SEO
vBulletin Search Engine Optimization
| |||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
02-28-2008, 07:26 PM
| ||||
| ||||
 Help with file placement please... Hello All, I am looking at the performance of our production database. It is 40gb, and growing reasonably fast. It is placed in one file group on a RAID-5 array. The array is made up of 20 (or so) 9gb disks. The data, the indexes and the transaction log are all on the "one logical disk". My question then, is, would it be better to move the transaction log onto a separate device (with Raid-1), and then separate out the indexes and the data and to place them onto separate devices (ie. split the raid disks into 2 new drives). Or would it be better to place the table into a larger number of smaller filegroups effectively split across the raid device and to (strategically) place different tables into the new logical disks. Does this make sense? Or, do I just leave everything as it is? Cheers Mike      |
|
02-28-2008, 07:26 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: Help with file placement please... "Mike Hibbert" <mike.hibbert@zurich.com> wrote in message news:ea62ce5c.0401070539.59081858@posting.google.c om... > Hello All, > > I am looking at the performance of our production database. It is > 40gb, and growing reasonably fast. It is placed in one file group on a > RAID-5 array. The array is made up of 20 (or so) 9gb disks. The data, > the indexes and the transaction log are all on the "one logical disk". > > My question then, is, would it be better to move the transaction log > onto a separate device (with Raid-1), and then separate out the > indexes and the data and to place them onto separate devices (ie. > split the raid disks into 2 new drives). Or would it be better to > place the table into a larger number of smaller filegroups effectively > split across the raid device and to (strategically) place different > tables into the new logical disks. Does this make sense? Move your logs to a separate device. That's the best single thing you can do for peformance here. As for a larger number of smaller filegroups, under SQL 2000 that won't gain you much performance-wise. Though there may be reasons to do so from a maintenance POV (dependin on your needs.) > > Or, do I just leave everything as it is? > > Cheers > Mike |
Linear Mode
