Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
kid_on_the_block
Posting Yak Master
172 Posts |
 Posted - 2005-11-11 : 06:54:38
|
| i have always heard from people that the data file & log file needs to be stored in seperate HDD controllers. Why ???? Someone answered that if we do so , & if unfortunatley the HDD with the Datafile fails, we can recover the DB , using the transaction log file.But what if the transaction log HDD controller fails, Can the DB still be functional Thanks |
|
|
Kristen
Test
22859 Posts |
Posted - 2005-11-11 : 08:57:01
|
| Its for performance. Ideally the Log File will be on a disk subsystem suited to writing (RAID 0/1 or whatever they call it) and the Data File on a system suited to Random Access (RAID 10 or maybe RAID 5 at a pinch).If either disk / controller fails you've had your chips of course (apart from the reduance of a drive failure when using RAID), however you can always change the options on the DB to then have both on the same drive whilst you fix the hardware (having restored from backup ...)"Someone answered that if we do so , & if unfortunately the HDD with the Datafile fails, we can recover the DB , using the transaction log file"Not sure I'd want to risk that, although it might be an idea. I would be planning to recover from a known-good backups (i.e. full backup plus all subsequent transaction backups up to the point of failure)Kristen |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
BackUp