Quote:
Originally Posted by w1nz  Cool thanks for the info everyone. As long as the symlink works we should be fine. You said you have 35 users and about 110gb of mail..... my company only has less than 60 users and only about 12 gigs of mail so it's really not that much. We are slowly growing, but it's taken about 4 years to get up to that 12 gigs of mail so I think I'm safe. 
I have both my mailstore on /raid5 and I have my backup symlinked now to /raid5, I'll post my performance results with that setup when the backup runs again overnight tonight. Thanks again. |
this would mean a lot more if you had the exact same setup backing up to a non-RAID5 partition to show the performance difference
... either way I'm sure everything will be fine. I've been through multiple tests of the same types of things when setting up current SAN's and threw more complications into it doing vertical stripping through multiple levels of RAID and having logical storage (and managed disk groups) behind SVC's (SAN Volume Controllers).
I dont think anyone would debate that it's not possible or negligibly noticable regarding performace, but for sheer I/O and write cost overhead, typically RAID 5 (by it's nature) is not the best choice for writes.
That being said there is a LOT more to consider when choosing a storage or parition creation methodology (all of which have nothing to do wit this thread). As previously mentioned, for some the performace is non-intrusive so it doesn't matter.
YMMV
Regards,
Lonny