Re: % Disk Time
From: Andrew J. Kelly (sqlmvpnooospam_at_shadhawk.com)
Date: 08/06/04
- Next message: Deke: "Re: After Restore of a DB to another, it runs slower?"
- Previous message: Andrew J. Kelly: "Re: After Restore of a DB to another, it runs slower?"
- In reply to: Mike: "% Disk Time"
- Next in thread: Wayne Snyder: "Re: % Disk Time"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 15:48:22 -0400
That counter is pretty much useless in my opinion. I have seen this vary
greatly with the different types of hardware used. It's better to use the
Avg and current Disk queues instead. They give a much better view of how
your drives are able to handle the load. By the way are these drives
Logical or Physical?
-- Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP "Mike" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:192c01c47bea$40735340$a601280a@phx.gbl... > > I have separate drives each SQL Server database: > database file (E:) > database transaction log (K:) > tempdb (M:) > database system files (F:) > > My database % Disk Time: (Average = 2541, STDEV = 4316, > Maximum = 86770) > > How is the % Disk Time measured? > > The % Disk Time high at 55%? > > Thanks, > > ___________________________________________________________ > > Brian > First of all i have said 'probably' > Secondly if you have this counter higher than 55% for > continuous periods > (let me say 15 min)then your SQL Server > > > may be experiencing an I/O bottleneck. > "Brian Moran" <brian@solidqualitylearning.com> wrote in > message > news:%23r7TWIieEHA.2848@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > > I don't tend to agree with that advice. > > > > On it's own > > << > > '%Disk Time > > >> > > > > Is not a very reliable indicator of an IO bottleneck. > You could easily > have > > a bottleneck if this counter is much lower than 55%. You > might NOT have a > > bottleneck if this counter is 55% or higher. > > > > There are many, many more counters which you should take > a look. You need > to > > take a look at queue lenght, wait times for disk > transfers, time it takes > > per read and write. In addition, there are a host of > other counters > > specific to your SAN that you should take a look at. > > > > > > Unfortunately, I'm running a bit late right now and I > don't have time to > > write a long message. Tom Davidson from MS has a nice > article in SQL > Server > > Magazine that dicusses some of these counters. I believe > it might also be > on > > MSDN. It shouldn't be too hard to track down if you > search by his name on > > each site. > > -- > > > > Brian Moran > > > > "Uri Dimant" <urid@iscar.co.il> wrote in message > > news:u1rJ0yheEHA.3520@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > > > Mike > > > This counter measured how busy a physical array is. In > general it should > > be > > > less 55% otherwise you probably jave IO bottleneck. > > > > > > > > > > I have a Windows 2000 Advanced Server with SQL Server 2000 > Enterprise Edition on a SAN. What units are the %Disk > Time measured in from Perfmon? > > Is the (% Disk Time E) = (Disk Time E) / (Total % Disk > Time) ? > > Please help me with these questions. > > Thanks, > > Mike >
- Next message: Deke: "Re: After Restore of a DB to another, it runs slower?"
- Previous message: Andrew J. Kelly: "Re: After Restore of a DB to another, it runs slower?"
- In reply to: Mike: "% Disk Time"
- Next in thread: Wayne Snyder: "Re: % Disk Time"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|