|
| PORTAIL | ANNUAIRE | ARTICLES | COMPARATEUR HÉBERGEURS | DEVIS | FORUMS | RÉDUCTEUR D'URL |
|
08/09/2008, 16h52
|
#1 |
Messages: n/a
Hébergeur: |
Disk Alignment
looking for some with DiskPart to with disk alignment for an EMC
unit. based on the reading i've done i think the command i want is as follows. create partition primary align=2048 the 2048 is a bit much i know, 64 should do it, but based on varying things i've read i felt safer with 2048 considering the LUNs are 500GB the other question is, do i need an offset? i think i read that NTFS takes 63K, so is it worth while to do a 64K offset or is this taken care of by the align? havent really been able to find any good solid info for this. Thanks Justin |
|
|
08/09/2008, 17h27
|
#2 |
|
Messages: n/a
Hébergeur: |
RE: Disk Alignment
Empirical evidence appears to suggest that you should align the disk
partition offset. See http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea...alignment.aspx. Linchi "Justin Rich" wrote: > looking for some with DiskPart to with disk alignment for an EMC > unit. > > based on the reading i've done i think the command i want is as follows. > > create partition primary align=2048 > > the 2048 is a bit much i know, 64 should do it, but based on varying things > i've read i felt safer with 2048 considering the LUNs are 500GB > > the other question is, do i need an offset? i think i read that NTFS takes > 63K, so is it worth while to do a 64K offset or is this taken care of by the > align? > > havent really been able to find any good solid info for this. > > Thanks > Justin > > > |
|
|
|
08/09/2008, 17h39
|
#3 |
|
Messages: n/a
Hébergeur: |
Re: Disk Alignment
Align = 64 usually works just fine. (measure is in Kbytes) since that is
the SQL extent size. Offset is for creating second and later partitions. Not what we need. EMC includes alignment offset recommendations in their Clariion documentation. Note that Windows 2008 handles alignment offsets correctly. -- Geoff N. Hiten Principal SQL Infrastructure Consultant Microsoft SQL Server MVP "Justin Rich" <jrich523@yahoo.spam.com> wrote in message news:eZ6g9JcEJHA.3476@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > looking for some with DiskPart to with disk alignment for an EMC > unit. > > based on the reading i've done i think the command i want is as follows. > > create partition primary align=2048 > > the 2048 is a bit much i know, 64 should do it, but based on varying > things i've read i felt safer with 2048 considering the LUNs are 500GB > > the other question is, do i need an offset? i think i read that NTFS takes > 63K, so is it worth while to do a 64K offset or is this taken care of by > the align? > > havent really been able to find any good solid info for this. > > Thanks > Justin > |
|
|
|
08/09/2008, 19h36
|
#4 |
|
Messages: n/a
Hébergeur: |
Re: Disk Alignment
Thanks for the info guys.
yes emc has a doc but it covers concepts, no real directions to speak of, and they said 64, which matches the 128 element size. so any multiple of 64 will work. the 2048 would cut it, and its only wasting 1MB, and there were a few things that said it might be better, but little to no proof... i went with 64, since everything lines up with that, default Clariion element size and SQL usage. the next question is, when i format it, i would assume its best to select a 64K sector size? keep things in line? Thanks "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message news:OAxa4jcEJHA.4504@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > Align = 64 usually works just fine. (measure is in Kbytes) since that is > the SQL extent size. > > Offset is for creating second and later partitions. Not what we need. > > EMC includes alignment offset recommendations in their Clariion > documentation. > > Note that Windows 2008 handles alignment offsets correctly. > > -- > Geoff N. Hiten > Principal SQL Infrastructure Consultant > Microsoft SQL Server MVP > > > > > "Justin Rich" <jrich523@yahoo.spam.com> wrote in message > news:eZ6g9JcEJHA.3476@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> looking for some with DiskPart to with disk alignment for an >> EMC unit. >> >> based on the reading i've done i think the command i want is as follows. >> >> create partition primary align=2048 >> >> the 2048 is a bit much i know, 64 should do it, but based on varying >> things i've read i felt safer with 2048 considering the LUNs are 500GB >> >> the other question is, do i need an offset? i think i read that NTFS >> takes 63K, so is it worth while to do a 64K offset or is this taken care >> of by the align? >> >> havent really been able to find any good solid info for this. >> >> Thanks >> Justin >> > |
|
|
|
08/09/2008, 20h54
|
#5 |
|
Messages: n/a
Hébergeur: |
Re: Disk Alignment
I seem to recall that 64K sector size is usually best for SQL Server data
