Post reply

PerfectDisk Vs DisKeeper

  • June 17, 2011 at 11:49 am

    #1340628

    Agreed, nice post and thanks

  • June 17, 2011 at 6:41 pm

    #1340743

    SQLRNNR (6/9/2011)

    Unfortunately, if you have heavy fragmentation at the OS level - you would need to stop SQL Server for proper disk defrag using any util.

    Why? I've never had a problem with tools like DiskKeeper defragmenting some really screwed up OS level disks with SQL Server files on them.

    --Jeff Moden

    RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
    First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
    ________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

    Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

    Helpful Links:
    How to post code problems
    How to Post Performance Problems
    Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

  • June 18, 2011 at 11:55 am

    #1340805

    Jeff Moden (6/17/2011)

    SQLRNNR (6/9/2011)

    Unfortunately, if you have heavy fragmentation at the OS level - you would need to stop SQL Server for proper disk defrag using any util.

    Why? I've never had a problem with tools like DiskKeeper defragmenting some really screwed up OS level disks with SQL Server files on them.

    NOt sure that you meant to quote that comment based on your comment. But with regards to diskkeeper - it works to about 75% of PerfectDisk. If you want to really defrag your drive, Perfectdisk far out performs DiskKeeper.

    As per stopping services, both utilities can cause serious latency in the database if trying to defrag during normal operating hours. Both require serious IO and can be burdensome if trying to run them while the application is accessing the database.

    Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
    _______________________________________________
    I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
    SQL RNNR
    Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
    Learn Extended Events

  • June 19, 2011 at 5:12 pm

    #1340918

    SQLRNNR (6/18/2011)

    As per stopping services, both utilities can cause serious latency in the database if trying to defrag during normal operating hours. Both require serious IO and can be burdensome if trying to run them while the application is accessing the database.

    I understand what you're saying but I've never experienced that type of problem with DiskKeeper running in the background.

    --Jeff Moden

    RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
    First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
    ________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

    Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

    Helpful Links:
    How to post code problems
    How to Post Performance Problems
    Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

  • June 20, 2011 at 10:38 am

    #1341318

    Jeff Moden (6/19/2011)

    SQLRNNR (6/18/2011)

    As per stopping services, both utilities can cause serious latency in the database if trying to defrag during normal operating hours. Both require serious IO and can be burdensome if trying to run them while the application is accessing the database.

    I understand what you're saying but I've never experienced that type of problem with DiskKeeper running in the background.

    Hmm. I've tried several versions and all have had severe impact. I'd be interested in which version and disk subsystem to see if that was a factor.

    Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
    _______________________________________________
    I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
    SQL RNNR
    Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
    Learn Extended Events

  • June 20, 2011 at 11:01 am

    #1341326

    SQLRNNR (6/20/2011)

    Jeff Moden (6/19/2011)

    SQLRNNR (6/18/2011)

    As per stopping services, both utilities can cause serious latency in the database if trying to defrag during normal operating hours. Both require serious IO and can be burdensome if trying to run them while the application is accessing the database.

    I understand what you're saying but I've never experienced that type of problem with DiskKeeper running in the background.

    Hmm. I've tried several versions and all have had severe impact. I'd be interested in which version and disk subsystem to see if that was a factor.

    Unfortunately, that was at my old job. I couldn't tell you the version and the only thing I can tell you about the disk-subsystem is that it was an EMC (but not sure if it was a Clarion or what).

    --Jeff Moden

    RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
    First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
    ________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

    Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

    Helpful Links:
    How to post code problems
    How to Post Performance Problems
    Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

  • June 20, 2011 at 11:13 am

    #1341334

    The newest version of DisKeeper does not have to run as often as the previous versions. DisKeeper hooks the disk drivers and prevents fragmentation during write operations; so far as I can tell, with a minimum overhead.

    If I run DisKeeper once every two weeks, 95 percent of fragmentation is prevented by IntelliWrite and only 5 percent by the defrag run.

    BTW, I am not an agent of DisKeeper Corp. 🙂

  • June 20, 2011 at 11:31 am

    #1341342

    Looks like they have fixed some things then. I would have to test drive and see how well it defrags compared to Perfectdisk.

    Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
    _______________________________________________
    I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
    SQL RNNR
    Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
    Learn Extended Events

  • June 20, 2011 at 11:45 am

    #1341354

    So far I have tried the newest version on my laptop (plain 500 GB) and on my dev machine (RAID2). I have not seen the results on RAID5 or higher, but I plan to do some testing during the slower summer months.

  • June 20, 2011 at 12:14 pm

    #1341373

    Thanks again for the input, all! I am still sided to PerfectDisk, due to the reasons listed below. I am looking for more personal experience with times taken, issues seen, if a comparison has been done, than info I can get from online searches. I have found a few forums with the same topic, but I am looking specifically for SQL server needs using both utilities SERVER versions (probably should have been more clear but was looking for full details). Of coarse, all other information is still very helpful, and much appreciated! 🙂

    Have you been using this on a Server that contains SQL services and databases that are in operation?

    My main research between all products examined comes down to online use, and minimizing the impact to the server. I am looking for a tool that will do online defragmentation. I can get a few service windows here or there but it will be limited time and on medium/large volumes of data. The analysis reports from PerfectDisk got my attention in comparisons to DisKeeper. I do not have 40 hours of down time on these servers. If I wished upon a star, I could MAYBE weasel 4 hours. Then, I would need a solution to do online defragmentation on a off peak hours scheduler or automated calculation of resources. From all these needs, I have seen that PerfectDisk does:

    * the initial defragmentation quicker,

    * does online defragmentation,

    * can run in the background to prevent fragmentation,

    * has a utility for SMART monitoring attached so we don't need two programs,

    * and has a consol to view from another station so the GUI does not impact SQL server performance as well as the remote or vnc needs to get onto the actual server.

    The needs are strictly for SQL server, minimize surface interface from the server, keep the servers in top shape, minimize impact, do online. My Net guys want more for the Virtual Machines, but my analysis only needs the final information of which is best for SQL server. If I am doing my job right, there should never be need to defragment on these volumes because all the growth on the volumes would be controlled. However, I am just getting into these drives and the autogrowth, shrinking, and other placement has been switched around. My resources are limited, budget little, and need to complete during operational times (24 hrs/day) are there.

    Thanks again! If anyone has more on the above information from experience it is very much appreciated! I am hoping to get a Net folk to get the install done this week so I can add my own use details for PerfectDisk trial.

  • June 20, 2011 at 7:23 pm

    #1341562

    matt.newman (6/20/2011)

    I am still sided to PerfectDisk, due to the reasons listed below

    It seems that you've done more research on the subject than a lot of us have. You should buy based on your findings and what you've found on this thread, so far. To me, it sounds like PerfectDisk may be your ticket.

    --Jeff Moden

    RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
    First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
    ________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

    Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

    Helpful Links:
    How to post code problems
    How to Post Performance Problems
    Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

  • June 20, 2011 at 7:32 pm

    #1341564

    Jeff

    This is about what works for you and what you feel comfortable defending to your boss during your performace review.

    That is where IMO this or any SqlServerCentral forum ends and a friendly banter over a beer begins. (I am buing, call me on that.)

  • June 20, 2011 at 10:34 pm

    #1341596

    Revenant (6/20/2011)

    Jeff

    This is about what works for you and what you feel comfortable defending to your boss during your performace review.

    That is where IMO this or any SqlServerCentral forum ends and a friendly banter over a beer begins. (I am buing, call me on that.)

    I absolutely agree. The OP seems to feel very comfortable with PerfectDisk and that's why I suggested he go with it. 🙂 I can't actually defend DiskKeeper against PerfectDisk because I've never used PerfectDisk.

    --Jeff Moden

    RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
    First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
    ________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

    Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

    Helpful Links:
    How to post code problems
    How to Post Performance Problems
    Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

  • June 21, 2011 at 8:18 am

    #1341864

    Bad words I am with. Sorry. I am just looking to see if there are any stone hard reasons to go with one over the other. I do need to justify the cost, and actual user experience always has a stronger word over other what is found out in other searches. Strongest of coarse being actually doing it myself. Hopfully I will get some time from NET today to install my analysis tools.

    Thanks all! Much appreciated!

    -Matt

  • June 21, 2011 at 8:26 am

    #1341874

    Our pleasure. Good luck with this little project.

    Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
    _______________________________________________
    I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
    SQL RNNR
    Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
    Learn Extended Events

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 29 (of 29 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply