Hi All,
Does it make any difference in performance, if 2 related
tables A & B are placed in filegroups X & Y and both
filegroups residing in same physical disk?
Thanks,
Hari
Hari
It does not make a diffrence in performance .
In order to gain a performance benefit separete them in two diff. PHYSICAL
disks.
"Hari" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2896901c46404$6824de70$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi All,
> Does it make any difference in performance, if 2 related
> tables A & B are placed in filegroups X & Y and both
> filegroups residing in same physical disk?
> Thanks,
> Hari
Showing posts with label bothfilegroups. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bothfilegroups. Show all posts
Friday, March 9, 2012
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Performance
Hi All,
Does it make any difference in performance, if 2 related
tables A & B are placed in filegroups X & Y and both
filegroups residing in same physical disk?
Thanks,
HariHari
It does not make a diffrence in performance .
In order to gain a performance benefit separete them in two diff. PHYSICAL
disks.
"Hari" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2896901c46404$6824de70$a301280a@.phx
.gbl...
> Hi All,
> Does it make any difference in performance, if 2 related
> tables A & B are placed in filegroups X & Y and both
> filegroups residing in same physical disk?
> Thanks,
> Hari
Does it make any difference in performance, if 2 related
tables A & B are placed in filegroups X & Y and both
filegroups residing in same physical disk?
Thanks,
HariHari
It does not make a diffrence in performance .
In order to gain a performance benefit separete them in two diff. PHYSICAL
disks.
"Hari" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2896901c46404$6824de70$a301280a@.phx
.gbl...
> Hi All,
> Does it make any difference in performance, if 2 related
> tables A & B are placed in filegroups X & Y and both
> filegroups residing in same physical disk?
> Thanks,
> Hari
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)