user and system DB on system drive

Do any of you store your system and user databases on your servers system drive, or do you store them on non system drives? Are there any risks in keeping them on the system drive, or any benefits in moving them to non system drives?
LVL 3
pma111Asked:
Who is Participating?
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

Steve WalesSenior Database AdministratorCommented:
By default, Microsoft puts the system databases on the C: drive.

The major risk is that if something happens where one of the databases starts growing uncontrollably (which shouldn't happen with a system database but you never now) and the OS drive fills, then Windows grinds to a halt.

If tempdb is on your OS drive and your app or developers create huge temp tables frequently, that could cause it too.

Microsoft provides this note for moving system databases: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms345408.aspx
0

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
Rich WeisslerProfessional Troublemaker^h^h^h^h^hshooterCommented:
On small servers, especially single purpose / express edition servers... I sometimes only have a single volume/drive to work with.

On slightly larger servers, the hardware guys will split out a system drive from the data drive, but it uses the same physical RAID set.  At that point, I believe I have a disadvantage of separating anything, and I put all the databases on the data drive.  (If the data drive fills up, that's bad, but it doesn't prevent the system from patching or cause operating system problems.)

On larger systems, I usually have a system volume, which will only have the database executables.  On different volumes I have the (1) database files, (2) transaction log files, and (3) [slowest disks] backup files.  But all that only applies when the different disks aren't on common physical disks... usually when I have volumes on the SAN.  If I had even large systems still, I'd split off the tempdb to it's own volume as well.

In my environment, the benefit to splitting the databases to a non-system volume is (hopefully) decreased I/O contention.  (Page file, OS Logs, and patching operations are written to the system volume.  All the database stuff should only have to contend with I/O traffic on it's own set of disks.)
0
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Microsoft SQL Server

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.

Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.