L2J Server

Mirroring does not give any performance boost.

tech RAID related article :
http://techreport.com/articles.x/9124/1

there are better Raid articles,just google (could not find it quick with server benches/IO)

Think RAID 1 like a backup of your HD Drive nothing else.

For server + database, your best consumer grade solution is:

Four (or more, but really four is just dandy) SSD hard drives in Raid5. With that setup, hard drive speed will be insanely fast. Plus, it'll be redundant in case one of the drives fails.

Raid1 gives the best speed improvements in read time only. Writes are usually a little bit slower since it has to write the same data to both drives.

The Raid 5 setup is pretty much the best setup you can do for the server. A cheaper solution is to find the heaviest accessed tables, split them between multiple hard drives using the table as file option in mysql and symbolic links.

toastgodsupreme wrote:For server + database, your best consumer grade solution is:

Four (or more, but really four is just dandy) SSD hard drives in Raid5. With that setup, hard drive speed will be insanely fast. Plus, it'll be redundant in case one of the drives fails.

Raid1 gives the best speed improvements in read time only. Writes are usually a little bit slower since it has to write the same data to both drives.

The Raid 5 setup is pretty much the best setup you can do for the server. A cheaper solution is to find the heaviest accessed tables, split them between multiple hard drives using the table as file option in mysql and symbolic links.

Yes, but from what I have read so far, Raid0 is the fastest if you have 2 Hard Drives.

momo61 wrote:Yes, but from what I have read so far, Raid0 is the fastest if you have 2 Hard Drives.

Raid5 is superior in my opinion. You have speed + redundancy. Plus, when doing it with SSD hard drives it's just retardedly fast. Yes, it's a bit more costly, but for good reason.

With SSD hard drives, a half decent controller and a half ass server, you'll probably see comparible speeds from a 4 disk raid5 setup compared to a 2 disk raid0 setup. And with the raid5, you have redundancy in case of failure. Yes, Raid0 is the king of speed because it does no parity checks or anything. But if a drive fails, it's all gone. Despite daily backups, I'm still paranoid enough to want a raid5 setup.

toastgodsupreme wrote:

momo61 wrote:Yes, but from what I have read so far, Raid0 is the fastest if you have 2 Hard Drives.

Raid5 is superior in my opinion. You have speed + redundancy. Plus, when doing it with SSD hard drives it's just retardedly fast. Yes, it's a bit more costly, but for good reason.

With SSD hard drives, a half decent controller and a half ass server, you'll probably see comparible speeds from a 4 disk raid5 setup compared to a 2 disk raid0 setup. And with the raid5, you have redundancy in case of failure. Yes, Raid0 is the king of speed because it does no parity checks or anything. But if a drive fails, it's all gone. Despite daily backups, I'm still paranoid enough to want a raid5 setup.

I agree with you that Raid5 is safer and faster. However, I dont know any hosting company willing to host such a server. And if you were to find one, they'd rent it for minimum 400€ I'm sure.

momo61 wrote:

toastgodsupreme wrote:

momo61 wrote:Yes, but from what I have read so far, Raid0 is the fastest if you have 2 Hard Drives.

Raid5 is superior in my opinion. You have speed + redundancy. Plus, when doing it with SSD hard drives it's just retardedly fast. Yes, it's a bit more costly, but for good reason.

With SSD hard drives, a half decent controller and a half ass server, you'll probably see comparible speeds from a 4 disk raid5 setup compared to a 2 disk raid0 setup. And with the raid5, you have redundancy in case of failure. Yes, Raid0 is the king of speed because it does no parity checks or anything. But if a drive fails, it's all gone. Despite daily backups, I'm still paranoid enough to want a raid5 setup.

I agree with you that Raid5 is safer and faster. However, I dont know any hosting company willing to host such a server. And if you were to find one, they'd rent it for minimum 400€ I'm sure.

Build your own server and either get it hosted on a university network or go with a hosting provider who offers colocation