| Author |
Topic |
|
jreyst
Starting Member
9 Posts |
 Posted - 2002-08-26 : 14:24:40
|
| Q: Would moving the NT pagefile to a partition that handles the reads and writes of the SQL data or SQL logs substantially interfere with those processes? Currently the pagefile is on the C-drive (with the OS of course) but we are constantly running out of space on the C-drive. I suggested we move the 1.5gb pagefile to a different partition, but the other partitions hold the data & logfiles. Another DBA here resisted moving it to one of the other partitions because he was concerned it would seriously affect performance of SQL. My basic query is, would it? I have read things on usenet groups stating it shouldn't, but I wanted to get some more thoughts on it (besides, the other DBA requested I ask you guys lol). Ideally I would prefer info from someone who has actually tried this, not from someone speaking theoretically, but even theories would still be appreciated :-)Our options are:C Drive: IDE 2.0GB (OS)D Drive: SCSI Raid1 9GB (SQL Data)E Drive: SCSI Raid1 36GB (SQL Logs)Any help or suggestions appreciated!John R. |
|
|
Onamuji
Aged Yak Warrior
504 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-26 : 14:28:37
|
| um add another drive and place the page file there ... that is the BEST way ... of course it must be a physical drive ... :) other than that i might shoot for the E drive ... |
 |
|
|
jreyst
Starting Member
9 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-26 : 14:43:25
|
| Onamuji: would you recommend moving it to the E-drive, or leaving it where it is. Remember, its 1.5gb and the C-drive is 2gb. Just wondering what YOU would do (assuming adding hardware is not an option).Thanks :-) |
|
|
|
rkc01
Starting Member
43 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-26 : 16:47:04
|
| Move it to the E: Drive. It shouldn't be an issue but If you find that performance was impacted then you know you need another drive. |
|
|
|
rkc01
Starting Member
43 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-26 : 16:50:35
|
| Are you running a hot stand by server? If not then I think you should consider running under RAID 5 or 10. The pagefile wont matter when the box goes down. Just a thought. |
|
|
|
setbasedisthetruepath
Used SQL Salesman
992 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-26 : 17:57:00
|
| Add another drive and mount it to a c:\ folder. And do you really have a volume for logs 4 times as large as your data volume?Jonathan Boott, MCDBA{0} |
|
|
|
jreyst
Starting Member
9 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-26 : 18:51:57
|
| Jonathan,As I said, adding hardware is not an option. And, I may have had my drives reversed (D & E) oops :-)John R. |
|
|
|
bm1000
Starting Member
37 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-26 : 20:04:41
|
| Are you having a paging problem? If not, leave it alone. No offense, but your disk subsystem looks suspect. Your database is on a two disk raid-1 array? Your OS is on a non-fault tolerant IDE disk? |
|
|
|
Onamuji
Aged Yak Warrior
504 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-26 : 20:38:57
|
| i think the best thing to do would be to add a lot more ram to your computer to reduce the amount of paging that needs to occur since that is the fastest way to get performance enhancements ... try doubling whatever is in the box now ... i would shoot for around 1gb depending on how much traffic you expect... |
|
|
|
jreyst
Starting Member
9 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-26 : 21:50:31
|
| > Are you having a paging problem? If not, leave it alone.No, just a space problem. We always seem to run out! With only a 2gb C drive and a 1.5gb pagefile, it doesn't leave a lot of room :-(> No offense, but your disk subsystem looks suspect. Your database is > on a two disk raid-1 array? Your OS is on a non-fault tolerant IDE > disk?I didn't build the server, we have "server ops" for that lol Either way, I agree with all you have said, but, the hardware configuration is not up to me.> i think the best thing to do would be to add a lot more ram to your > computer to reduce the amount of paging that needs to occur since > that is the fastest way to get performance enhancements ... try > doubling whatever is in the box now ... i would shoot for around 1gb > depending on how much traffic you expect... It's got 1gb of ram already. And, I'm not looking for performance enhancements, I just want to know if performance will be negatively affected by moving the pagefile off of C and onto D or E. |
|
|
|
MuadDBA
628 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-27 : 10:56:14
|
