• Twitter
  • FaceBook

Exchange Server Forums

Forums | Register | Login | My Profile | Inbox | RSS RSS icon | My Subscription | My Forums | Address Book | Member List | Search | FAQ | Ticket List | Log Out

Recommended drive architecture

Users viewing this topic: none

Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Microsoft Exchange 2003] >> Installation >> Recommended drive architecture Page: [1]
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Recommended drive architecture - 9.Jan.2004 9:29:00 PM   


Posts: 11
Joined: 27.Nov.2002
From: Ottawa, Ontario
Status: offline
What is the recommended drive architecture for a new install of MSE 2003 or 2002? For example:

* System/Boot drive with installation of Exchange on C: on one physical disk
* Data (private and public storage) on drive D:, another physical disk
* Logs on E:, yet another physical disk.

Also, I've heard that either the logs or storage should be FAT... probably the logs. Has anyone read of such and can provide further suggestions?
Post #: 1
RE: Recommended drive architecture - 10.Jan.2004 8:01:00 AM   


Posts: 65
Joined: 13.Nov.2003
From: San Diego, CA
Status: offline
FAT partitions are no longer recommended to house the transaction logs. In fact, all partitions have to be NTFS for Exchange 2k3.

The architecture depends on your organization size and performance needs. But separate drives are still recommended with RAID5 for database and RAID1 (faster writes) for logs.

(in reply to OttawaRyan)
Post #: 2
RE: Recommended drive architecture - 13.Jan.2004 5:46:00 PM   


Posts: 5
Joined: 13.Jan.2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline
In a perfect world your drive configuration would be a reflection of your database layout and log file location. Ideally you want to put each Exchange database on a dedicated RAID 0+1 and your log files on a RAID 1. Since this configuration is usually cost prohibitive the best course of action is to make sure that your database files and log files are on physically separate drive arrays. The database should be located on a drive that allows for redundancy, RAID 5 is the most common although you have to contend with parity overhead. For the logs RAID 1 is very common and will perform adequately in most situations.

(in reply to OttawaRyan)
Post #: 3
RE: Recommended drive architecture - 13.Jan.2004 7:28:00 PM   


Posts: 11
Joined: 27.Nov.2002
From: Ottawa, Ontario
Status: offline
Thanks for the replies. Another question: What approximate ratio should the size of the hard drive for the transaction logs be to the size of the data store drive?

I have a 32GB data drive, but I don't think I should need anywhere near the same size for the transaction logs and I don't want to waste several GB of space if I can avoid it. [Big Grin]


(in reply to OttawaRyan)
Post #: 4

Page:   [1] << Older Topic    Newer Topic >>
All Forums >> [Microsoft Exchange 2003] >> Installation >> Recommended drive architecture Page: [1]
Jump to:

New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts

Follow TechGenix on Twitter