DB Files & Perf question

Hello. Say you have a server with 2 drives available
beyond the C: drive.. like E: and F: It's usually said
that you should separate you DATA and LOG files on
separate drives. But how about if you have 20-40
databases and you put all DATA on one drive and all LOG
files on the other drive? Isn't there still a lot of
clashing between all the different log files on the same
drive? If the point of separating the file types across
drives is so disk performance isn't jumping all around for
the continual LOG write, then if you have multiple LOG
files on a drive, isn't that at least as bad for
performance? then, is it maybe better to put some of
those LOG files on teh DATA file drive? Probably best to
get more physical drives, but when you have that many
databases on teh same server, does it really matter to
split 30 LOG files to their own drive? Thanks, BruceBruce
If you have 20 - 40 databases, but you only have 3 drives available, that su
ggests that the databases will not be very large. If they are not very large
, they might not have a lot of read activity. So there will still be a benef
it.
In essence I think you have a point that the more databses you have (and the
more data), the less benefit you will see from transaction logs on their ow
n drive. However unless they are all performing updates all the time, you sh
ould still see some benefit