Backing up and Truncating a transaction log in SQL

I have a transaction log on on of my databases that is very big, and I need to backup the logs and truncate them to get some free disk space. The backup of the log needs to be placed on one of my remote backup servers. I would like to perform this task in SQL so I can put the code in a scheduled job. Thanks in advance for any help.Let me know if you mange to arrive at a defined process !!!
I do have the same issue|||Do you care about what is in the log? What I mean is do you think you will have to recover from the log backup or not? If not, you can just dump it without creating a backup file. Then you can shrink the log file using DBCC Shrinkfile.|||My company likes to keep a backup of all logs no matter what for auditing purposes.|||You need to set up a shared folder in the reomote server and run the following script,

BACKUP LOG mydb TO DISK = '\\remoteservername\sharedfoledername\mydb_log_bac kup' WITH INIT, NOUNLOAD, NAME = 'mydb_log_backup', NOSKIP , STATS = 10, NOFORMAT|||Would that script also truncate the logs, or do I have to run BACKUP LOG DB WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY afterwards. Also what extension do I use for the backup log file. Example: DB_Logs_2003.bak. Is that OK? Thanks for all you help so far.|||??!! That's what I was asking you about. 'With Truncate only' will only dump the log for you without actually backing up the log for you. If you need keep the backup file then you should not use that option. The script DOES backup. Extension doesn't matter.|||Oh! I see what you are saying. Now I fully understand. Thanks for all the help.

