We have a Hitachi Thunder SAN to host SharePoint databases. We are running
SQL server 2000 SP3 in a 2 node active/passive cluster. I have read articles
stating to run diskpar to align the offset correctly with the disks to
dramatically increase performance. I'm undecided on whether I should run
diskpar.
Does anybody have experience of seeing improvement using Hitachi SANs?
There seems to be more experience with Exchange than SQL out there.
--
Will RobinsonHi
Yes, run it. The alignment of OS blocks with the underlying SAN block does
eliminate the need for the SAN to do unnecessary IO.
Also, make sure that your formatting matches your SAN's block size. On or
Hitachi and EMC's, we format the drives with 64kb blocks, as this matches
SQL Server I/O sizes and our SAN's stripe size.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"WillAva" <WillAva@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C95D1918-D841-42F9-B156-1C00A7BF8304@.microsoft.com...
> We have a Hitachi Thunder SAN to host SharePoint databases. We are
> running
> SQL server 2000 SP3 in a 2 node active/passive cluster. I have read
> articles
> stating to run diskpar to align the offset correctly with the disks to
> dramatically increase performance. I'm undecided on whether I should run
> diskpar.
> Does anybody have experience of seeing improvement using Hitachi SANs?
> There seems to be more experience with Exchange than SQL out there.
> --
> Will Robinson
订阅:
博文评论 (Atom)
没有评论:
发表评论