Files and Filegroups

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...physdbstor.mspx
I've been reading the above whitepaper which i'm finding really useful, and
have a question about the recommended number of files in a filegroup...
It recommends that as a rule of thumb the number of files in a filegroup
should equal the number of cpu cores - does this still apply to partitioned
tables?
We have a partitioned table with 50 filegroups, sitting on a server with 2
dual core processors.. ..does this mean for the partitioned table it's
recommended we have 4 files in each of the 50 associated filegroups (and
effectively have 200 files)?
Thanks in advance
BenUKIf these filegroups are dedicated to the partitioned table, I'd probably not
bother with having that many files--i.e. forget about equating the number of
data files with the number of processors. Managing a large number of files
can be a headache in itself.
Linchi
"Ben UK" wrote:

> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...physdbstor.mspx
> I've been reading the above whitepaper which i'm finding really useful, an
d
> have a question about the recommended number of files in a filegroup...
> It recommends that as a rule of thumb the number of files in a filegroup
> should equal the number of cpu cores - does this still apply to partitione
d
> tables?
> We have a partitioned table with 50 filegroups, sitting on a server with 2
> dual core processors.. ..does this mean for the partitioned table it's
> recommended we have 4 files in each of the 50 associated filegroups (and
> effectively have 200 files)?
> Thanks in advance
> BenUK|||Cool thats what I figured [/hoped :0)]
"Linchi Shea" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> If these filegroups are dedicated to the partitioned table, I'd probably n
ot
> bother with having that many files--i.e. forget about equating the number
of
> data files with the number of processors. Managing a large number of files
> can be a headache in itself.
> Linchi
> "Ben UK" wrote:
>