<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Demand Technology FAQ &#187; Disk</title>
	<atom:link href="http://faq.demandtech.com/tag/disk-queue-length/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://faq.demandtech.com</link>
	<description>Help and Support for the Performance Sentry Product Line</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2010 19:33:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Is there a simple way to tune my Disks?</title>
		<link>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/11/20/is-there-a-simple-way-to-tune-my-disks/</link>
		<comments>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/11/20/is-there-a-simple-way-to-tune-my-disks/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:49:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Disk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disk Monitoring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disk Performance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://faq.demandtech.com/?p=158</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Absolutely!
You can simply follow the instructions on this White Paper:
SIMPLIFIED DISK TUNNING
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Absolutely!</p>
<p>You can simply follow the instructions on this White Paper:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.demandtech.com/Resources/Papers/Simplified%20disk%20tuning(large%20footprint).pdf">SIMPLIFIED DISK TUNNING</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/11/20/is-there-a-simple-way-to-tune-my-disks/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>“Have you ever wondered how to determine the logical disk size looking at Performance Monitor performance metrics?”</title>
		<link>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/11/09/%e2%80%9chave-you-ever-wondered-how-to-determine-the-logical-disk-size-looking-at-performance-monitor-performance-metrics%e2%80%9d/</link>
		<comments>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/11/09/%e2%80%9chave-you-ever-wondered-how-to-determine-the-logical-disk-size-looking-at-performance-monitor-performance-metrics%e2%80%9d/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 15:40:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Disk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NTSMF - Collection Service]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sentry Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows Performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disk Monitoring]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://faq.demandtech.com/?p=153</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It is easy, but requires some calculation.  First, look at the logical disk object and add the ‘’% Free Space” and “Free Megabytes” counters to the Perfmon display.  Then switch to ‘Report View’. Figure 1.
 
 Figure 1.
 Simply divide Free Megabytes by Free Space (remember this is a percentage, so the displayed value must be divided by [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is easy, but requires some calculation.  First, look at the logical disk object and add the ‘’% Free Space” and “Free Megabytes” counters to the Perfmon display.  Then switch to ‘Report View’. Figure 1.</p>
<p> <img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-154" title="Disksize1" src="http://faq.demandtech.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Disksize1.jpg" alt="Disksize1" width="800" height="600" /></p>
<p> Figure 1.</p>
<p> Simply divide Free Megabytes by Free Space (remember this is a percentage, so the displayed value must be divided by 100 to get the true numeric value.  In the above example, the calculation will be 5,541 / .02338 = 236,997.43.  So the disk size is 236,997MB or (dividing by 1024) 231.44GB.  This logical drive is 231GB!</p>
<p> However, customers using Performance Sentry get this information automatically by collecting ‘base’ or ‘denominator’ counters.</p>
<p> Some compound counters contain a Denominator/Base value that is used in calculating the current counter value. By default Performance Sentry writes the Denominator/Base value in the SMF file, unless the user chooses not to. This parameter is found in Performance Sentry Administration under the “Parameter Administration” pane under “Write Denominator Counters? (Y/N)”. See Figure 2.</p>
<p> <img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-155" title="Disksize2" src="http://faq.demandtech.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Disksize2.jpg" alt="Disksize2" width="498" height="648" /></p>
<p> Figure 2.</p>
<p> A good example of a compound counter that uses a denominator/base value is the Logical Disk<strong>/% Free Space</strong> counter. This counter is a PERF_RAW_FRACTION counter type. The counter type defines a compound structure supplying the numerator (Free Megabytes) and denominator/base (Free Space Base).</p>
<p> Denominator/Base counters are identified by a unique counter name, constructed by appending the characters “Base” to the counter name. The counter named <strong>% Free Space Base </strong>is the denominator counter associated with the <strong>% Free Space </strong>counter.</p>
<p> So the calculation formula is defined as:</p>
<p> <strong>% Free Space = Free Megabytes / % Free Space Base (Total Available Mbytes in System)</strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong>The Collection Service is responsible for calculating the fraction, which is the value, reported for the counter each interval. The Write Denominator Counters option instructs the Collection Service to supply the denominator value used in the calculation, too, which is otherwise a null value. In this case, the denominator value is a useful metric to collect because it supplies the capacity of the Logical Disk in bytes.</p>
