| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted:
Mon Sep 19, 2005 12:50 pm Post subject:
Advice on 3GB switch for file servers |
|
|
Hi All,
Going through process of file server consolidation, moving 30+ local
file servers to central site. Yet undecided whether central file
server will be cluster or standalone boxes (decision to be made above
according to cost justification).
However I'm interested if anyone can give me some advice on whether
Windows 2003 server which are just acting as file servers benefit from
using the /3GB switch in boot.ini.
In total have about 12000 users, number of shares unknown but at the
moment there are about 15000 out there. Total data appromiately 25TB.
Regardless of cluster or standalone the storage will be SAN based.
Any suggestions appreciated.
Cheers
Anthony. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Sep 19, 2005 12:50 pm Post subject:
Re: Advice on 3GB switch for file servers |
|
|
How much RAM do you have on the machine? If you have over 2GB, you should
see some improvement.
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website
http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training
<leffe911@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127122887.494564.127000@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | Hi All,
Going through process of file server consolidation, moving 30+ local
file servers to central site. Yet undecided whether central file
server will be cluster or standalone boxes (decision to be made above
according to cost justification).
However I'm interested if anyone can give me some advice on whether
Windows 2003 server which are just acting as file servers benefit from
using the /3GB switch in boot.ini.
In total have about 12000 users, number of shares unknown but at the
moment there are about 15000 out there. Total data appromiately 25TB.
Regardless of cluster or standalone the storage will be SAN based.
Any suggestions appreciated.
Cheers
Anthony.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Russ Kaufmann [MVP]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Sep 19, 2005 4:51 pm Post subject:
Re: Advice on 3GB switch for file servers |
|
|
<leffe911@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127122887.494564.127000@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | Hi All,
Going through process of file server consolidation, moving 30+ local
file servers to central site. Yet undecided whether central file
server will be cluster or standalone boxes (decision to be made above
according to cost justification).
However I'm interested if anyone can give me some advice on whether
Windows 2003 server which are just acting as file servers benefit from
using the /3GB switch in boot.ini.
In total have about 12000 users, number of shares unknown but at the
moment there are about 15000 out there. Total data appromiately 25TB.
Regardless of cluster or standalone the storage will be SAN based.
|
If the server is only running as a file server and has 1GB or more of RAM,
there should be some improvements. If the server is running other services,
the shift of RAM from Kernal Mode to User Mode may cause problems with
performance of those other services. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matt Povey
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:50 pm Post subject:
RE: Advice on 3GB switch for file servers |
|
|
"leffe911@hotmail.com" wrote:
| Quote: | However I'm interested if anyone can give me some advice on whether
Windows 2003 server which are just acting as file servers benefit from
using the /3GB switch in boot.ini.
In total have about 12000 users, number of shares unknown but at the
moment there are about 15000 out there. Total data appromiately 25TB.
Regardless of cluster or standalone the storage will be SAN based.
|
Nope. Wouldn't advise it. The /3GB switch is not something to be used simply
because you have more than 2GB RAM. You have to remember what it actually
does. By setting the switch, you allow /3GB aware user mode processes to
utilise 3GB rather than 2GB worth of virtual address space.
However, since the file server runs as kernel mode threads from srv.sys,
this change in allocation does not help. Indeed, so far as I am aware, the
file cache (which is one of the primary determinants of performance for a
file server) resides in kernel mode. As such, by altering the allocation of
RAM between kernel and user mode, you could actually reduce the performance
of your file server.
Furthermore, the use of /3GB reduces the maximum quantity of non-paged-pool
which is available to the server (I believe). Since file serving uses
significant quantities of NPP (especially where multiple filter drivers are
in use - e.g. AV, Quota management etc. as well as DFS), this is potentially
a serious issue.
Bottom line. Don't use it on file servers.
If you want to tweak performance of a file server, look at NTFS (disable 8.3
generation and the like), IRQ Filter (resource kit) etc. You could also look
at TCP Offload NICs. I'd personally be much more concerned with IO
performance and the data on the file server than whether or not to use /3GB.
Regarding /3GB. Have a look at Raymond Chen's blog.
http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/search.aspx?q=%2f3gb&p=1
I should say that this is opinion. I've nothing to really back it up with.
The bottom line though is that I don't use /3GB on file servers. I'd be
interested to know if I'm wrong in that.
Good luck.
Matt Povey |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Russ Kaufmann [MVP]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:50 pm Post subject:
Re: Advice on 3GB switch for file servers |
|
|
"Matt Povey" <Matt Povey@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:89D5FDD2-C3B0-45DD-80D1-D0E046EBDC50@microsoft.com...
| Quote: | However, since the file server runs as kernel mode threads from srv.sys,
this change in allocation does not help. Indeed, so far as I am aware, the
file cache (which is one of the primary determinants of performance for a
file server) resides in kernel mode. As such, by altering the allocation
of
RAM between kernel and user mode, you could actually reduce the
performance
of your file server.
|
You nailed it right there. If it is in kernel mode, the using the /3GB
switch would actually have a negative impact if any impact at all.
Great bit of info there, Matt. Thanks.
--
Russ Kaufmann
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Website
http://msmvps.com/clusterhelp - New Blog
http://spaces.msn.com/members/russkaufmann - Old Blog |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in