A systems administrator is tasked with upgrading the storage for a Tier 2 application server that hosts a moderately-used relational database. The current storage array, which uses 7,200 RPM HDDs, is experiencing performance bottlenecks during peak usage. The primary requirements for the new storage solution are improved I/O performance and low latency to handle transactional database queries more efficiently. While an all-flash array is too expensive for this application's budget, a noticeable performance improvement over the existing setup is mandatory. Which of the following drive types would BEST meet these requirements while balancing performance and cost?
The correct answer is the 10,000 RPM SAS HDD. In this scenario, the goal is to find a cost-effective upgrade that improves performance over the existing 7,200 RPM drives for a moderately-used database server. 10,000 RPM SAS drives provide a significant performance increase in terms of I/O operations per second (IOPS) and lower latency compared to 7,200 RPM drives, which is ideal for transactional database workloads. They represent a middle ground, offering a good balance between the higher performance and cost of 15,000 RPM drives and the lower performance of 7,200 RPM drives. Since an all-flash (SSD) solution is explicitly stated as being over budget, the 10,000 RPM drive is the most logical and balanced choice. A 7,200 RPM SATA HDD would not resolve the performance bottleneck. A 15,000 RPM SAS HDD would provide higher performance but at a greater cost, which may not be justified for a Tier 2 application, failing the 'balance' requirement. A read-intensive SSD, while performant, would be part of an all-flash solution which is outside the stated budget constraints.