Average Disk Queue Length

Hey guys. I've a problem with Average Disk queue length staying ta 100%. the
server is a very good box and doesn't do much on it. It also has 6gb RAM with
2gb each for 2 instances and 2 gb for Windows. 2 Xeon procs at 2.4Ghz hyper
threaded.
It is on Raid 5 and all the files are located on 1 drive. I know this is the
worst practice but this is a DEV box and not much is happening on it. There
is Replication going from instance 1 on the machine to instance2 on the
machine. But, still this should not happen. Someone Please help...Disk Queue counters are not a percentage they are a number. So either it is
not the Avg Disk Queue counter or you are misinterpreting it. Have a look
at this:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/administration/2000/perftuning.asp
Performance WP's
http://www.swynk.com/friends/vandenberg/perfmonitor.asp Perfmon counters
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/sql_server_performance_audit.asp
Hardware Performance CheckList
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/best_sql_server_performance_tips.asp
SQL 2000 Performance tuning tips
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=q224587 Troubleshooting App
Performance
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/adminsql/ad_perfmon_24u1.asp
Disk Monitoring
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1EED4616-0587-484B-AB7F-AFDF03065F79@.microsoft.com...
> Hey guys. I've a problem with Average Disk queue length staying ta 100%.
> the
> server is a very good box and doesn't do much on it. It also has 6gb RAM
> with
> 2gb each for 2 instances and 2 gb for Windows. 2 Xeon procs at 2.4Ghz
> hyper
> threaded.
> It is on Raid 5 and all the files are located on 1 drive. I know this is
> the
> worst practice but this is a DEV box and not much is happening on it.
> There
> is Replication going from instance 1 on the machine to instance2 on the
> machine. But, still this should not happen. Someone Please help...|||Disk queue length is not measured in percent. Are you sure that's what you
have? That said, the avg disk queue length should not be > 2x #of spindles.
With all of your files on the same drive, it's not surprising that you have
this problem. RAID5 compounds this, as well. Of course, replication adds
to the burden, depending on the volume of data coming across, and this will
be exacerbated by snapshot synchronization.
Can you purchase some disks and create a couple of RAID10 sets?
--
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada tom@.cips.ca
www.pinpub.com
"Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1EED4616-0587-484B-AB7F-AFDF03065F79@.microsoft.com...
> Hey guys. I've a problem with Average Disk queue length staying ta 100%.
> the
> server is a very good box and doesn't do much on it. It also has 6gb RAM
> with
> 2gb each for 2 instances and 2 gb for Windows. 2 Xeon procs at 2.4Ghz
> hyper
> threaded.
> It is on Raid 5 and all the files are located on 1 drive. I know this is
> the
> worst practice but this is a DEV box and not much is happening on it.
> There
> is Replication going from instance 1 on the machine to instance2 on the
> machine. But, still this should not happen. Someone Please help...|||I understand these problems and yes, I had written it wrong. It's a counter
an dis not measured in percent. The only reason i posted this question here
is because it should not be so high even with all the existing WORST
practices followed. But, I didn't have much of a choice since it's a dev box
and not much s going on with this server here which is why the Avg disk queue
length should not be high... Is there anything else i should do to find why
it's so high?
thank you in advance.
"Tom Moreau" wrote:
> Disk queue length is not measured in percent. Are you sure that's what you
> have? That said, the avg disk queue length should not be > 2x #of spindles.
> With all of your files on the same drive, it's not surprising that you have
> this problem. RAID5 compounds this, as well. Of course, replication adds
> to the burden, depending on the volume of data coming across, and this will
> be exacerbated by snapshot synchronization.
> Can you purchase some disks and create a couple of RAID10 sets?
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
> SQL Server MVP
> Columnist, SQL Server Professional
> Toronto, ON Canada tom@.cips.ca
> www.pinpub.com
> "Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:1EED4616-0587-484B-AB7F-AFDF03065F79@.microsoft.com...
> > Hey guys. I've a problem with Average Disk queue length staying ta 100%.
> > the
> > server is a very good box and doesn't do much on it. It also has 6gb RAM
> > with
> > 2gb each for 2 instances and 2 gb for Windows. 2 Xeon procs at 2.4Ghz
> > hyper
> > threaded.
> > It is on Raid 5 and all the files are located on 1 drive. I know this is
> > the
> > worst practice but this is a DEV box and not much is happening on it.
> > There
> > is Replication going from instance 1 on the machine to instance2 on the
> > machine. But, still this should not happen. Someone Please help...
>
>|||Maybe these will help:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/administration/2000/perftuning.asp
Performance WP's
http://www.swynk.com/friends/vandenberg/perfmonitor.asp Perfmon counters
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/sql_server_performance_audit.asp
Hardware Performance CheckList
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/best_sql_server_performance_tips.asp
SQL 2000 Performance tuning tips
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=q224587 Troubleshooting App
Performance
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/adminsql/ad_perfmon_24u1.asp
Disk Monitoring
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DD9DE915-894E-4723-ADA7-BDFA25491DBE@.microsoft.com...
>I understand these problems and yes, I had written it wrong. It's a counter
> an dis not measured in percent. The only reason i posted this question
> here
> is because it should not be so high even with all the existing WORST
> practices followed. But, I didn't have much of a choice since it's a dev
> box
> and not much s going on with this server here which is why the Avg disk
> queue
> length should not be high... Is there anything else i should do to find
> why
> it's so high?
> thank you in advance.
> "Tom Moreau" wrote:
>> Disk queue length is not measured in percent. Are you sure that's what
>> you
>> have? That said, the avg disk queue length should not be > 2x #of
>> spindles.
>> With all of your files on the same drive, it's not surprising that you
>> have
>> this problem. RAID5 compounds this, as well. Of course, replication
>> adds
>> to the burden, depending on the volume of data coming across, and this
>> will
>> be exacerbated by snapshot synchronization.
>> Can you purchase some disks and create a couple of RAID10 sets?
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Columnist, SQL Server Professional
>> Toronto, ON Canada tom@.cips.ca
>> www.pinpub.com
>> "Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:1EED4616-0587-484B-AB7F-AFDF03065F79@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hey guys. I've a problem with Average Disk queue length staying ta
>> > 100%.
>> > the
>> > server is a very good box and doesn't do much on it. It also has 6gb
>> > RAM
>> > with
>> > 2gb each for 2 instances and 2 gb for Windows. 2 Xeon procs at 2.4Ghz
>> > hyper
>> > threaded.
>> > It is on Raid 5 and all the files are located on 1 drive. I know this
>> > is
>> > the
>> > worst practice but this is a DEV box and not much is happening on it.
>> > There
>> > is Replication going from instance 1 on the machine to instance2 on the
>> > machine. But, still this should not happen. Someone Please help...
>>|||See Andrew's reply. Also, post the numbers you get for the read and write
queue lengths.
--
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada tom@.cips.ca
www.pinpub.com
"Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DD9DE915-894E-4723-ADA7-BDFA25491DBE@.microsoft.com...
>I understand these problems and yes, I had written it wrong. It's a counter
> an dis not measured in percent. The only reason i posted this question
> here
> is because it should not be so high even with all the existing WORST
> practices followed. But, I didn't have much of a choice since it's a dev
> box
> and not much s going on with this server here which is why the Avg disk
> queue
> length should not be high... Is there anything else i should do to find
> why
> it's so high?
> thank you in advance.
> "Tom Moreau" wrote:
>> Disk queue length is not measured in percent. Are you sure that's what
>> you
>> have? That said, the avg disk queue length should not be > 2x #of
>> spindles.
>> With all of your files on the same drive, it's not surprising that you
>> have
>> this problem. RAID5 compounds this, as well. Of course, replication
>> adds
>> to the burden, depending on the volume of data coming across, and this
>> will
>> be exacerbated by snapshot synchronization.
>> Can you purchase some disks and create a couple of RAID10 sets?
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Columnist, SQL Server Professional
>> Toronto, ON Canada tom@.cips.ca
>> www.pinpub.com
>> "Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:1EED4616-0587-484B-AB7F-AFDF03065F79@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hey guys. I've a problem with Average Disk queue length staying ta
>> > 100%.
>> > the
>> > server is a very good box and doesn't do much on it. It also has 6gb
>> > RAM
>> > with
>> > 2gb each for 2 instances and 2 gb for Windows. 2 Xeon procs at 2.4Ghz
>> > hyper
>> > threaded.
>> > It is on Raid 5 and all the files are located on 1 drive. I know this
>> > is
>> > the
>> > worst practice but this is a DEV box and not much is happening on it.
>> > There
>> > is Replication going from instance 1 on the machine to instance2 on the
>> > machine. But, still this should not happen. Someone Please help...
>>

