# of files in group, CPU, and RAID

Not sure if this is the right forum...
I have a fact table that ha sits own filegroup on a dedicated RAID 10 array.
Somewhere in Books Online I read that you should create a file in the
filegroup for each CPU in the server. My understanding is that in SQL 2000,
this triggered the server to spawn multiple threads to handle the I/O. My
questions are:
1 - Does SQL 2005 need multiple files to spawn multiple threads for I/O?
2 - If not, being on a RAID 10 array, does it help in any way to have
multiple files in a group?
Thanks,
-- Brian"Brian Shelden" <BrianShelden@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:236B2CF8-F24E-43B8-A3EF-0F7D41CEE486@.microsoft.com...
> Not sure if this is the right forum...
> I have a fact table that ha sits own filegroup on a dedicated RAID 10
> array.
> Somewhere in Books Online I read that you should create a file in the
> filegroup for each CPU in the server. My understanding is that in SQL
> 2000,
> this triggered the server to spawn multiple threads to handle the I/O. My
> questions are:
> 1 - Does SQL 2005 need multiple files to spawn multiple threads for I/O?
> 2 - If not, being on a RAID 10 array, does it help in any way to have
> multiple files in a group?
> Thanks,
>
Multipost. Answered in .server.
David

# of CPU for SQL Server

I have a question about sizing of a SQL 2000 server.
If my no. of transaction I need to update does not changes, when the data growth, do I need to add more CPU or memory to the SQL 2000 Server
Hi,
No need to increase the RAM or CPU directly. You measure the usage of MEMORY
and CPU for some time during peak usage situation
using Windows performance monitor or system Monitor.
If you find that CPU usage is always higher than 70% and memry usage is
higher than 80%, then add additional hardware resources.
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Kelvin" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:28DD3CCE-93F0-46BA-AC99-FE60285A2275@.microsoft.com...
> I have a question about sizing of a SQL 2000 server.
> If my no. of transaction I need to update does not changes, when the data
growth, do I need to add more CPU or memory to the SQL 2000 Server
|||If it is possible that although the number of transactions does not change,
but the number of rows affected by the transactions changes or the amount of
data that people need to see increases over time, then you may need to
increase memory and processor as data volumes increase...
Index maintenance will also take more resources( as will the DBCCs)
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Kelvin" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:28DD3CCE-93F0-46BA-AC99-FE60285A2275@.microsoft.com...
> I have a question about sizing of a SQL 2000 server.
> If my no. of transaction I need to update does not changes, when the data
growth, do I need to add more CPU or memory to the SQL 2000 Server