Re: Spread table.
- From: "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 10:38:04 -0500
This is not true for SQL 2000 and above. It used to be in 7.0 that a single
thread was used per file. In 2000 it can use multiple threads on a single
file. 10 million rows is not a lot and you don't gain much by creating
multiple files unless each file is on a separate drive array. Not a
separate Logical drive but a physical drive. But on a fast array such as a
Raid 10 and with multiple processors Sql Server can use multiple threads to
read a single file in parallel.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Rogers" <Rogers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:98DB88E9-DEFB-49AB-8DED-ED11C6F9A6B9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> If your database is very large and very busy, multiple files can be used
> to
> increase performance. Here is one example of how you might use multiple
> files. Let's say you have a single table with 10 million rows that is
> heavily
> queried. If the table is in a single file, such as a single database file,
> then SQL Server would only use one thread to perform a sequential read of
> the
> rows in the table. But if the table were divided into three physical files
> (all part of the same filegroup), then SQL Server would use three threads
> (one per physical file) to sequentially read the table, which potentially
> could be much faster. In addition, if each file were on its own separate
> disk
> or disk array, the performance would even be greater.
>
> Can any one let me know how can I spread one large table into three
> different files.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Spread table.
- From: Rogers
- Re: Spread table.
- References:
- Spread table.
- From: Rogers
- Spread table.
- Prev by Date: Re: Query Analyzer outputs, copy & paste
- Next by Date: Re: Spread table.
- Previous by thread: Spread table.
- Next by thread: Re: Spread table.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading