We are indexing over 2 terabytes. We use a quad 64 bit DL 585, with 8 Gigs
or RAM. We have a RAID 10 drive for our full-text indexes and these consist
of 15000 rpm drives.
I am not aware of any performance counters which give you the information
you are looking for.
We find that with too many active catalogs search performance declines. So
we have 6 catalogs which have active indexing against them, the rest have
change tracking turned off (there are no updates to these catalogs). We
partition into 50 million row tables each with their own catalog, each in
its own database. We found that this offered best performance as opposed to
a single monolithic index, or 100 million row tables.
I take it you have looked at the following white papers?
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/bestpractice/ftslesld.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itshowcase/content/intdocmgmtsql2005.mspx

Signature
RelevantNoise.com - dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
> I've been searching for information on how Full text indexing uses
> hardware
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>
> Has anyone looked into these issues in the SQL 2008 CTPs?
David Reabow - 10 Sep 2007 17:42 GMT
Thanks Hilary,
These articles have very good suggestions. I'll be trying most of them.
> We are indexing over 2 terabytes. We use a quad 64 bit DL 585, with 8 Gigs
> or RAM. We have a RAID 10 drive for our full-text indexes and these consist
[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
> >
> > Has anyone looked into these issues in the SQL 2008 CTPs?