Win Server 2003, software Raid 1

T

TheHorse2012-02-13 01:40:29

RAID

TheHorse, 2012-02-13 01:40:29

Win Server 2003, software Raid 1 - brakes?

Good day.

There is a certain server (Intel® Core(TM)2 CPU 6300 @ 1.86GHz, 3 GB) with Microsoft Windows Server 2003 R2 SP2 (32-bit).

It had an old 80 GB IDE screw on it. Everything worked, and at one fine moment, we decided to make Raid 1. We installed 2 tested SATA 2 disks for 500GB (Seagate and WD), made partition mirroring standard Windows tools and got the expected Raid 1.

The problem is that everything began to work much slower.
The situation is aggravated by the fact that the server is running Oracle Server, MySQL, PostgreSQL, perforce, svn, apache HTTPD, Microsoft IIS… (well, you get the idea). RAM is crammed with 2.6 - 2.9 out of 3.0 GB. The percentage is loaded by 2% -20%.

Installed HDDScan, drove both hard drives - cleanliness and order.

Actually questions:
1. How and with what you can check the speed of the raid itself (read / write).
2. What could lead to a strong decrease in performance?
3. How to edit?

PS The server is very combat, making the same one is a job for a couple of weeks.

Reply

Answer the question

In order to leave comments, you need to log in

5 answer(s)

A

All3, 2012-02-13
@TheHorse

They always take the same disks for a raid (one manufacturer, one and the same model, and best of all, one and the same batch). What you did is a miracle that it works! wd and seagate most likely have a different number of plates/cylinders/heads.

P

Puma Thailand, 2012-02-13
@opium

Well, what a shame 3 gigabytes of memory for a server, at a price of 4 gigabytes of less than 2000 rubles.
Any test for disks will suit you, the same Everest.
What does it mean to do the same for a couple of weeks?
Clone disks and start a new server, on a similar platform, a matter of a few hours.
Have a look at perfmon for Windows.

M

Mikhail Lyalin, 2012-02-13
@mr_jok

different drives (Seagate and WD)

L

livinger, 2012-02-13
@liveder

HD Tune will easily benchmark your drives.

P

PuzzleW, 2012-06-16
@PuzzleW

Of course, I'm sorry, merlin_rterm wrote you almost everything you need to pay attention to, but I'll still ask ... you write that HDDScan'om drove their own screws ... are they all right with SMART? check. And I would also suggest such a primitive test - break the mirror and see if the load drops. If yes, this is the overhead for soft-RAID. If not, the problem is in the screws / fragmentation / incorrect software settings / etc. Ideally, try to leave both screws as the main ones after breaking the mirror. By the way! Did you resync? maybe you are resynchronizing, but you are nervous about performance?