May 2, 2002 at 9:53 am
Hi everyone,
Need some help if possible.
We are changing our server from having all our datafiles and indexes and logs on a RAID 5 array to a RAID 10. We decided that we should have our datafiles, indexes and logs all sitting on different disks. Can anyone advise how to go about this and also do you think its advisable?
Thanks Again!
Meg
May 2, 2002 at 10:44 am
I gained significant performance improvements by doing the following. I set up a mirrored d drive and a RAID 5 E drive(c was reserved for OS) They have separate controllers(ie not just a partition). I put my static tables on the D drive and my frequently updated/modified tables on E. You should have your non clustered indexes on the same drive as your tables(clustered index). I split all my large/frequently modified tables on their own filegroups with multiple files depending on the size of the table(allows for more threads). I have heard that RAID 5 (and 10) drives are harder to write to, but I think the fault tolerance you provide is worth it and I do not think that there is a significant performance loss when you take everything else into account.
May 2, 2002 at 10:47 am
You can setup fielgroups and specifiy which filegroups you want a nonclustered index in and which the table is in. We generally only do this on large databases to try to increase access speeds as the file with the index seem to perform better when they are not mixed. We have a few databases with serveral file groups holding different indexes from a single table and have noticed access time improvements even when they are on the same physical array.
"Don't roll your eyes at me. I will tape them in place." (Teacher on Boston Public)
Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply