Reason for multiple filegroups/ files?

SQL2K
SP4
If my data is spread accross a Raid array, is there any real reason to use
multiple filegroups/ files? Will I see any performance benefit? Will I only
see it on VLDB's. If I do use them, is there a good way to group them
logically?
TIA, ChrisRChrisR
>Will I see any performance benefit?
Probably, if you put the filegroup on another PHYSICAL disk
>Will I only
> see it on VLDB's. If I do use them, is there a good way to group them
> logically?
Yes , it makes sence only for VLDB
Look, you will have to investigate it carefuly, I mean how you are going
to restore in case of failure or somethinmg like that , it is not so easy
to maintain and I have my doubt that nowadays we can really gain
perfiomance benefit from creating a new file group . Perhaps you might
think about adding a new datafile .NDF and seeing how it works
"ChrisR" <noFudgingWay@.NoEmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23hGlHLPKHHA.1912@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> SQL2K
> SP4
> If my data is spread accross a Raid array, is there any real reason to use
> multiple filegroups/ files? Will I see any performance benefit? Will I
> only
> see it on VLDB's. If I do use them, is there a good way to group them
> logically?
> TIA, ChrisR
>|||Add on ; please take a look into below URL's. But to make use of the full
advantage you may need multiple disk controller as Uri suggested.
http://www.databasejournal.com/features/mssql/article.php/1439801
http://www.informit.com/guides/content.asp?g=sqlserver&seqNum=42&rl=1
Thanks
Hari
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:u4aAfSPKHHA.3936@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> ChrisR
>>Will I see any performance benefit?
> Probably, if you put the filegroup on another PHYSICAL disk
>>Will I only
>> see it on VLDB's. If I do use them, is there a good way to group them
>> logically?
> Yes , it makes sence only for VLDB
>
> Look, you will have to investigate it carefuly, I mean how you are going
> to restore in case of failure or somethinmg like that , it is not so easy
> to maintain and I have my doubt that nowadays we can really gain
> perfiomance benefit from creating a new file group . Perhaps you might
> think about adding a new datafile .NDF and seeing how it works
>
>
> "ChrisR" <noFudgingWay@.NoEmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23hGlHLPKHHA.1912@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> SQL2K
>> SP4
>> If my data is spread accross a Raid array, is there any real reason to
>> use
>> multiple filegroups/ files? Will I see any performance benefit? Will I
>> only
>> see it on VLDB's. If I do use them, is there a good way to group them
>> logically?
>> TIA, ChrisR
>>
>|||At the very least I always recommend creating one secondary filegroup to
place all the user objects and leave just the system objects in the primary
filegroup. This makes it cleaner and easier to do piecemeal restores if
needed. From there it depends on how you use your data and what your
hardware config is like. If you want to separate different groups of objects
such as Non-clustered indexes from the Clustered / tables onto different
drive arrays you need at least two filegroups. If you know this is something
you may do in the future but aren't now it still may make sense to separate
them into multiple FG's to make the move easier down the road. If the db is
relatively small, your hardware is decent you may never see any advantages
of multiple files or filegroups.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"ChrisR" <noFudgingWay@.NoEmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23hGlHLPKHHA.1912@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> SQL2K
> SP4
> If my data is spread accross a Raid array, is there any real reason to use
> multiple filegroups/ files? Will I see any performance benefit? Will I
> only
> see it on VLDB's. If I do use them, is there a good way to group them
> logically?
> TIA, ChrisR
>|||Thanks everyone, this is all as I suspected.
"ChrisR" <noFudgingWay@.NoEmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23hGlHLPKHHA.1912@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> SQL2K
> SP4
> If my data is spread accross a Raid array, is there any real reason to use
> multiple filegroups/ files? Will I see any performance benefit? Will I
only
> see it on VLDB's. If I do use them, is there a good way to group them
> logically?
> TIA, ChrisR
>