Reason for using Filegroup

Vendor has produced a Read Only system for us in SQL
Server 2000.
The database size is around 10GB and there are around 2000
tables in it.
I find that they have configured the database to use 5
files in the primary filegroup with size of 2GB each. All
of them are located in a RAID 1 disk. The autogrow is not
enabled for that database as it is READ ONLY.
I would like to know what is the benefit of placing them
in 5 files in a filegroup instead of 1 single physical
file ? Is it due to performance issue ?
ThanksIf they're all on the same spindle then there is no benefit. They may
as well have had them in a single file.
The main reason for multiple files in a filegroup is improving
performance by putting the files on different spindles (and also when
you get low on disk space on one logical volume you can seamlessly
"extend" the filegroup by adding another file to it that resides on a
different logical volume (presumedly with more disk space)).
Perhaps the vendor meant to actually locate the 5 physical files on 5
separate RAID arrays but...forgot?
*mike hodgson*
/ mallesons stephen jaques/
blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Stephen wrote:

>Vendor has produced a Read Only system for us in SQL
>Server 2000.
>The database size is around 10GB and there are around 2000
>tables in it.
>I find that they have configured the database to use 5
>files in the primary filegroup with size of 2GB each. All
>of them are located in a RAID 1 disk. The autogrow is not
>enabled for that database as it is READ ONLY.
>I would like to know what is the benefit of placing them
>in 5 files in a filegroup instead of 1 single physical
>file ? Is it due to performance issue ?
>Thanks
>