Database and transaction log question

New to SQL. I have 2 drives mirrored for os and sql installation files and a
raid 5 array for the database files for sql.
Should I create two partitions on the raid 5 array and put the database file
s on one and the transaction logs on another or is it not going to make a di
fference in performance since both partitions would still be on the same rai
d 5 array. Appreciate a qui
ck response to this question.
Also if it is recommended to place the transaction logs on a separate partit
ion on the same raid 5 array. Where do I set that in sql. Thanks a lot every
one.
OwenHaving multiple partitions on the same RAID5 array isn't going to buy you
anything. Put the logs on their own RAID1 volume. If you have the disks,
place the data files on a RAID10 volume. If you don't have the disks, then
put the data files on a RAID5. Never put the logs on the same array as the
data files.
Tom
---
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql
"owen" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5C7163A9-C709-4466-A823-3DCA707A5912@.microsoft.com...
New to SQL. I have 2 drives mirrored for os and sql installation files and a
raid 5 array for the database files for sql.
Should I create two partitions on the raid 5 array and put the database
files on one and the transaction logs on another or is it not going to make
a difference in performance since both partitions would still be on the same
raid 5 array. Appreciate a quick response to this question.
Also if it is recommended to place the transaction logs on a separate
partition on the same raid 5 array. Where do I set that in sql. Thanks a lot
everyone.
Owen|||"owen" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5C7163A9-C709-4466-A823-3DCA707A5912@.microsoft.com...
> New to SQL. I have 2 drives mirrored for os and sql installation files and
a raid 5 array for the database files for sql.
> Should I create two partitions on the raid 5 array and put the database
files on one and the transaction logs on another or is it not going to make
a difference in performance since both partitions would still be on the same
raid 5 array. Appreciate a quick response to this question.
> Also if it is recommended to place the transaction logs on a separate
partition on the same raid 5 array. Where do I set that in sql. Thanks a lot
everyone.
> Owen
Creating 2 partitions on a RAID 5 is going to give you no performance
advantage at all. In fact, though log files will benefit from the fault
tolerance afforded by RAID 5, as they are only written to, rather than read
from, they will not benefit from read performance advantages that RAID 5
gives you.
If your main concern is fault tolerance then stick the logs on the mirror.
That way if your entire RAID 5 controller goes up the Swanny, you still have
your log files.
If you are going to reposition your fils, simply go into Enterprise Manager,
properties of the database and change it there
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.614 / Virus Database: 393 - Release Date: 05/03/2004

Data vanishing from SQL Server

Hi,
Please help me to solve the following scenario. We are
working on SQL Server 7.0 on Windows NT Server with Raid
5 . We are using a front end application through which all
the things are done. For the last few days we are finding
that certain sets of transactions are disappearing from
the database totally e.g.
1. Certain books are sold to the customers.
2. Stock is reduced.
3. Delivery instructions are generated from the system.
Say Point 1 & 2 are within same transaction whereas Point
3 is a separate transaction based on the committed transactions of
Point 1 & 2. Now the next day or on
the same day after 3-4 hours we find that all the
transactions are reverted. It is creating a big problem.
Is it problem with SQL Server / Windows NT / Virus / Hardware ?
Please give suggestion.
Thanks in advance.You can tell quite quickly if it is SQL Server by
performing a trace.
NB if it is SQL Server then the cause of this will be
something that your team has put in.
J
>--Original Message--
>Hi,
>Please help me to solve the following scenario. We are
>working on SQL Server 7.0 on Windows NT Server with Raid
>5 . We are using a front end application through which
all
>the things are done. For the last few days we are finding
>that certain sets of transactions are disappearing from
>the database totally e.g.
>1. Certain books are sold to the customers.
>2. Stock is reduced.
>3. Delivery instructions are generated from the system.
>Say Point 1 & 2 are within same transaction whereas Point
>3 is a separate transaction based on the committed
transactions of
>Point 1 & 2. Now the next day or on
>the same day after 3-4 hours we find that all the
>transactions are reverted. It is creating a big problem.
>Is it problem with SQL Server / Windows NT / Virus /
Hardware ?
>Please give suggestion.
>Thanks in advance.
>.
>|||Thanks for the suggestion. But if we run the trace then it will take up
certain CPU time. Apart from that this situation is not happening
everyday. It happens all of a sudden and that is why we cannot simulate
the scenario. Please suggest something more.
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!|||Ok then.
Try setting up some triggers.
These triggers are only activated when data is deleted.
You can then store who or what deleted the data, or even
if it was ever there.
Incidently a trace does not take up much CPU time, try it
out for yourself, on your server set it up so it shows CPU
time, put on a trace, and then see if it has any noticable
difference, I think you will be surprised ;)
J
>--Original Message--
>Thanks for the suggestion. But if we run the trace then
it will take up
>certain CPU time. Apart from that this situation is not
happening
>everyday. It happens all of a sudden and that is why we
cannot simulate
>the scenario. Please suggest something more.
>
>*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com
***
>Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
>.
>|||Dipankar,
Could your application possibly be using transactions which never get
committed?
Regards,
Mark
"Dipankar Ganguly" <dipankarganguly@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:be8835c2.0312170647.a4e7224@.posting.google.com...
> Hi,
> Please help me to solve the following scenario. We are
> working on SQL Server 7.0 on Windows NT Server with Raid
> 5 . We are using a front end application through which all
> the things are done. For the last few days we are finding
> that certain sets of transactions are disappearing from
> the database totally e.g.
> 1. Certain books are sold to the customers.
> 2. Stock is reduced.
> 3. Delivery instructions are generated from the system.
> Say Point 1 & 2 are within same transaction whereas Point
> 3 is a separate transaction based on the committed transactions of
> Point 1 & 2. Now the next day or on
> the same day after 3-4 hours we find that all the
> transactions are reverted. It is creating a big problem.
> Is it problem with SQL Server / Windows NT / Virus / Hardware ?
> Please give suggestion.
> Thanks in advance.