V8.03 Server sizing question

Yahoo Archive
1
The intention is that you'll spread your drives across two controllers.

Vantage will perform best if you have separate volumes for:

- System Drive
- Vantage Server Directory
- Database Files (Progress or MSSQL)
- Database Transaction Logs (Progress or MSSQL)

My system has Vantage on C:\ so I'm violating that suggestion, but I have Vantage and the System on C: (RAID 1 mirror), Database files on E:\ (RAID 10 mirror/stripe, 6 drives), and Log files on F:\ (RAID 1 mirror).

The system and data are on controller 1, the logs on controller 2.

-bws

--
Brian W. Spolarich ~ Manager, Information Services ~ Advanced Photonix / Picometrix
    bspolarich@... ~ 734-864-5618 ~ www.advancedphotonix.com

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of apt876sp1
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 1:47 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] V8.03 Server sizing question

The Hardware sizing guide for Vantage 8.03 states that two disk controllers are required for 41-150 users. What is the purpose and how would you configure them to share control of the onboard drives? Is the second controller just intended to be available for hot swap?
2
The Hardware sizing guide for Vantage 8.03 states that two disk controllers are required for 41-150 users. What is the purpose and how would you configure them to share control of the onboard drives? Is the second controller just intended to be available for hot swap?
3
It's meant to allow for different controllers to allow for better allocation
of resources.

1 Controller for the drives for the OS
1 Controller for the drives for the DB, Program files, etc

A drive can only be connected to 1 controller, so they can never share
control. Not all servers are capable of having more than one controller. So
it does make sure you check what your servers capabilities are prior to
purchase, it varies from model to model within most manfact. lines.

----- Original Message -----
From: "apt876sp1" <atucker@...>
To: <vantage@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 1:47 PM
Subject: [Vantage] V8.03 Server sizing question


> The Hardware sizing guide for Vantage 8.03 states that two disk
> controllers are required for 41-150 users. What is the purpose and how
> would you configure them to share control of the onboard drives? Is the
> second controller just intended to be available for hot swap?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
> have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
> (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
> Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
> (2) To search through old msg's goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
> (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
4
The purpose is to separate the OS and the application from the database. So you would install your OS and application on one of the controllers and the database on the other controller. Use a raid 1 config on the OS and app and raid 10 on the database. Vantage 8.03 on progress is very disk IO intensive so don't skimp on your raid 10 drive array. I suggest as many 15k rmp disks as you can afford on the raid 10. We have only a 4 disk array at the moment and it is slow. Looking to add more, probably up to 8 and reevaluate.

Greg Renfro
IT Manager
Apex Engineering International, LLC.
316-262-1494 x139
________________________________
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of apt876sp1
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 12:47 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] V8.03 Server sizing question





The Hardware sizing guide for Vantage 8.03 states that two disk controllers are required for 41-150 users. What is the purpose and how would you configure them to share control of the onboard drives? Is the second controller just intended to be available for hot swap?



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]