<p> The Summarization Utility of Performance Sentry makes use of the associated Denominator counters to summarize several Hit % counters in the Cache object correctly over the summarization interval. If denominator values for these PERF_SAMPLE_FRACTION counters are present, the Summarization Utility correctly produces the weighted average Hit % for the interval. If denominator values are not present; the Summarization Utility calculates the simple arithmetic mean, which is subject to error.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/11/09/%e2%80%9chave-you-ever-wondered-how-to-determine-the-logical-disk-size-looking-at-performance-monitor-performance-metrics%e2%80%9d/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I do not see a drive letter for some of my logical disks. Instead, I see something that looks like HarddiskDmVolumes\systemnameDg0\Volume1 instead. What is that all about?</title>
		<link>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/10/15/i-do-not-see-a-drive-letter-for-some-of-my-logical-disks-instead-i-see-something-that-looks-like-harddiskdmvolumessystemnamedg0volume1-instead-what-is-that-all-about-2/</link>
		<comments>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/10/15/i-do-not-see-a-drive-letter-for-some-of-my-logical-disks-instead-i-see-something-that-looks-like-harddiskdmvolumessystemnamedg0volume1-instead-what-is-that-all-about-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:13:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Disk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disk Monitoring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disk Performance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://faq.demandtech.com/?p=128</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Logical disk information containing &#8220;HarddiskVolume&#8230;&#8221; usually indicates an unformatted partition. Knowledge Base article (Q260834) describes the &#8216;HarddiskVolume&#8217; label as a volume that has been mounted, but not assigned a drive letter. See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q260834 
There is another MS KB entry that specfically discusses &#8220;HarddiskDmVolumes&#8221; names. See
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=274311. This KB article explains that after you convert a hard [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Logical disk information containing &#8220;HarddiskVolume&#8230;&#8221; usually indicates an unformatted partition. Knowledge Base article (Q260834) describes the &#8216;HarddiskVolume&#8217; label as a volume that has been mounted, but not assigned a drive letter. See <a href="http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q260834">http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q260834 </a></p>
<p>There is another MS KB entry that specfically discusses &#8220;HarddiskDmVolumes&#8221; names. See<br />
<a href="http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=274311">http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=274311</a>. This KB article explains that after you convert a hard disk from Basic to Dynamic, the volumes on that hard disk are not identified by their drive letter in System Monitor. Instead, volumes that are displayed in System Monitor in a form similar to the following:</p>
<p><strong>      HarddiskDmVolumes\MachineName\Volume#<br />
</strong><br />
You need to re-assign drive letters to dynamic disks after you convert them so that the drive letters are reported properly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/10/15/i-do-not-see-a-drive-letter-for-some-of-my-logical-disks-instead-i-see-something-that-looks-like-harddiskdmvolumessystemnamedg0volume1-instead-what-is-that-all-about-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why are the Logical Disk counters zero?</title>
		<link>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/10/15/why-are-the-logical-disk-counters-zero/</link>
		<comments>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/10/15/why-are-the-logical-disk-counters-zero/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:10:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Disk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disk Monitoring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disk Performance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://faq.demandtech.com/?p=126</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This will occur on Windows 2000 if you have never issued the diskperf -yv command to enable the Logical Disk measurements. When diskperf is not active, the corresponding Counters in System Monitor are zero. In Windows 2000, only the Physical Disk counters are enabled by default (this is equivalent to issuing the diskperf -yd command.)
In [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This will occur on Windows 2000 if you have never issued the diskperf -yv command to enable the Logical Disk measurements. When diskperf is not active, the corresponding Counters in System Monitor are zero. In Windows 2000, only the Physical Disk counters are enabled by default (this is equivalent to issuing the diskperf -yd command.)</p>
<p>In Windows NT, neither Logical or Physical Disk counters are enabled by default. To enable both sets of Disk counters, issue the diskperf -y command in NT 4.0. You must reboot the system in both Windows 2000 and NT 4.0 in order to activate the new diskperf settings.</p>
<p>Both Logical and Physical disk performance statistics are turned on by default beginning with Windows Server 2003.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/10/15/why-are-the-logical-disk-counters-zero/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How was the problem with the % Disk Time Counter fixed in Windows 2000?</title>
		<link>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/10/15/how-was-the-problem-with-the-disk-time-counter-fixed-in-windows-2000/</link>
		<comments>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/10/15/how-was-the-problem-with-the-disk-time-counter-fixed-in-windows-2000/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:06:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Disk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disk Monitoring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disk Performance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://faq.demandtech.com/?p=124</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Maybe not fixed exactly, but ultimately, this problem is addressed quite nicely in Win2K (although it would arguably be better had the older % Disk Time Counters – now obsolete –not been retained).