Average Disk Queue Length

Hey guys. I've a problem with Average Disk queue length staying ta 100%. the
server is a very good box and doesn't do much on it. It also has 6gb RAM with
2gb each for 2 instances and 2 gb for Windows. 2 Xeon procs at 2.4Ghz hyper
threaded.
It is on Raid 5 and all the files are located on 1 drive. I know this is the
worst practice but this is a DEV box and not much is happening on it. There
is Replication going from instance 1 on the machine to instance2 on the
machine. But, still this should not happen. Someone Please help...
Disk Queue counters are not a percentage they are a number. So either it is
not the Avg Disk Queue counter or you are misinterpreting it. Have a look
at this:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...perftuning.asp
Performance WP's
http://www.swynk.com/friends/vandenberg/perfmonitor.asp Perfmon counters
http://www.sql-server-performance.co...ance_audit.asp
Hardware Performance CheckList
http://www.sql-server-performance.co...mance_tips.asp
SQL 2000 Performance tuning tips
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=q224587 Troubleshooting App
Performance
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...rfmon_24u1.asp
Disk Monitoring
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1EED4616-0587-484B-AB7F-AFDF03065F79@.microsoft.com...
> Hey guys. I've a problem with Average Disk queue length staying ta 100%.
> the
> server is a very good box and doesn't do much on it. It also has 6gb RAM
> with
> 2gb each for 2 instances and 2 gb for Windows. 2 Xeon procs at 2.4Ghz
> hyper
> threaded.
> It is on Raid 5 and all the files are located on 1 drive. I know this is
> the
> worst practice but this is a DEV box and not much is happening on it.
> There
> is Replication going from instance 1 on the machine to instance2 on the
> machine. But, still this should not happen. Someone Please help...
|||Disk queue length is not measured in percent. Are you sure that's what you
have? That said, the avg disk queue length should not be > 2x #of spindles.
With all of your files on the same drive, it's not surprising that you have
this problem. RAID5 compounds this, as well. Of course, replication adds
to the burden, depending on the volume of data coming across, and this will
be exacerbated by snapshot synchronization.
Can you purchase some disks and create a couple of RAID10 sets?
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada tom@.cips.ca
www.pinpub.com
"Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1EED4616-0587-484B-AB7F-AFDF03065F79@.microsoft.com...
> Hey guys. I've a problem with Average Disk queue length staying ta 100%.
> the
> server is a very good box and doesn't do much on it. It also has 6gb RAM
> with
> 2gb each for 2 instances and 2 gb for Windows. 2 Xeon procs at 2.4Ghz
> hyper
> threaded.
> It is on Raid 5 and all the files are located on 1 drive. I know this is
> the
> worst practice but this is a DEV box and not much is happening on it.
> There
> is Replication going from instance 1 on the machine to instance2 on the
> machine. But, still this should not happen. Someone Please help...
|||I understand these problems and yes, I had written it wrong. It's a counter
an dis not measured in percent. The only reason i posted this question here
is because it should not be so high even with all the existing WORST
practices followed. But, I didn't have much of a choice since it's a dev box
and not much s going on with this server here which is why the Avg disk queue
length should not be high... Is there anything else i should do to find why
it's so high?
thank you in advance.
"Tom Moreau" wrote:

