I have recently taken over at a company that is running SQL 2005 on a server
that has two disk in a Raid 1 configuration. I am not that up to date on SQL
and would like to know if it is possible to add more disks to change it to a
raid 0 + 1 set up without corrupting the data that is currently on the Raid 0.

thanks in advance.
--
jimbo345

That is not a SQL Server issue. You would obviously want to ensure you had
valid backups (on another drive array) first but the controller and it's
software will be the determining factor in how you add disks or change array
types.

--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP

"jimbo345" <jimbo345@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E3F00027-E06E-435B-B58D-B8A42637630C@microsoft.com...
>I have recently taken over at a company that is running SQL 2005 on a
>server
> that has two disk in a Raid 1 configuration. I am not that up to date on
> SQL
> and would like to know if it is possible to add more disks to change it to
> a
> raid 0 + 1 set up without corrupting the data that is currently on the
> Raid 0.
>
> thanks in advance.
> --
> jimbo345

As Andrew indicated, that is determined by the disk subsystem.

I recommend that you consider RAID 10 if you are making changes. ;-)

--
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc

Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous

You can't someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf


"jimbo345" <jimbo345@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E3F00027-E06E-435B-B58D-B8A42637630C@microsoft.com...
>I have recently taken over at a company that is running SQL 2005 on a
>server
> that has two disk in a Raid 1 configuration. I am not that up to date on
> SQL
> and would like to know if it is possible to add more disks to change it to
> a
> raid 0 + 1 set up without corrupting the data that is currently on the
> Raid 0.
>
> thanks in advance.
> --
> jimbo345

Your post is a bit confusing. You fist say that you have RAID 1 and then
later say you don't want to corrupt the data on RAID 0.

Best configuration is:

1) RAID 1 - Boot & SQL (2 drives)
2) RAID 1 - Log files (2 drives)
3) RAID 10 - Databases (4 drives)

If absolutely necessary, you could go with

1) RAID 1 - Boot & SQL & log files (2 drives)
2) RAID 10 - Databases (4 drives)

All RAID arrays should be on their own channel. Otherwise you can get
contention (read performance)problems with one channel...

If you actually have RAID 1 already, then add the other arrays and move
the log and/or databases. If you actually have RAID 0, then converting
it to RAID 1 will lose all your data....


Regards,
Hank Arnold

jimbo345 wrote:
> I have recently taken over at a company that is running SQL 2005 on a server
> that has two disk in a Raid 1 configuration. I am not that up to date on SQL
> and would like to know if it is possible to add more disks to change it to a
> raid 0 + 1 set up without corrupting the data that is currently on the Raid 0.
>
> thanks in advance.