Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

On a windows OS (Server 2003, XP, Vista, Win7 etc.), is there a performance penalty for having too many files in a single folder?

  • Will a folder scan become slower (when viewing the folder in windows explorer)?
  • Will direct access become slower (copying a file in/out of this folder for example)?
  • Is there a graph that show this speed correlation to number of files?

I noticed sometimes systems with large sets of files (log files etc.) will break the files into a hierarchy of folders, with each folder holding only a small set of items. Is there a technical benefit, or a scaling consideration behind this?

share|improve this question

yes and no. the larger amount of files in a directory, the longer it takes to enumerate, and the more resources it takes to enumerate.

  1. Folder scan - yes very much so, I have a server with ~65k files in it, take about 45 mins to enumerate
  2. Depends, if you are doing copy <full_path>\filename.ext <some other path> then no it doesn't take any more time if you are doing copy <full_path\filename.* <some other path> then yes as you get the same hit as enumerating the direcotry.
  3. Never seen anything like this, but never looked either.
share|improve this answer
  • Yes, definitely
  • Maybe
  • Not that I'm aware of. You'd have to measure it with a stopwatch, discounting anything else causing load on the system, and it would only be valid for that system.
share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.