Will a C:\drive with 5% free space be slower than one with 25% free space?
I have a Hyper-V with two VM , one being Windows Essential and the other the RDS server which runs all the programs. It currently has 5% of free space left. I can add more free space. Would it be more efficient and run better if it has more free space?
Also, if you extend a hard drive, will that make any different to the backup you have prior to that?
Thanks.
Also, if you extend a hard drive, will that make any different to the backup you have prior to that?
Thanks.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Normally this would certainly be the case. But of course it depends on the size of the disk. For example if it is 100 TB in size, and you have 5% left, you would probably still have plenty of space left to work with. On the other hand, with a much smaller disk, 5% would cause a much bigger problem.
As for the backup, it just takes the time and space of the size of your backup.
As for the backup, it just takes the time and space of the size of your backup.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Shrinking disks is not simple at all. It mostly involves moving all data to a smaller disk ...
On the essential, add an additional disk based.
Migrate the shares data to it. This way you can better control, manage OS drive utilization without impacting performance as a fileshare use expands with time.
Migrate the shares data to it. This way you can better control, manage OS drive utilization without impacting performance as a fileshare use expands with time.
I think the best answer is "it depends". There are multiple disk operations, hardware considerations, and application considerations.
Yes, there are cases where a full disk won't perform as well as a less-full disk. But there are also many cases where it doesn't matter.
If the additional storage results in a higher volume of read/write activity, of course performance will be impacted. But if the disk is filling up and read/write volumes aren't changing, then it is possible that thoughput may not be impacted - or at least not perceptibly. If the disk is heavily fragmented, yes, write performance can suffer.
1) Read performance is not greatly influenced by % full, except on heavily fragmented single-disk magnetic disk volumes, but the issue there isn't really due to % full - it is due to the fragmentation.
2) Write performance for large allocations (as a percent of remaining space) may be influenced by fragmentation on single-volume magnetic disk, but that depends on a lot of factors: the fragmentation status of the volume, the use of multi-disk volumes like RAID arrays, the use of write-caching hardware such as disk drives and disk controllers, and the use of OS-level write caching.
3) Magnetic hard disks are more subject to write performance degradation due to fragmentation than SSD. So if the disk you are talking about is backed by SSD, %full doesn't have that much impact on performance (until you run out!).
4) Some operating systems, virtualization software, and storage systems have capabilities to perform automatic defragmentation of stored data. These capabilities minimize the impact of fragmentation, even with very full volumes.
But if you want a general guideline, then, yes, you can say that full disks may be slower than less full ones.
Yes, there are cases where a full disk won't perform as well as a less-full disk. But there are also many cases where it doesn't matter.
If the additional storage results in a higher volume of read/write activity, of course performance will be impacted. But if the disk is filling up and read/write volumes aren't changing, then it is possible that thoughput may not be impacted - or at least not perceptibly. If the disk is heavily fragmented, yes, write performance can suffer.
1) Read performance is not greatly influenced by % full, except on heavily fragmented single-disk magnetic disk volumes, but the issue there isn't really due to % full - it is due to the fragmentation.
2) Write performance for large allocations (as a percent of remaining space) may be influenced by fragmentation on single-volume magnetic disk, but that depends on a lot of factors: the fragmentation status of the volume, the use of multi-disk volumes like RAID arrays, the use of write-caching hardware such as disk drives and disk controllers, and the use of OS-level write caching.
3) Magnetic hard disks are more subject to write performance degradation due to fragmentation than SSD. So if the disk you are talking about is backed by SSD, %full doesn't have that much impact on performance (until you run out!).
4) Some operating systems, virtualization software, and storage systems have capabilities to perform automatic defragmentation of stored data. These capabilities minimize the impact of fragmentation, even with very full volumes.
But if you want a general guideline, then, yes, you can say that full disks may be slower than less full ones.
ASKER
So, this is a VM with Windows Server 2016 Standard. There is plenty of space that can be added. Of course, some of that space needs to be reserved for the other VM if necessary, and I believe it is more difficult to make shrink a volume than expand it.
Is there an optimal amount as far as percentage that is recommended?
Also, I know there are OS tools for defragmenting as well as 3rd party tools. Is it a good idea to defragment a server OS?