We are running SQL6.5 and plan to upgrade to SQL2000. I'm wondering what's the best stripe size for the RAID 5 configuration. 8,16,32 or 64 kb.
The database is 90% used for read actions. Only during night complete refill of data and write actions only for statistics. Any advise is welcome on this subjectSince SQL server pages are 64K the raid stripe settings must also be set to 64K|||SQL 6.5 uses 2k pages and SQL 2000 uses 8k pages.
The stripe size of your RAID drives does NOT have to follow the page size, however I would use a RAID stripe size >= to my page size.
Showing posts with label upgrade. Show all posts
Showing posts with label upgrade. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Best Performance
We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two options - A dual
processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
running standard edition.
The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster - Obviously
Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four processors...
Help !!!
AndyFYI: There can be many reasons for a recompile. But you must be using
really many stored procedures and very little memory. SQL-Server will
make the tradeoff how to use the available memory and it knows a
recompilation is expensive. Because of that, there will be few
recompiles because of memory constraints.
Gert-Jan
Andy Reilly wrote:
I don't have enough info to say with certainty... no one does...
but generally speaking... I would be SHOCKED if the 4X Standard box didn't
perform better than the 2X Enterprise. Enterprise can support more mem,
but... the Standard limits are pretty darn good. IF you can get adequte
performance on a 2X box... that almost implies to me that your app and data
set isn't bing enough to worry about going beyond 2G anyway...
Brian Moran
Principal Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
SQL Server MVP
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Andy Reilly" <ReillyA@.ThomasNoSpam-Sanderson.co.uk> wrote in message
news:%23F4GHBC5DHA.2188@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
Obviously
processors...
processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
running standard edition.
The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster - Obviously
Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four processors...
Help !!!
AndyFYI: There can be many reasons for a recompile. But you must be using
really many stored procedures and very little memory. SQL-Server will
make the tradeoff how to use the available memory and it knows a
recompilation is expensive. Because of that, there will be few
recompiles because of memory constraints.
Gert-Jan
Andy Reilly wrote:
quote:|||the corrent answer to almost any performance queestion is 'it depends'. <g>
> We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two options - A dual
> processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
> running standard edition.
> The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster - Obvious
ly
> Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
> hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four processors...
.
> Help !!!
> Andy
I don't have enough info to say with certainty... no one does...
but generally speaking... I would be SHOCKED if the 4X Standard box didn't
perform better than the 2X Enterprise. Enterprise can support more mem,
but... the Standard limits are pretty darn good. IF you can get adequte
performance on a 2X box... that almost implies to me that your app and data
set isn't bing enough to worry about going beyond 2G anyway...
Brian Moran
Principal Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
SQL Server MVP
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Andy Reilly" <ReillyA@.ThomasNoSpam-Sanderson.co.uk> wrote in message
news:%23F4GHBC5DHA.2188@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
quote:
> We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two options - A dual
> processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
> running standard edition.
> The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster -
Obviously
quote:
> Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
> hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four
processors...
quote:
> Help !!!
> Andy
>
Best Performance
We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two options - A dual
processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
running standard edition.
The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster - Obviously
Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four processors...
Help !!!
AndyEnterprise is not necessarily faster than standard.
Check the following for further details :-
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?
url=/technet/prodtechnol/sql/evaluate/choose.asp
If you think about it for a moment the speed of any
application is going to as fast as the slowest component,
which is normally (in order of slowest) Network, Hard
Disk, then CPU.
So before getting your CPU's sorted you should have a look
at the other two.
If you would like further details then feel free to email
me at little_flowery_me<REMOVETHIS>.@.hotmail.com
In the meanwhile have a quick look at this...
http://www.tpc.org/
J
>--Original Message--
>We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two
options - A dual
>processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad
processor machine
>running standard edition.
>The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the
faster - Obviously
>Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and
should therefore
>hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having
four processors...
>Help !!!
>Andy
>
>.
>|||FYI: There can be many reasons for a recompile. But you must be using
really many stored procedures and very little memory. SQL-Server will
make the tradeoff how to use the available memory and it knows a
recompilation is expensive. Because of that, there will be few
recompiles because of memory constraints.
Gert-Jan
Andy Reilly wrote:
> We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two options - A dual
> processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
> running standard edition.