and logs in a general sense. I think for some specific situations such as data partitions that will have large datawarehouses on them or analysis services I have seen 256K be better and for log-only drives 8K better in some benchmarks. I could be completely misremembering though.  -- Kevin G. Boles Indicium Resources, Inc. SQL Server MVP kgboles a earthlink dt net "Justin Rich" <jrich523@yahoo.spam.com> wrote in message news:el$HtldEJHA.5004@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Thanks for the info guys. > > yes emc has a doc but it covers concepts, no real directions to speak of, > and they said 64, which matches the 128 element size. so any multiple of > 64 will work. the 2048 would cut it, and its only wasting 1MB, and there > were a few things that said it might be better, but little to no proof... > i went with 64, since everything lines up with that, default Clariion > element size and SQL usage. > > the next question is, when i format it, i would assume its best to select > a 64K sector size? keep things in line? > > Thanks > > > "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:OAxa4jcEJHA.4504@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> Align = 64 usually works just fine. (measure is in Kbytes) since that is >> the SQL extent size. >> >> Offset is for creating second and later partitions. Not what we need. >> >> EMC includes alignment offset recommendations in their Clariion >> documentation. >> >> Note that Windows 2008 handles alignment offsets correctly. >> >> -- >> Geoff N. Hiten >> Principal SQL Infrastructure Consultant >> Microsoft SQL Server MVP >> >> >> >> >> "Justin Rich" <jrich523@yahoo.spam.com> wrote in message >> news:eZ6g9JcEJHA.3476@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>> looking for some with DiskPart to with disk alignment for an >>> EMC unit. >>> >>> based on the reading i've done i think the command i want is as follows. >>> >>> create partition primary align=2048 >>> >>> the 2048 is a bit much i know, 64 should do it, but based on varying >>> things i've read i felt safer with 2048 considering the LUNs are 500GB >>> >>> the other question is, do i need an offset? i think i read that NTFS >>> takes 63K, so is it worth while to do a 64K offset or is this taken care >>> of by the align? >>> >>> havent really been able to find any good solid info for this. >>> >>> Thanks >>> Justin >>> >> > > |
|
|
|
08/09/2008, 23h00
|
#6 |
|
Messages: n/a
Hébergeur: |
Re: Disk Alignment
64K is good. In general go with the manufacturer default since that is what
the IO system is generally tuned for. -- Geoff N. Hiten Principal SQL Infrastructure Consultant Microsoft SQL Server MVP "Justin Rich" <jrich523@yahoo.spam.com> wrote in message news:el$HtldEJHA.5004@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Thanks for the info guys. > > yes emc has a doc but it covers concepts, no real directions to speak of, > and they said 64, which matches the 128 element size. so any multiple of > 64 will work. the 2048 would cut it, and its only wasting 1MB, and there > were a few things that said it might be better, but little to no proof... > i went with 64, since everything lines up with that, default Clariion > element size and SQL usage. > > the next question is, when i format it, i would assume its best to select > a 64K sector size? keep things in line? > > Thanks > > > "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:OAxa4jcEJHA.4504@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> Align = 64 usually works just fine. (measure is in Kbytes) since that is >> the SQL extent size. >> >> Offset is for creating second and later partitions. Not what we need. >> >> EMC includes alignment offset recommendations in their Clariion >> documentation. >> >> Note that Windows 2008 handles alignment offsets correctly. >> >> -- >> Geoff N. Hiten >> Principal SQL Infrastructure Consultant >> Microsoft SQL Server MVP >> >> >> >> >> "Justin Rich" <jrich523@yahoo.spam.com> wrote in message >> news:eZ6g9JcEJHA.3476@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>> looking for some with DiskPart to with disk alignment for an >>> EMC unit. >>> >>> based on the reading i've done i think the command i want is as follows. >>> >>> create partition primary align=2048 >>> >>> the 2048 is a bit much i know, 64 should do it, but based on varying >>> things i've read i felt safer with 2048 considering the LUNs are 500GB >>> >>> the other question is, do i need an offset? i think i read that NTFS >>> takes 63K, so is it worth while to do a 64K offset or is this taken care >>> of by the align? >>> >>> havent really been able to find any good solid info for this. >>> >>> Thanks >>> Justin >>> >> > > |
|
|
|
09/09/2008, 14h44
|
#7 |
|
Messages: n/a
Hébergeur: |
Re: Disk Alignment
So basically match it with whatever the disk sector size is?
