File Server Performance

[jeff]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (More info?)

I'm seeing some strange behavior on one of our file servers.

When I do an incremental backup on it, the Current Disk Queue Length
counters jump up, and our document management system can get files from the
file server. (The document management system is on a different server.) If
we run a full backup, we don't see that same kind of negative impact.

Another odd behavior is that if I right click on a directory to get the
total size of the contained files, users are unable to get files from the
system, until the properties window finishes totaling up the file sizes.

I looked at the Master File Table, and there are about 2.2 million entries
in it, but it's not full, and it's not fragmented.

Has anyone else encountered a similar problem before?

Jeff

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (More info?)

Jeff,

If the Disk Queue jumps up, that indicates that the drive isn't processing
requests fast enough - causing requests to queue up - which results in
slower performance. Optimimally, the queue should be relatively low in
number.

What tool are you using to get fragmentation information? If you look at
the Split IO counter, what does it show?

- Greg/Raxco Software
Microsoft MVP - Windows File System

Want to email me? Delete ntloader.


"Jeff" <Jeff@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:329AE8C2-1E51-4352-9FD0-0EC15AB96045@microsoft.com...
> I'm seeing some strange behavior on one of our file servers.
>
> When I do an incremental backup on it, the Current Disk Queue Length
> counters jump up, and our document management system can get files from
the
> file server. (The document management system is on a different server.)
If
> we run a full backup, we don't see that same kind of negative impact.
>
> Another odd behavior is that if I right click on a directory to get the
> total size of the contained files, users are unable to get files from the
> system, until the properties window finishes totaling up the file sizes.
>
> I looked at the Master File Table, and there are about 2.2 million entries
> in it, but it's not full, and it's not fragmented.
>
> Has anyone else encountered a similar problem before?
>
> Jeff

 

[jeff]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.file_system (More info?)

I'm using the disk defragmentor that comes with the OS. I'll take a look the
counter you mentioned, but I'm really preplexed by the problems that occur
when I right click on a folder to get the size of the files it contains, and
why the difference between a partial backup and a full backup? The only
difference I can think of is that the partial backup has to check the archive
bit.

Jeff

"Greg Hayes/Raxco Software" wrote:

> Jeff,
>
> If the Disk Queue jumps up, that indicates that the drive isn't processing
> requests fast enough - causing requests to queue up - which results in
> slower performance. Optimimally, the queue should be relatively low in
> number.
>
> What tool are you using to get fragmentation information? If you look at
> the Split IO counter, what does it show?
>
> - Greg/Raxco Software
> Microsoft MVP - Windows File System
>
> Want to email me? Delete ntloader.
>
>
> "Jeff" <Jeff@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:329AE8C2-1E51-4352-9FD0-0EC15AB96045@microsoft.com...
> > I'm seeing some strange behavior on one of our file servers.
> >
> > When I do an incremental backup on it, the Current Disk Queue Length
> > counters jump up, and our document management system can get files from
> the
> > file server. (The document management system is on a different server.)
> If
> > we run a full backup, we don't see that same kind of negative impact.
> >
> > Another odd behavior is that if I right click on a directory to get the
> > total size of the contained files, users are unable to get files from the
> > system, until the properties window finishes totaling up the file sizes.
> >
> > I looked at the Master File Table, and there are about 2.2 million entries
> > in it, but it's not full, and it's not fragmented.
> >
> > Has anyone else encountered a similar problem before?
> >
> > Jeff
>
>
>