calculating Disk QueueLengths

Hello,
We have raid 5 and raid 1 levels on our disk systems.I know the avg disk
quelengths
should not exceed 2 continously.But is that going to 4 for Raid1 since we ha
ve
two disks on raid1 and 10 for raid 5 since we have 5 disks on raid5.
thanks,Hi
For a raid configured as a single volume the figure is a total for all
drives, so they are within limits although I would hope these are peeks are
not constant values. You may want to read SQL Server 2000 Performance Tuning
Technical Reference by Ed Whalen et al. ISBN 0-7356-1270-6
John
"chinn" <chinn@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BD18FB90-0652-4C99-82EF-4C6A6888573A@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> We have raid 5 and raid 1 levels on our disk systems.I know the avg disk
> quelengths
> should not exceed 2 continously.But is that going to 4 for Raid1 since we
> have
> two disks on raid1 and 10 for raid 5 since we have 5 disks on raid5.
> thanks,|||So which values are correct is it 2 or 4 for raid 1 ..
Thanks,
"John Bell" wrote:

> Hi
> For a raid configured as a single volume the figure is a total for all
> drives, so they are within limits although I would hope these are peeks ar
e
> not constant values. You may want to read SQL Server 2000 Performance Tuni
ng
> Technical Reference by Ed Whalen et al. ISBN 0-7356-1270-6
> John
> "chinn" <chinn@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:BD18FB90-0652-4C99-82EF-4C6A6888573A@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||It's +2 for each disk in your RAID, so for 2 Disks in RAID 1 you get 2 + 2 =
4. This is the peak though, and you shouldn't be hitting this
continuously... If you are you might look at your disk and database
configurations to ensure they're optimal (i.e., where are your
non-clustered indexes being stored? how about your transaction logs, etc.?)
Also the physical aspects - are you using hardware RAID or software RAID?
Do you have separate controllers, etc.
"chinn" <chinn@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5A765E00-7C9C-468C-B092-E044DB676A52@.microsoft.com...
> So which values are correct is it 2 or 4 for raid 1 ..
> Thanks,