Re: SQL Server 2005 and file systems, any recommendations

DA Morgan (damorgan@xxxxxxxxx) writes:
Erland Sommarskog wrote:
Correct. A binary collation comes with a price. So does raw partitions.

Would you please explain what you intend with this comment about block
devices. With any database, other apparently than Microsoft's, there is
an advantage that accrues to those who forgo file systems. Why is SQL
Server different?

I referred previously in the thread to a fellow MVP who had found a 20%
improvement with raw devices over the file system.

The price I'm talking about is the more complex administration that raw
devices buy you.

As for why they are complex... Many years ago when I worked with Sybase,
I had to travel to customer to perform a triple upgrade: upgrade HP-UX
from 8.0 to 9.0, Sybase from 4.2 to 4.9 and our own application. The
customer had adequate staff to run the OS upgrade themselves, but still
they wanted us to it. The reason: in this OS upgrade HP-UX introduced
logical volumes, having had only fixed partitions before, and the customer
did not know how to handle Sybase, where all data was on raw partitions.
Had the databases been on plain files, the OS upgrade would have been
trivial for them. But in those days, Sybase strongly discouraged you from
running production databases on file-system devices, and with a good reason,
since buffering in the file system could cause problems.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspx
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: SQL Server 2005 and file systems, any recommendations
    ... Many years ago when I worked with Sybase, I had to travel to customer to perform a triple upgrade: ... Had the databases been on plain files, the OS upgrade would have been trivial for them. ... since buffering in the file system could cause problems. ...
    (comp.databases.ms-sqlserver)
  • Re: Sort Order not as I planned
    ... I have an important customer who has upgraded to SQL Server 2005 with 9 ADP ... databases I have designed for them. ... This upgrade was done for replication purposes for other SQL Server ... Sylvain Lafontaine, ing. ...
    (microsoft.public.access.adp.sqlserver)
  • Re: Update MSDE2000 to SQL2000 on same server
    ... Yes you do an upgrade from MSDE to SQL 2000 Enterprise. ... a full database backup of all databases. ... Step 2 Click SQL Server 2000 Components. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup)
  • Re: Upgrading from 6.5 to 2005
    ... We learned from Microsoft's "SQL Server 2005 Implementation and ... Maintenance - Self-Paced Training Kit" that there is no direct upgrade path ... we have both 2000 and 2005 evaluation versions installed on a new ... databases when they are in 2000. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup)
  • Re: Upgrade 2000 to 2005
    ... leases hardware IIRC, so that would not be an issue. ... Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server: ... measure, I would detach the user databases, upgrade in place, and then ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering)