Random and Sequential Data Access

Comparing random versus sequential operations is one way of assessing application efficiency in terms of disk use. Accessing data sequentially is much faster than accessing it randomly because of the way in which the disk hardware works. The seek operation, which occurs when the ** disk head positions itself at the right ** disk cylinder to access data requested, takes more time than any other part of the I/O process. Because reading randomly involves a higher number of seek operations than does sequential reading, random reads deliver a lower rate of throughput. The same is true for random writing. You might find it useful to examine your workload to determine whether it accesses data randomly or sequentially. If you find disk access is predominantly random, you might want to pay particular attention to the activities being done and monitor for the emergence of a bottleneck.

For workloads of either random or sequential I/O, use drives with faster rotational speeds. For workloads that are predominantly random I/O, use a drive with faster seek time.

For workloads that have high I/O rates, consider using stripe sets because they add physical disks, increasing the system's ability to handle concurrent disk requests. Notice, however, that stripe sets enabled in software can cause an increase in consumption of the processor. Hardware-enabled RAID sets eliminate this impact on the processor but increase the consumption of processing cycles on the hardware RAID adapter.



Even when an application reads records sequentially, if the file is fragmented throughout the disk or disks, the I/O will not be sequential. If the disk-transfer rate on a sequential or mostly sequential read operation deteriorates over time, run Disk Defragmenter on the disk and test again. When fragmentation occurs, data is not organized in contiguous clusters on the disk. Fragmentation slows performance because back-and-forth head movement is slow.