Server 2003 te disk performansını ölçme

PhysicalDisk : Current Disk Queue Length. This
counter provides a primary measure of disk congestion. Just as the
processor queue was an indication of waiting threads, the disk queue is
an indication of the number of transactions that are waiting to be
processed. Recall that the queue is an important measure for services
that operate on a transaction basis. Just like the line at the
supermarket, the queue will be representative of not only the number of
transactions, but also the length and frequency of each transaction.

PhysicalDisk : % Disk Time. Much
like % Processor time, this counter is a general mark of how busy the
disk is. You will see many similarities between the disk and processor
since they are both transaction-based services. This counter indicates
a disk problem, but must be observed in conjunction with the Current
Disk Queue Length counter to be truly informative. Recall also that the
disk could be a bottleneck prior to the % Disk Time reaching 100%.

PhysicalDisk : Avg. Disk Queue Length. This
counter is actually strongly related to the %Disk Time counter. This
counter converts the %Disk Time to a decimal value and displays it.
This counter will be needed in times when the disk configuration
employs multiple controllers for multiple physical disks. In these
cases, the overall performance of the disk I/O system, which consists
of two controllers, could exceed that of an individual disk. Thus, if
you were looking at the %Disk Time counter, you would only see a value
of 100%, which wouldn't represent the total potential of the entire
system, but only that it had reached the potential of a single disk on
a single controller. The real value may be 120% which the Avg. Disk
Queue Length counter would display as 1.2.

PhysicalDisk : Disk Reads/sec. This
counter is used to compare to the Memory: Page Inputs/sec counter. You
need to compare the two counters to determine how much of the Disk
Reads are actually attributed to satisfying page faults.

LogicalDisk : Disk Reads/sec. When
observing an individual application (rather a partition) this counter
will be an indication of how often the applications on the partition
are reading from the disk. This will provide you with a more exact
measure of the contribution of the various processes on the partition
that are affecting the disk.

PhysicalDisk : Disk Reads Bytes/sec. Primarily,
you'll use this counter to describe the performance of disk throughput
for the disk subsystem. Remember that you are generally measuring the
capability of the entire disk hardware subsystem to respond to requests
for information.

LogicalDisk : Disk Reads Bytes/sec. For
the partition, this will be an indication of the rate that data is
being transferred. This will be an indication of what type of activity
the partition is experiencing. A smaller value will indicate more
random reads of smaller sections.

PhysicalDisk : Avg. Disk Bytes/Read. This
counter is used primarily to let you know the average number of bytes
transferred per read of the disk system. This helps distinguish between
random reads of the disk and the more efficient sequential file reads.
A smaller value generally indicates random reads. The value for this
counter can also be an indicator of file fragmentation.

PhysicalDisk : Avg. Disk sec/Read. The
value for this counter is generally the number of seconds it takes to
do each read. On less-complex disk subsystems involving controllers
that do not have intelligent management of the I/O, this value is a
multiple of the disk's rotation per minute. This does not negate the
rule that the entire system is being observed. The rotational speed of
the hard drive will be the predominant factor in the value with the
delays imposed by the controller card and support bus system.

PhysicalDisk: Disk Reads/sec. The
value for this counter is the number of reads that the disk was able to
accomplish per second. Changes in this value indicate the amount of
random access to the disk. The disk is a mechanical device that is
capable of only so much activity. When files are closer together, the
disk is permitted to get to the files quicker than if the files are
spread throughout the disk. In addition, disk fragmentation can
contribute to an increased value here.