in the case of this EMC system since the element size is 128 that makes the sectors 64K each, so do the align as 64 and then format with a unit size of 64K. Is it safe to say that your align and unit size should always be the same offset? Atleast in the windows world. Thanks "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message news:OiECLXfEJHA.4304@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > 64K is good. In general go with the manufacturer default since that is > what the IO system is generally tuned for. > > > -- > Geoff N. Hiten > Principal SQL Infrastructure Consultant > Microsoft SQL Server MVP > > > "Justin Rich" <jrich523@yahoo.spam.com> wrote in message > news:el$HtldEJHA.5004@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> Thanks for the info guys. >> >> yes emc has a doc but it covers concepts, no real directions to speak of, >> and they said 64, which matches the 128 element size. so any multiple of >> 64 will work. the 2048 would cut it, and its only wasting 1MB, and there >> were a few things that said it might be better, but little to no proof... >> i went with 64, since everything lines up with that, default Clariion >> element size and SQL usage. >> >> the next question is, when i format it, i would assume its best to select >> a 64K sector size? keep things in line? >> >> Thanks >> >> >> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:OAxa4jcEJHA.4504@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>> Align = 64 usually works just fine. (measure is in Kbytes) since that >>> is the SQL extent size. >>> >>> Offset is for creating second and later partitions. Not what we need. >>> >>> EMC includes alignment offset recommendations in their Clariion >>> documentation. >>> >>> Note that Windows 2008 handles alignment offsets correctly. >>> >>> -- >>> Geoff N. Hiten >>> Principal SQL Infrastructure Consultant >>> Microsoft SQL Server MVP >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> "Justin Rich" <jrich523@yahoo.spam.com> wrote in message >>> news:eZ6g9JcEJHA.3476@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>> looking for some with DiskPart to with disk alignment for an >>>> EMC unit. >>>> >>>> based on the reading i've done i think the command i want is as >>>> follows. >>>> >>>> create partition primary align=2048 >>>> >>>> the 2048 is a bit much i know, 64 should do it, but based on varying >>>> things i've read i felt safer with 2048 considering the LUNs are 500GB >>>> >>>> the other question is, do i need an offset? i think i read that NTFS >>>> takes 63K, so is it worth while to do a 64K offset or is this taken >>>> care of by the align? >>>> >>>> havent really been able to find any good solid info for this. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> Justin >>>> >>> >> >> > |
|
|
|
09/09/2008, 15h48
|
#8 |
|
Messages: n/a
Hébergeur: |
Re: Disk Alignment
Not necessarily, but one should always be an integer multiple of the other
so boundaries align. -- Geoff N. Hiten Principal SQL Infrastructure Consultant Microsoft SQL Server MVP "Justin Rich" <jrich523@yahoo.spam.com> wrote in message news:%23ZXAGnnEJHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > So basically match it with whatever the disk sector size is? > in the case of this EMC system since the element size is 128 that makes > the sectors 64K each, so do the align as 64 and then format with a unit > size of 64K. > > Is it safe to say that your align and unit size should always be the same > offset? Atleast in the windows world. > > Thanks > > "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:OiECLXfEJHA.4304@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> 64K is good. In general go with the manufacturer default since that is >> what the IO system is generally tuned for. >> >> >> -- >> Geoff N. Hiten >> Principal SQL Infrastructure Consultant >> Microsoft SQL Server MVP >> >> >> "Justin Rich" <jrich523@yahoo.spam.com> wrote in message >> news:el$HtldEJHA.5004@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>> Thanks for the info guys. >>> >>> yes emc has a doc but it covers concepts, no real directions to speak >>> of, and they said 64, which matches the 128 element size. so any >>> multiple of 64 will work. the 2048 would cut it, and its only wasting >>> 1MB, and there were a few things that said it might be better, but >>> little to no proof... >>> i went with 64, since everything lines up with that, default Clariion >>> element size and SQL usage. >>> >>> the next question is, when i format it, i would assume its best to >>> select a 64K sector size? keep things in line? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> >>> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:OAxa4jcEJHA.4504@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>>> Align = 64 usually works just fine. (measure is in Kbytes) since that >>>> is the SQL extent size. >>>> >>>> Offset is for creating second and later partitions. Not what we need. >>>> >>>> EMC includes alignment offset recommendations in their Clariion >>>> documentation. >>>> >>>> Note that Windows 2008 handles alignment offsets correctly. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Geoff N. Hiten >>>> Principal SQL Infrastructure Consultant >>>> Microsoft SQL Server MVP >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> "Justin Rich" <jrich523@yahoo.spam.com> wrote in message >>>> news:eZ6g9JcEJHA.3476@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>>> looking for some with DiskPart to with disk alignment for an >>>>> EMC unit. >>>>> >>>>> based on the reading i've done i think the command i want is as >>>>> follows. >>>>> >>>>> create partition primary align=2048 >>>>> >>>>> the 2048 is a bit much i know, 64 should do it, but based on varying >>>>> things i've read i felt safer with 2048 considering the LUNs are 500GB >>>>> >>>>> the other question is, do i need an offset? i think i read that NTFS >>>>> takes 63K, so is it worth while to do a 64K offset or is this taken >>>>> care of by the align? >>>>> >>>>> havent really been able to find any good solid info for this. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> Justin >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > > |
|
|
 |
| Outils de la discussion | |
|
|
