I wasn't implying that the terminal server was being used for persistant storage... However, users do use applications like Word, Excel, Powerpoint, etc to create new/edit documents (which ultimately ends up on another file server somewhere). Others use TS to access Database applications. Some of which are client/server, others are not. If the TS dies, so does the data they are working on. Joe -----Original Message----- From: Jim Hathaway [mailto:JimH@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 9:32 AM To: 'thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx' Subject: [THIN] Re: What is the optimal RAID configuration valuable data on a terminal server? surely that should never be the case. blood, sweat, tears poured into creating your config, yes. Besides, with imaging, your downed server is only down until your new drive arrives. A load balanced farm does mitigate the risk of loosing any one to two servers out of a farm due to hardware failure quite a bit. To be fair, performance at Raid 0 on most drive systems these days is only slightly better than Raid 1. Hardly noticeable to end users and perfmon. -----Original Message----- From: Joe Shonk [mailto:JShonk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 8:39 AM To: 'thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx' Subject: [THIN] Re: What is the optimal RAID configuration RAID 1 is fault-tolerant... Multiple load balanced servers in a farm are not. Granted there is contigencies/redundancy built in a load balanced farm, but it's not considered fault-tolerant. If the drive fails, the whole server fails. Dropping any connections it had with it, and possible loss of valuable data. With Raid 1, if you lose a drive your still ticking aways as if nothing happened. -----Original Message----- From: Roger Riggins [ mailto:Roger@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Roger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> ] Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 8:13 AM To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [THIN] Re: What is the optimal RAID configuration Another possibility is RAID 0 if you want performance, let multiple servers be your redundancy. ROGER RIGGINS A+, MCSE, CCNA, CCA ACES 319-352-1234 WWW.ACESIOWA.COM -----Original Message----- From: Shannon Wyatt [ mailto:swyatt@xxxxxxx <mailto:swyatt@xxxxxxx> ] Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 7:49 AM To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [THIN] Re: What is the optimal RAID configuration Generally Terminal Servers will have a mirrored disk configuration. Since your applications are running from another server (hoepully) then the additional RAID 5 configuration is unnecessary. Most of the people that I work with are using 1U servers for Metaframe, so supporting a RAID 5 array is impossible within the server itself. -----Original Message----- From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [ mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf Of Sangha, Jay S Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 7:36 AM To: 'thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx' Subject: [THIN] What is the optimal RAID configuration Does anybody have any information in regards to optimal disk RAID configuration for WTS/Citrix servers. We are putting together a new build standard but we are unsure as to the best set-up. We are considering RAID 1 for the system and RAID 5 for the application. Is this sort of stuff documented anywhere. Kind Regards, Jay Sangha NT/2000 Server Operations SCS Global Services Tel: +44 (0)1438 76 2630 Fax: +44 (0)1438 76 2208 =================================== For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link. http://thethin.net/citrixlist.cfm <http://thethin.net/citrixlist.cfm> =================================== For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link. http://thethin.net/citrixlist.cfm <http://thethin.net/citrixlist.cfm> =================================== For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link. http://thethin.net/citrixlist.cfm <http://thethin.net/citrixlist.cfm>