> Disk queue length is not measured in percent. Are you sure that's what you
> have? That said, the avg disk queue length should not be > 2x #of spindles.
> With all of your files on the same drive, it's not surprising that you have
> this problem. RAID5 compounds this, as well. Of course, replication adds
> to the burden, depending on the volume of data coming across, and this will
> be exacerbated by snapshot synchronization.
> Can you purchase some disks and create a couple of RAID10 sets?
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
> SQL Server MVP
> Columnist, SQL Server Professional
> Toronto, ON Canada tom@.cips.ca
> www.pinpub.com
> "Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:1EED4616-0587-484B-AB7F-AFDF03065F79@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Maybe these will help:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...perftuning.asp
Performance WP's
http://www.swynk.com/friends/vandenberg/perfmonitor.asp Perfmon counters
http://www.sql-server-performance.co...ance_audit.asp
Hardware Performance CheckList
http://www.sql-server-performance.co...mance_tips.asp
SQL 2000 Performance tuning tips
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=q224587 Troubleshooting App
Performance
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...rfmon_24u1.asp
Disk Monitoring
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DD9DE915-894E-4723-ADA7-BDFA25491DBE@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
>I understand these problems and yes, I had written it wrong. It's a counter
> an dis not measured in percent. The only reason i posted this question
> here
> is because it should not be so high even with all the existing WORST
> practices followed. But, I didn't have much of a choice since it's a dev
> box
> and not much s going on with this server here which is why the Avg disk
> queue
> length should not be high... Is there anything else i should do to find
> why
> it's so high?
> thank you in advance.
> "Tom Moreau" wrote:
|||See Andrew's reply. Also, post the numbers you get for the read and write
queue lengths.
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada tom@.cips.ca
www.pinpub.com
"Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DD9DE915-894E-4723-ADA7-BDFA25491DBE@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
>I understand these problems and yes, I had written it wrong. It's a counter
> an dis not measured in percent. The only reason i posted this question
> here
> is because it should not be so high even with all the existing WORST
> practices followed. But, I didn't have much of a choice since it's a dev
> box
> and not much s going on with this server here which is why the Avg disk
> queue
> length should not be high... Is there anything else i should do to find
> why
> it's so high?
> thank you in advance.
> "Tom Moreau" wrote:

