December 21, 2010 at 8:51 am
Hi, I have a question about file & filegroups in point of performance:
I have a log table, lots of new rows inserted constantly, 60000 in total.
I move 3 months old rows from log table to an archive table. to keep the log table small (~5 - 6 million rows)
archive table keeps growing, it holds rows for several years. my application decides to use which table: log, archive or log+archive (a view unions log and archive)
I have 2 separate physical disks,
on disk-1: log.data (and clustered index), archive.data (and clustered index)
on disk-2: log.indexes, archive.indexes, transaction_logs
1) Do you think is it a good plan?
2) If I have 3 disks, should I put transaction_logs to disk-3 separately?
Note that I have no option to use partitioned tables.
Thank you,
December 21, 2010 at 8:55 am
How fat are the tables?
December 21, 2010 at 9:11 am
log table ~9-12 GB (rows for 3 months)
archive table: depends on how many records but same size with log table. 3 months = 9-12 gb. mostly my customers holds rows for 3-5 years.
Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply