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 |
|
Gyto
Posting Yak Master
144 Posts |
 Posted - 2012-07-18 : 11:53:23
|
| Hi there,I assume the preference for clusters is to have the tempdb on it's own dedicated physical disk, but if there are not enough actual disks in the SAN to make this possible, would there be any performance benefit to split an existing RAID group into 2 LUNs and use one solely for the tempdb?E.g. A single RAID 10 set split as follows:LUN 1 - Userdb MDFs - 950gbLUN 2 - tempdb data & logs - 50gbSomething like that....any ideas?Thanks,Matt |
|
|
chadmat
The Chadinator
1974 Posts |
Posted - 2012-08-03 : 17:03:18
|
| Obviously this is workload dependant, but 50GB seems like it might be a little small for 950GB of data.-Chad |
 |
|
|
sql-lover
Yak Posting Veteran
99 Posts |
Posted - 2012-08-22 : 22:09:47
|
| If tempdb and data will be on same RAID channel , I see no performance improvement.But something is for sure,don't mix data and Tlog,if you can. Tlogs should be on its own channel always, due Its sequencial IO reading pattern. |
|
|
|
jackv
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
2179 Posts |
Posted - 2012-08-23 : 01:32:50
|
| Even having tlogs on separates IO channels is not a guarantee of high performance. There are sitauations where you can have multiple transaction logs from many databases - which if busy enough can simulate a random read. Keep an eye on IO write\reads delays. Also, report on LDF \ MDF locations - http://www.sqlserver-dba.com/2012/08/sql-server-manage-sql-data-and-sql-log-file-locations.htmlJack Vamvas--------------------http://www.sqlserver-dba.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tempdb Location