• RSS
  • Twitter
  • FaceBook

Exchange Server Forums

Forums | Register | Login | My Profile | Inbox | RSS RSS icon | My Subscription | My Forums | Address Book | Member List | Search | FAQ | Ticket List | Log Out

Why the 32kb page size?

Users viewing this topic: none

Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Microsoft Exchange 2010] >> General >> Why the 32kb page size? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Why the 32kb page size? - 3.May2010 3:03:14 PM   
fergusstrachan

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 27.Nov.2009
Status: offline
There are a lot of articles/talk about 32kb page size in Exchange 2010 and the IO improvements realised by the increase, but I wonder if anyone can tell me why it has been increased only now?

One thought would be that, surely if it's so much better, why didn't they do it in, say, Exchange 2003?

Maybe it's down to improvements/changes in hard disk technology, maybe limitations of the software or even, god forbid, something they just didn't think of until now?! :-)

Does anyone have a good explanation?

Ferg.
Post #: 1
RE: Why the 32kb page size? - 4.May2010 4:18:14 AM   
ismail.mohammed

 

Posts: 3018
Joined: 9.May2007
From: India
Status: offline
hi mate,

As per my understanding - simple layman language what i understand...

Exchange 2003 - 4kb per page
Exchange 2007 - 8 kb per page
Exchange 2010 - 32 kb per page

Now imagine the data is written in the page. if you see exchange 2003 writing process will comparatively slow as compare to 2007 and 2010 it is just because it has to cover more page compare the new version. example let say 32 kb of mail written in the database it will basically take 8 pages were the data load will be high and I/o performance will be more compare to the new version.

(in reply to fergusstrachan)
Post #: 2
RE: Why the 32kb page size? - 4.May2010 5:31:13 AM   
fergusstrachan

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 27.Nov.2009
Status: offline
Hi Ismail, thanks for the reply.

Maybe I wasn't clear enough, but it wasn't really my point.
I understand that using 32kb is faster and also why, but I am trying to find out why MS didn't implement the 32kb page size in 2007 or even 2003.

As you say, the 4kb page size means relatively slow performance on 2003, so (coming from the point of almost ignorance) it would have made sense to introduce the 32kb page size a long time ago.

Ferg.

(in reply to ismail.mohammed)
Post #: 3
RE: Why the 32kb page size? - 4.May2010 6:08:50 AM   
ismail.mohammed

 

Posts: 3018
Joined: 9.May2007
From: India
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fergusstrachan

Hi Ismail, thanks for the reply.

Maybe I wasn't clear enough, but it wasn't really my point.
I understand that using 32kb is faster and also why, but I am trying to find out why MS didn't implement the 32kb page size in 2007 or even 2003.

Ans : For this i can tell you only one answer, during past days we had exchange 5.5 and 2000, if you see that the standard edition was just 16 GB till we had exchange 2003 with sp2. That time MS noticed that 16 GB would be sufficient but if you see todays technology level 1 TB also seems to be less so they have introduced unlimited disk capacity in Exchange 2007 and exchange 2010 std. edition. so like this during that time 4kb was good performance and moreover we were using 32-bit. now we have 64-bit for which they have increased the speed.

As you say, the 4kb page size means relatively slow performance on 2003, so (coming from the point of almost ignorance) it would have made sense to introduce the 32kb page size a long time ago.

Ans: If you think of year 2000 and 2003 4 kb was a good speed. now based on the input and feedback MS improved the size so that you can get better performance.

Ferg.

(in reply to fergusstrachan)
Post #: 4
RE: Why the 32kb page size? - 4.May2010 10:55:01 AM   
Odedeal@Gmail.com

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 27.Feb.2010
Status: offline
The simple reason would be the 32Bit and 64Bit architecture, the logical limits are doubled from 32bit environment to 64bit environment that is why you see in general number are getting doubled , from 32bit platform to 64Platform.

One thing I guess is great to see or understand, the Exchange 2010 is not a simple upgrade compared to Exchange 2007, it is the *best* and most advance version of messaging application. There are so many changes in Exchange 2010, including message table structure changes allowed more sequential I/O hence changes store schema made the E210 is completely different than other version. Architectural changes also allowed cheaper mailbox cost in exchange 2010.


Now back to your question, why these changes were not implemented on 2003? (-: as you can see anything in life has its own sequential balance and good things take time to occur. Being very honest I think the competition and loosing market fear made Exchange to make such huge jumps from E07 to E210.

If you really think about it when someone sells mailbox for 4$ it is very difficult to sell MB for 17$. E210 mailbox cost is less than 4 bucks not with all these incredible futures.

So I would say the major changes came with fast changing business requirements such as cloud computing.
Cheers
Ocd

< Message edited by Odedeal@Gmail.com -- 4.May2010 10:57:22 AM >


_____________________________

Oz Casey, Dedeal
MCITP (EMA), MCITP (SA)
MCSE 2003, M+, S+, MCDST
Security+, Project +, Server +
http://smtp25.blogspot.com/ (Blog
http://telnet25.spaces.live.com/ (Blog)
http://telnet25.wordpress.com/ (Blog)

(in reply to ismail.mohammed)
Post #: 5

Page:   [1] << Older Topic    Newer Topic >>
All Forums >> [Microsoft Exchange 2010] >> General >> Why the 32kb page size? Page: [1]
Jump to:

New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Follow TechGenix on Twitter