Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
wooldawg
Starting Member
12 Posts |
 Posted - 2008-04-02 : 14:54:35
|
| Hello, We have a Windows 2K server which has a sole purpose in life as SQL 2000 server. The data volume is RAID 10 array which is now 75% full with 32 gig of free space. There is one mdf file that is 35 gig and one that is 29.5 gig. We use diskeeper and it is telling me that data volume is 67% fragmented. After repeated runs the % is not improving. I'm guessing it is not able to defrag these large mdf files because there is not enough free space to move them around. Is this correct?Any suggestions for improving the file fragmentation on this volume? (Please note I am talking about OS/File fragmentation and not fragmentation inside of the db's.)Thanks! |
|
|
rmiao
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
7266 Posts |
Posted - 2008-04-02 : 22:14:53
|
| Don't worry about that but check table frag instead. Defrag tables by rebuild clustered index if necessary. |
 |
|
|
ngurukiran
Starting Member
3 Posts |
Posted - 2008-04-04 : 18:22:41
|
| Actually, Ray - I have seen instances where just the disk fragmentation has contributed to slower performance. If you have enough space on disk, try backing up and restoring the very same database and see if it changes performance. Chances are that the database was set to auto grow and was allocated fragmented pieces from disk, but the restore should give it one contiguos piece of disk(hopefully) and improve performance.I do concur, however that Index / Table fragmentation can frequently be more of a factor. |
|
|
|
rmiao
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
7266 Posts |
Posted - 2008-04-04 : 23:51:24
|
| Disk defrag only works on small local disk, you have no way to defrag tb disk in limited maintenance window. |
|
|
|
renequimoyog
Starting Member
4 Posts |
Posted - 2011-10-20 : 03:43:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by ngurukiran
Actually, Ray - I have seen instances where just the disk fragmentation has contributed to slower performance. If you have enough space on disk, try backing up and restoring the very same database and see if it changes performance.
I read that defragmenting the disc is contributing certain % increase in performance. But to you, you have seen instances where it slows. How can that be... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trouble defragmenting windows 2000 server