Windows 2000 adds a new Counter to the Logical and Physical Disk Objects called % Idle Time. Disk idle time accumulates in diskperf [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe not fixed exactly, but ultimately, this problem <em>is</em> addressed quite nicely in Win2K (although it would arguably be better had the older <strong>% Disk Time</strong> Counters – now obsolete –not been retained).</p>
<p>Windows 2000 adds a new Counter to the Logical and Physical Disk Objects called <strong>% Idle Time</strong>. Disk idle time accumulates in <span style="font-family: Courier;">diskperf</span> when there are no outstanding requests for a volume.</p>
<p>Having a measure of disk idle time permits you to calculate <strong><em>% Disk busy</em></strong> = 100 &#8211; <strong>% Idle Time</strong>, which is a valid measure of disk utilization</p>
<p>Then you can calculate <strong><em>Disk Service time</em></strong> = <strong><em>% Disk busy</em></strong> / <strong>Disk transfers/sec.</strong> This is an application of the Utilization Law, namely:</p>
<p><em>u = service time * arrival rate</em></p>
<p>Finally, calculate <strong><em>Disk Queue time</em></strong> = <strong>Avg. Disk secs/transfer</strong> &#8211; <strong><em>Disk service time</em></strong>, which follows from the definition of <em>response time = service time + queue time</em>.</p>
<p>So measuring Logical and Physical Disk <strong>% Idle Time</strong> solves a lot of problems. It allows us to calculate disk utilization and derive both disk service time and queue time measurements for disks in Windows 2000.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/10/15/how-was-the-problem-with-the-disk-time-counter-fixed-in-windows-2000/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Logical/Physical Disk % Disk Time counters look wrong. What gives?</title>
		<link>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/10/15/the-logicalphysical-disk-disk-time-counters-look-wrong-what-gives/</link>
		<comments>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/10/15/the-logicalphysical-disk-disk-time-counters-look-wrong-what-gives/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:02:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Disk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disk Monitoring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disk Performance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://faq.demandtech.com/?p=122</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The % Disk Time counters are capped in System Monitor at 100% because it would be confusing to report disk utilization &#62; 100%. This occurs because the % Disk Time counters do not actually measure disk utilization. The Explain text that implies that it does represent disk utilization is very misleading.
What the Logical Disk and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <strong>% Disk Time</strong> counters are capped in System Monitor at 100% because it would be confusing to report disk utilization &gt; 100%. This occurs because the <strong>% Disk Time</strong> counters do not actually measure disk utilization. The Explain text that implies that it does represent disk utilization is very misleading.</p>
<p>What the Logical Disk and Physical Disk <strong>% Disk Time</strong> counters actually do measure is a little complicated to explain.</p>
<p>The <strong>%Disk Time</strong> Counter is not measured directly. It is a value derived by the diskperf filter driver that provides disk performance statistics. diskperf is a layer of software sitting in the disk driver stack. As I/O Request packets (IRPs) pass through this layer, diskperf keeps track of the time I/Os start and the time they finish. On the way to the device, diskperf records a timestamp for the IRP. On the way back from the device, the completion time is recorded. The difference is the duration of the I/O request. Averaged over the collection interval, this becomes the <strong>Avg. Disk sec/Transfer</strong>, a direct measure of disk response time from the point of view of the device driver. diskperf also maintains byte counts and separate Counters for Reads and Writes, at both the Logical and Physical Disk level. (This allows <strong>Avg. Disk sec/Transfer </strong>to be broken out into Reads and Writes).</p>
<p>The <strong>Avg. Disk sec/Transfer</strong> measurement reported is based on the complete round trip time of a request. Strictly speaking, it is a direct measure of disk <em>response time </em>– which means it includes <em>queue time</em>. Queue time is time spent waiting for the device because it is busy with another request or waiting for the SCSI bus to the device because it is busy.</p>
<p><strong>% Disk Time</strong> is a value derived by diskperf from the sum of all IRP round trip times (<strong>Avg.Disk sec/Transfer)</strong> times <strong>Disk Transfers/sec</strong>, divided by duration, essentially:</p>
<p> </p>
<p align="center"><em>% Disk Time = Avg Disk sec/Transfer * Disk Transfers/sec</em></p>
<p> </p>
<p>which is a calculation (subject to capping when it exceeds 100%!) that you can verify easily enough for yourself.</p>
<p>Because the <strong>Avg. Disk sec/Transfer</strong> that diskperf measures includes disk queuing, <strong>% Disk Time</strong> can grow greater than 100% if there is significant disk queuing (at either the Physical or Logical Disk level). The Explain text in the official documentation suggests that this product of <strong>Avg. Disk sec/Transfer </strong>and <strong>Disk Transfers/sec</strong> measures % Disk busy.<em> </em>If (big if) IRP round trip time represented service time only, then the <strong>% Disk Time</strong> calculation would correspond to disk utilization. But <strong>Avg. Disk sec/Transfer</strong> includes queue time, so the formula used really calculates something entirely different.</p>
