I was going to run RAID 5, but then read that the system partition and/or page file should not be on RAID 5. Then...
By submitting your email address, you agree to receive emails regarding relevant topic offers from TechTarget and its partners. You can withdraw your consent at any time. Contact TechTarget at 275 Grove Street, Newton, MA.
I was going to put the system partition on one drive and use RAID 1 on the other two. The only problem with that is that I feel it's a waste to use a 160 GB drive for a system partition. The server would only be for about 50 light users. Could I run RAID 5? If not, what other options do I have that would let me use my drives efficiently? Here is what I have available:
P4 2.8 GHZ
2 GB RAM
3 160 GB SATA drives
SATA RAID controller
Also, you should be aware that putting the transaction logs and the databases on the same array will restrict your overall disaster recovery plan with Exchange in the event of disk failure. You stand to lose both the database and the transaction logs in the same failure, which isn't a best practice in protecting data within your environment.
Do you have comments on this Ask the Expert Q&A? Let us know.
Dig Deeper on Microsoft Exchange Server Hardware Management
Related Q&A from Peter Tersteeg
If recently created mailboxes are not displayed in the GAL after a migration to Exchange 2007, Active Directory (AD) has yet to replicate the ...continue reading
If you are migrating mailboxes across domains after an upgrade to Exchange Server 2007, you will need to update the Exchange Management Console.continue reading
Items deleted before an Exchange Server migration will not carry over to the new server, even if a Deleted Items Retention period is set. Find out ...continue reading
Have a question for an expert?
Please add a title for your question
Get answers from a TechTarget expert on whatever's puzzling you.