| Hello, this is the OTHER DBA.This server was ordered while the company was between DBAs, one left and my hire hadn't officially gone through. So the manager ordered the server with 2 RAID 1 arrays, a 9GB one for logs, and a 36GB one or data. Not what I would have recommended, but that's what we got and I AM working on getting them to get me a better subsystem.The problem we have is this: given our CURRENT configuration, I have the pagefile on the C:\ drive. Going with the recommendation that your pagefile should be at least as large as your total RAM (which is 1GB), the pagefile is 1.5GB right now. That eats up 75% of the space available on the drive. Toss in an OS and a few program files, and you have yourself a pretty full drive. I am hesitant to move the pagefile onto the drive where by data resides, and I WILL NOT move it to where my log files reside, because sometimes I get a ton of transactions (I have actually filled up the disk on a weekend) and I need that space available there. I guess I have 2 options...move it to the E drive where my data is, or reduce the size of the pagefile to be only RAM + 64MB or whatever.My fear when moving it to the E drive is that it will interfere with the highly transactional environment of the server, slowing down the read/write access and upsetting my 500 users.Does anyone have experience with moving a pagefile to the same disk subsystem as your data? Does it interfere with your performance?Again, I am working on getting mew hardware. PLEASE do not tell me to get more disks, better RAID, etc. I know I need it and I am working on getting it. For now, I want to avoid getting pages and e-mail notifications throughout the day that one of my drives is critically low on space, and am wondering if this is a viable option.Thanks,Joe |
|
|
|
setbasedisthetruepath
Used SQL Salesman
992 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-27 : 14:10:30
|
| Not to be flip, but you haven't actually asked a question here.Having the pagefile fill up causes big problems, as of course you're aware, so if you're not able to procure new hardware, and not willing to move it to the log volume, the only choice is to move it to the data volume. Yes your performance will suffer, in a magnitude directly proportional to the amount of paging done by the system, but as you haven't supplied any possible alternatives the performance hit is irrelevant.Jonathan Boott, MCDBA{0} |
|
|
|
MuadDBA
628 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-27 : 14:43:19
|
| The question was asked as the very first post, by my co-worker. What he received was anything but an answer to that question.Your response provided me with what I need to justify a) leaving the pagefile on the C:\drive and disabling the notifications and b) further support that our hardware is insufficient and needs to be upgraded.Thanks!PS SQLTEAM is a great community, and most people here are pretty helpful, but apparently some people think that getting new hardware for the servers works by going to Best Buy and dropping a grand on 8 Quantum 100GB IDE hard drives. In the real world of multi-billion dollar companies, disaster recovery procedures, hardware suport contracts, seperation of hardware operations and software operations, and a ton of other variables, getting new hardware takes a good deal of time and no matter how smart or cost-justified it is, might not be the available solution. When folks ask questions about working with things within their current hardware constraints, it helps if you take them seriously instead of suggesting they crack out their VISA card or just make a better case to their manager. This isn't a flame, and I am using no cuss words, I just think we could stand to take the poster's questions a little more seriously, especially when they are typed without typos, grammar errors, etc and show some thought behind them. |
|
|
|
Page47
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
2878 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-27 : 15:02:35
|
WARNING: theoretical speaking ahead ...quote:
I just want to know if performance will be negatively affected by moving the pagefile off of C and onto D or E.
Performance, most likely, will be negatively affected. That will depend on if you have enough RAM to prevent paging. Any activity in the pagefile will result in disk contention and increased latency since the read/write head will be jumping from sector to sector. On a log spindle, you best bet is to have nothing but sequential writes, with no other activity. One thing is for damn sure: it will not improve performance. Have you considered decreasing the size of your pagefile?Jay White{0} |
|
|
|
Onamuji
Aged Yak Warrior
504 Posts |
Posted - 2002-08-28 : 08:39:35
|
I totally agree... if you don't have the room to support such a huge page file then just drop 500mb of it should help a lot... it maybe not be a new server you need either ... just another drive and possibly a raid card to support it but i think the one you have will work fine ... all you would need is a 9gb one too and those are not very expensive compared to a new server  |
|
|
|
|
NT Pagefile