Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    London
    Posts
    169

    Cool Unanswered: SQL Server, disk arrays and disk IO

    Hi all,

    Ok here goes,

    I have a three tier system using SQL server 2000, we are currently experiencing IO bottle necks on our SCSI Raid 10 array, which holds the Data and the logs in separate partitions.

    So my options as I understand it are:

    Get Enterprise edition

    or

    Get another physical raid 10 array and separate the logs and data i.e. data on one array and logs on the other array.


    I would like to try the latter but I am totally unsure how much difference this will make or whether it will make any difference at all.

    Does anyone know how much performance increase I will get from using two arrays as opposed to one?


    Any other advice on this scenario would be greatly appreciated.


    Thanks

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    cape town, south africa
    Posts
    102
    Hi

    I think if you've got the cash, do option 2 - (come to thing of it prob cost more for enterpise edition ) youll get fantastic results from having the logs on a seperate controller -especially if there is nothing but the logs - then it can just write sequentially - disk spindle never loses its place.
    Maybe also just get a RAID 1 array - wont have the overhead of striping.

    also nice big battery backed up cache can help.

    the more seperate disks the better....

    good luck
    des

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    London
    Posts
    169
    Hi,

    Thanks for the info mate, yep Enterprise is mega pricey especially if you have two Processors.

    I also have a question about the maximum worker threads, this is currently configured to 300, but I have process ID's in current activity that go up to 400 roughly,

    If I increase the maximum worker threads will this increase performance?

    Also,

    What are your opinions of setting 'Boost SQL server Priority on Windows' to 1?
    I have heard that this generally does more bad than good. What do you think?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    cape town, south africa
    Posts
    102
    hey

    on the worker threads - havent done it myself, but i reckon it pretty much boils down to your server resources - maybe up them to 500 and see. (or better - see if you can do a trace/pf monitor on them & see if they are maxing.)

    Have heard the same about boosting - never dared to do it! though our servers never run only sql - so it would be crazy for us. is yours only running sql? prob not too good an idea to do it on production server

    Have you set Use Windows NT Fibers? Helps with the OS & system management...

    also - if you end up getting a nice new pile of disks - throw your heavily used table indexes on separate spindles to the data files too- will help a lot. (as a compromise, maybe throw them on the new log array)

    des

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    cape town, south africa
    Posts
    102
    ps.preallocating RAM can help, and also make sure your log/data file sizes are fixed , so doesnt have to grow them often...
    des

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •