<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/App_Themes/default/rss.xslt"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" xmlns:evnet="http://www.mscommunities.com/rssmodule/"><channel><title>Comment Feed for Demo SQL Server 2008 DW - Configure DW Storage (Joe Longtin on Channel 9)</title><atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/joe+longtin/demo-of-sql-server-2008-data-warehousing-features/rss/default.aspx" /><description>Demo SQL Server 2008 DW - Configure DW Storage</description><link>http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Joe+Longtin/Demo-of-SQL-Server-2008-Data-Warehousing-Features/</link><language>en-us</language><pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 15:42:12 GMT</pubDate><lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 15:42:12 GMT</lastBuildDate><generator>EvNet (EvNet, Version=1.0.3608.3122, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null)</generator><item><title>Re: Demo SQL Server 2008 DW - Configure DW Storage</title><description>&lt;p&gt;Great topic, but what was the rationale for&amp;nbsp;assigning multiple (four) data files to a single filegroup? &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Let's assume:&lt;br /&gt;&amp;bull; a desire to favor query performance (i.e., sequential I/O) over load times&lt;br /&gt;&amp;bull; a willingness to assign a filegroup to each fact table&lt;br /&gt;&amp;bull; fact tables are 'properly loaded' to facilitate sequential I/O, and have a clustered key&lt;br /&gt;&amp;bull; we ignore tempdb&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It's easy to find Microsoft DW whitepapers recommending a *single* file per filegroup, warning that proportional fill leads to file switching and hindered read-aheads. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Other sources, such as this video, advocate multiple files per filegroup. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fast Track papers are content with a single filegroup (Primary), too, and recommend two files per RAID 1 LUN (~drive). Furthermore, the number of cores drives the number of LUNs (~drives). &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Oddly, the SQL CAT team loves proportional fill striping, makes no mention of file switching, and only warns that proportional fill can hinder DW *load* times via smaller scatter/gather writes.&lt;/p&gt;</description><comments></comments><link>http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Joe+Longtin/Demo-of-SQL-Server-2008-Data-Warehousing-Features/?CommentID=482697</link><pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 15:42:12 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Joe+Longtin/Demo-of-SQL-Server-2008-Data-Warehousing-Features/?CommentID=482697</guid><evnet:views>0</evnet:views><evnet:viewtrackingurl>http://channel9.msdn.com/482697/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=0</evnet:viewtrackingurl><evnet:previewtext>Great topic, but what was the rationale for&amp;nbsp;assigning multiple (four) data files to a single filegroup? 
&amp;nbsp;
Let's assume:&amp;bull; a desire to favor query performance (i.e., sequential I/O) over load times&amp;bull; a willingness to assign a filegroup to each fact table&amp;bull; fact tables are&amp;#8230;</evnet:previewtext><dc:creator>SteveOLAP</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss></wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://channel9.msdn.com/482697/Trackback.aspx</trackback:ping></item></channel></rss>