Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
BeanMunster
Starting Member
2 Posts |
 Posted - 2009-05-18 : 05:47:40
|
| Hello,I wonder if anyone would be able to advise on the following dilema.I have a database in SQL 2005 with performance issues. One of the things I would like to do is to make best use of the hardware I have. I understand that by separating the database into filegroups located on different volumes and by moving the high volume transaction tables to separate files I will get the benefit of more processor threads able to access the data concurrently (I have 8 cores). Accepting this to be the case, which of the following reconfigurations would provide the best performance?Reconfiguration 1Split the existing RAID 10 into three logical volumes.Reconfiguration 2I reconfigure the 6 disks in the existing RAID 10 into threepairs of RAID 1 creating 3 physical volumes.Many thanksBrian MarksGroup ICT DepartmentEpwin Group |
|
|
pootle_flump
1064 Posts |
Posted - 2009-05-18 : 06:39:30
|
| Have you eliminated everything else? Have you established that you are IO bound, and that the database is well designed, the code efficient and well written?This are very tentative thoughts as I am not a hardware guy however:The logical split won't increase the number of spindles. Unlikely to make any difference.The physical split my improve things, although you lose out a little going from RAID 10 (very highly performant) to RAID 1 (pretty highly performant). |
 |
|
|
BeanMunster
Starting Member
2 Posts |
Posted - 2009-05-18 : 07:07:47
|
| I am sure you are correct. I know there are many factors affecting performance, but before I can convince the coders to have a look I am forced to optimise the setup. I suspect the performance increase will be minimal. My disk queue is peaking at 10 a few times a day but is ok on average.I have discovered a printer driver with a handle leak also that may be affecting Windows performance.Thank you for your advice, it is what I suspected. Late night again tonight!Brian MarksGroup ICT DepartmentEpwin Group |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performance from logical vs physical partitions