid there
either.  It just depends on how safe you want your data to be and how
highly available you want to be.  A raid on each of the 4 mirroring the
OS drives could ensure that none ever go down except for scheduled

Its really a question of how much money do you have to spend and how
important is being available to you.  But I belive raid is over kill if
your using LVS.  Note, at my site, we only use raid on our file servers
and db servers.  Where there is data we want to keep.  Everything else
is cheap hardware and then we use LVS to provide high availablity. 

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>