<p>The formula used in the calculation to derive <strong>% Disk Time</strong> corresponds to Little&#8217;s Law, a well-known equivalence relation that shows the number of requests in the system as a function of the arrival rate and service time. According to Little&#8217;s Law, <strong>Avg Disk sec/Transfer </strong>* <strong>Disk transfers/sec</strong> properly yields the average number of requests in the system, more formally known as the <em>average Queue length</em>. The average Queue length value calculated in this fashion includes both IRPs queued for service and actually in service.</p>
<p>A direct measure of disk response time like <strong>Avg. Disk sec/Transfer</strong> is a useful metric. Since people tend to buy disk hardware based on a service time expectation, it is unfortunate that there is no way to break out disk service time and the queue time separately in NT 4.0. (The situation is greatly improved in Windows 2000, however.) Given the way diskperf hooks into the I/O driver stack, the software RAID functions associated with Ftdisk, and SCSI disks that support command tag queuing, one could argue this the only feasible way to do things in the Windows 2000 architecture. The problem of interpretation arises because of the misleading Explain text and the arbitrary (and surprising) use of capping.</p>
<p>Microsoft&#8217;s fix to the problem beginning in NT 4.0 is a different version of the Counter that is not capped. This is <strong>Avg. Disk Queue Length</strong>. Basically, this is the same field as <strong>% Disk Time</strong> without capping and without being printed as a percent.</p>
<p>For example, if <strong>% Disk Time</strong> is 78.3%, <strong>Ave Disk Queue Length</strong> is 0.783. When <strong>% Disk Time</strong> is equal to 100%, then <strong>Ave Disk Queue Length</strong> shows the actual value before capping. We recently had a customer reporting values like 2.63 in this field. That&#8217;s a busy disk! The interpretation of this Counter is the average number of disk requests that are active and queued – the average Queue Length.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/10/15/the-logicalphysical-disk-disk-time-counters-look-wrong-what-gives/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I am concerned about the overhead of the diskperf measurements. What does this feature cost?</title>
		<link>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/09/29/i-am-concerned-about-the-overhead-of-the-diskperf-measurements-what-does-this-feature-cost/</link>
		<comments>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/09/29/i-am-concerned-about-the-overhead-of-the-diskperf-measurements-what-does-this-feature-cost/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:55:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Disk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disk Monitoring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[diskperf]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://faq.demandtech.com/?p=65</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There is very little overhead involved with the collection of diskperf measurements.  We strongly recommend that you enable all disk performance data collection on any system where you care about performance.
Even if you don’t care that much about performance, you should turn on Logical Disk reporting at a minimum. The Logical Disk Object contains two [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is very little overhead involved with the collection of diskperf measurements.  We strongly recommend that you enable all disk performance data collection on any system where you care about performance.</p>
<p>Even if you don’t care that much about performance, you should turn on Logical Disk reporting at a minimum. The Logical Disk Object contains two Counters, <strong>Free Megabytes</strong> and <strong>% Free Space</strong>, that will alert you in advance to potential out-of-disk space conditions.</p>
<p>The diskperf measurement layer does add some code to the I/O Manager stack, so there is added latency associated with each I/O request that accesses a physical disk when measurement is turned on. However, the overhead of running the diskperf measurement layer, even twice on Windows 2000 machines, is trivial. In a benchmark environment where a 550 MHz 4-way Windows 2000 Server was handling 40,000 I/Os per second, enabling the diskperf measurements reduced its I/O capacity by about 5% to 38,000 I/Os per second. In that environment, we estimated that the diskperf measurement layer added about 3-4 microseconds to the I/O Manager path length for each I/O operation. (On a faster processor, the delay is proportionally less.) For a disk I/O request that you would normally expect to require a minimum of 3-5 milliseconds, this additional latency is hardly noticeable.</p>
<p>Besides, if you do not have disk performance statistics enabled and a performance problem occurs that happens to be disk-related (and many are), you won’t be able to gather data about the problem because loading the diskperf measurement layer requires a reboot!</p>
