Steve, and everyone else...
Thanks for the great compliments!
Yes, as mentioned in my article, there is no performance benefit to multiple log files. It seems the only benefit is file management for disk space and other administrative tasks where you would want the log file in a smaller size (i.e. disk mirroring, or limited hard drive space).
BOL: Adding and Deleting Data and Transaction Log Files
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms191433.aspx), says "SQL Server uses a proportional fill strategy across all the files within each filegroup and writes an amount of data proportional to the free space in the file. This enables the new file to be used immediately. In this way, all files generally become full at about the same time. However, transaction log files cannot be part of a filegroup; they are separate from one another. As the transaction log grows, the first log file fills, then the second, and so on, by using a fill-and-go strategy instead of a proportional fill strategy. Therefore, when a log file is added, it cannot be used by the transaction log until the other files have been filled first."
This is a solid indication that there is no benefit to performance when using multiple transaction log files.
~ Without obstacles, you cannot progress ~