Average Disk Queue Length

Hey guys. I've a problem with Average Disk queue length staying ta 100%. the
server is a very good box and doesn't do much on it. It also has 6gb RAM wit
h
2gb each for 2 instances and 2 gb for Windows. 2 Xeon procs at 2.4Ghz hyper
threaded.
It is on Raid 5 and all the files are located on 1 drive. I know this is the
worst practice but this is a DEV box and not much is happening on it. There
is Replication going from instance 1 on the machine to instance2 on the
machine. But, still this should not happen. Someone Please help...Disk Queue counters are not a percentage they are a number. So either it is
not the Avg Disk Queue counter or you are misinterpreting it. Have a look
at this:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../perftuning.asp
Performance WP's
http://www.swynk.com/friends/vandenberg/perfmonitor.asp Perfmon counters
http://www.sql-server-performance.c...mance_audit.asp
Hardware Performance CheckList
http://www.sql-server-performance.c...rmance_tips.asp
SQL 2000 Performance tuning tips
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=q224587 Troubleshooting App
Performance
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d.../>
on_24u1.asp
Disk Monitoring
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1EED4616-0587-484B-AB7F-AFDF03065F79@.microsoft.com...
> Hey guys. I've a problem with Average Disk queue length staying ta 100%.
> the
> server is a very good box and doesn't do much on it. It also has 6gb RAM
> with
> 2gb each for 2 instances and 2 gb for Windows. 2 Xeon procs at 2.4Ghz
> hyper
> threaded.
> It is on Raid 5 and all the files are located on 1 drive. I know this is
> the
> worst practice but this is a DEV box and not much is happening on it.
> There
> is Replication going from instance 1 on the machine to instance2 on the
> machine. But, still this should not happen. Someone Please help...|||Disk queue length is not measured in percent. Are you sure that's what you
have? That said, the avg disk queue length should not be > 2x #of spindles.
With all of your files on the same drive, it's not surprising that you have
this problem. RAID5 compounds this, as well. Of course, replication adds
to the burden, depending on the volume of data coming across, and this will
be exacerbated by snapshot synchronization.
Can you purchase some disks and create a couple of RAID10 sets?
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada tom@.cips.ca
www.pinpub.com
"Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1EED4616-0587-484B-AB7F-AFDF03065F79@.microsoft.com...
> Hey guys. I've a problem with Average Disk queue length staying ta 100%.
> the
> server is a very good box and doesn't do much on it. It also has 6gb RAM
> with
> 2gb each for 2 instances and 2 gb for Windows. 2 Xeon procs at 2.4Ghz
> hyper
> threaded.
> It is on Raid 5 and all the files are located on 1 drive. I know this is
> the
> worst practice but this is a DEV box and not much is happening on it.
> There
> is Replication going from instance 1 on the machine to instance2 on the
> machine. But, still this should not happen. Someone Please help...|||I understand these problems and yes, I had written it wrong. It's a counter
an dis not measured in percent. The only reason i posted this question here
is because it should not be so high even with all the existing WORST
practices followed. But, I didn't have much of a choice since it's a dev box
and not much s going on with this server here which is why the Avg disk queu
e
length should not be high... Is there anything else i should do to find why
it's so high?
thank you in advance.
"Tom Moreau" wrote:

> Disk queue length is not measured in percent. Are you sure that's what yo
u
> have? That said, the avg disk queue length should not be > 2x #of spindle
s.
> With all of your files on the same drive, it's not surprising that you hav
e
> this problem. RAID5 compounds this, as well. Of course, replication adds
> to the burden, depending on the volume of data coming across, and this wil
l
> be exacerbated by snapshot synchronization.
> Can you purchase some disks and create a couple of RAID10 sets?
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
> SQL Server MVP
> Columnist, SQL Server Professional
> Toronto, ON Canada tom@.cips.ca
> www.pinpub.com
> "Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:1EED4616-0587-484B-AB7F-AFDF03065F79@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||Maybe these will help:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../perftuning.asp
Performance WP's
http://www.swynk.com/friends/vandenberg/perfmonitor.asp Perfmon counters
http://www.sql-server-performance.c...mance_audit.asp
Hardware Performance CheckList
http://www.sql-server-performance.c...rmance_tips.asp
SQL 2000 Performance tuning tips
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=q224587 Troubleshooting App
Performance
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d.../>
on_24u1.asp
Disk Monitoring
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DD9DE915-894E-4723-ADA7-BDFA25491DBE@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
>I understand these problems and yes, I had written it wrong. It's a counter
> an dis not measured in percent. The only reason i posted this question
> here
> is because it should not be so high even with all the existing WORST
> practices followed. But, I didn't have much of a choice since it's a dev
> box
> and not much s going on with this server here which is why the Avg disk
> queue
> length should not be high... Is there anything else i should do to find
> why
> it's so high?
> thank you in advance.
> "Tom Moreau" wrote:
>|||See Andrew's reply. Also, post the numbers you get for the read and write
queue lengths.
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada tom@.cips.ca
www.pinpub.com
"Tejas Parikh" <TejasParikh@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DD9DE915-894E-4723-ADA7-BDFA25491DBE@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
>I understand these problems and yes, I had written it wrong. It's a counter
> an dis not measured in percent. The only reason i posted this question
> here
> is because it should not be so high even with all the existing WORST
> practices followed. But, I didn't have much of a choice since it's a dev
> box
> and not much s going on with this server here which is why the Avg disk
> queue
> length should not be high... Is there anything else i should do to find
> why
> it's so high?
> thank you in advance.
> "Tom Moreau" wrote:
>