<p>In our view, you can only justify turning off the disk performance stats in a benchmark environment where you are attempting to wring out the absolute highest performance level from your hardware configuration. Of course, you will need to have the diskperf measurements enabled initially to figure out how to optimize the configuration in the first place. It is standard practice to disable disk performance monitoring prior to making your final measurement runs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/09/29/i-am-concerned-about-the-overhead-of-the-diskperf-measurements-what-does-this-feature-cost/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I see a value of 2.63 in the Ave Disk Queue Length Counter field. How should I interpret this value?</title>
		<link>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/09/29/i-see-a-value-of-2-63-in-the-ave-disk-queue-length-counter-field-how-should-i-interpret-this-value/</link>
		<comments>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/09/29/i-see-a-value-of-2-63-in-the-ave-disk-queue-length-counter-field-how-should-i-interpret-this-value/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:52:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Disk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Performance Metrics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Performance Sentry]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://faq.demandtech.com/?p=63</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Ave Disk Queue Length Counter is derived from the product of Avg.Disk sec/Transfer) times Disk Transfers/sec, the average response of the device times the I/O rate. This corresponds to a well-known theorem of Queuing Theory called Little’s Law, which states:
N = l * Sr
where N is the number of outstanding requests in the system, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <strong>Ave Disk Queue Length</strong> Counter is derived from the product of <strong>Avg.Disk sec/Transfer)</strong> times <strong>Disk Transfers/sec</strong>, the average response of the device times the I/O rate. This corresponds to a well-known theorem of Queuing Theory called Little’s Law, which states:</p>
<p align="center"><em>N = l * S<sub>r</sub></em></p>
<p>where <em>N</em> is the number of outstanding requests in the system, <em>l</em> is the <em>arrival rate</em> of requests, and<em> S<sub>r</sub></em> is the response time. So the <strong>Ave Disk Queue Length</strong> Counter is an estimate of the number of outstanding request to the (Logical or Physical) disk. This includes any requests that are currently in service at the device, plus any that requests that are waiting for service. If requests are currently waiting for the device <em>inside the SCSI device driver layer</em> of software below the diskperf filter driver, the <strong>Current Disk Queue Length</strong> Counter will have a value greater than 0. If requests are queued in the hardware, which is usual for SCSI disks and RAID controllers, the <strong>Current Disk Queue Length</strong> Counter will show a value of 0, even though requests are queued.</p>
<p>Since the <strong>Ave Disk Queue Length</strong> Counter value is a derived value, not a direct measurement, you do need to be careful how you interpret it. Little’s Law is a very general result that is often used in the field of computer measurement to derive a third result when the other two values are measured directly. However, Little’s Law does require an equilibrium assumption in order for it be valid. The equilibrium assumption is that the arrival rate equals the completion rate over the measurement interval. Otherwise, the calculation is meaningless. In practice, this means you should ignore the <strong>Ave Disk Queue Length</strong> Counter value for any interval where the <strong>Current Disk Queue Length</strong> Counter is not equal to the value of <strong>Current Disk Queue Length</strong> for the previous measurement interval.</p>
<p>Suppose, for example, the <strong>Ave Disk Queue Length</strong> Counter reads 10.3, and the <strong>Current Disk Queue Length</strong> Counter shows 4 requests in the disk queue at the end of the measurement interval. If the previous value of <strong>Current Disk Queue Length</strong> was 0, the equilibrium assumption necessary for Little’s Law does not hold. Since the number of arrivals is evidently greater than the number of completions during the interval, there is no valid interpretation for the value in the <strong>Ave Disk Queue Length</strong> Counter, and you should ignore the Counter value. However, if both the present measurement of the <strong>Current Disk Queue Length</strong> Counter and the previous value are equal, then it is safe to interpret the <strong>Ave Disk Queue Length</strong> Counter as the average number of outstanding I/O requests to the disk over the interval, including both requests currently in service and requests queued for service.</p>
<p>You also need to understand the ramifications of having a total disk round trip time measurement instead of a simple disk service time measure. Assuming M/M/1, a disk at 50% busy has one request waiting on average and disk response time is 2 * service time. This means that at 50% busy – assuming M/M/1 holds, an <strong>Ave Disk Queue Length</strong> value of 1.00 is expected. That means that any disk with an <strong>Ave Disk Queue Length</strong> value greater than 0.70 probably has a substantial amount of queue time associated with it. The exception of course is when M/M/1 does not hold, such as during a backup operation when there is only a single user of the disk. A single user of the disk can drive a disk to near 100% utilization without a queue!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://faq.demandtech.com/2009/09/29/i-see-a-value-of-2-63-in-the-ave-disk-queue-length-counter-field-how-should-i-interpret-this-value/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