> The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster - Obviously
> Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
> hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four processors...
> Help !!!
> Andy|||the corrent answer to almost any performance queestion is 'it depends'. <g>
I don't have enough info to say with certainty... no one does...
but generally speaking... I would be SHOCKED if the 4X Standard box didn't
perform better than the 2X Enterprise. Enterprise can support more mem,
but... the Standard limits are pretty darn good. IF you can get adequte
performance on a 2X box... that almost implies to me that your app and data
set isn't bing enough to worry about going beyond 2G anyway...
--
Brian Moran
Principal Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
SQL Server MVP
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Andy Reilly" <ReillyA@.ThomasNoSpam-Sanderson.co.uk> wrote in message
news:%23F4GHBC5DHA.2188@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two options - A dual
> processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
> running standard edition.
> The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster -
Obviously
> Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
> hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four
processors...
> Help !!!
> Andy
>
processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
running standard edition.
The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster - Obviously
Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four processors...
Help !!!
AndyEnterprise is not necessarily faster than standard.
Check the following for further details :-
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?
url=/technet/prodtechnol/sql/evaluate/choose.asp
If you think about it for a moment the speed of any
application is going to as fast as the slowest component,
which is normally (in order of slowest) Network, Hard
Disk, then CPU.
So before getting your CPU's sorted you should have a look
at the other two.
If you would like further details then feel free to email
me at little_flowery_me<REMOVETHIS>.@.hotmail.com
In the meanwhile have a quick look at this...
http://www.tpc.org/
J
>--Original Message--
>We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two
options - A dual
>processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad
processor machine
>running standard edition.
>The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the
faster - Obviously
>Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and
should therefore
>hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having
four processors...
>Help !!!
>Andy
>
>.
>|||FYI: There can be many reasons for a recompile. But you must be using
really many stored procedures and very little memory. SQL-Server will
make the tradeoff how to use the available memory and it knows a
recompilation is expensive. Because of that, there will be few
recompiles because of memory constraints.
Gert-Jan
Andy Reilly wrote:
> We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two options - A dual
> processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
> running standard edition.
> The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster - Obviously
> Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
> hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four processors...
> Help !!!
> Andy|||the corrent answer to almost any performance queestion is 'it depends'. <g>
I don't have enough info to say with certainty... no one does...
but generally speaking... I would be SHOCKED if the 4X Standard box didn't
perform better than the 2X Enterprise. Enterprise can support more mem,
but... the Standard limits are pretty darn good. IF you can get adequte
performance on a 2X box... that almost implies to me that your app and data
set isn't bing enough to worry about going beyond 2G anyway...
--
Brian Moran
Principal Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
SQL Server MVP
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Andy Reilly" <ReillyA@.ThomasNoSpam-Sanderson.co.uk> wrote in message
news:%23F4GHBC5DHA.2188@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two options - A dual
> processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
> running standard edition.
> The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster -
Obviously
> Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
> hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four
processors...
> Help !!!
> Andy
>
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Benchmark for different edition of sql server 2000
Our company is pondering whether we should upgrade from
standard version to enterprise version. Some high level
people is very concerned about the price.
Is there any good article/whitepaper for this? Something
like industry standard, micrsoft recommendataion,etc?
Thanks.What are your reasons for upgrading? Unless you use the features =specific to Enterprise, it might not be worth the cost.
You can refer to http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/default.asp
for all sorts of information on SQL Server.
-- Keith
"JZHU" <hzhua16@.hotmail.com> wrote in message =news:005901c39f14$1673b570$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
> Our company is pondering whether we should upgrade from
> standard version to enterprise version. Some high level
> people is very concerned about the price. > Is there any good article/whitepaper for this? Something
> like industry standard, micrsoft recommendataion,etc?
> > Thanks.|||Thanks. My major concern is about the memory. Our database
is around 150-200 GB right now, and support 2000-3000
users. The standard version only support 2G memory. Is it
too little? Currently, when we run the query, most of the
time, it has physical read instead of logical read.
>--Original Message--
>What are your reasons for upgrading? Unless you use the
features specific to Enterprise, it might not be worth the
cost.
>You can refer to
>http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/default.asp
>for all sorts of information on SQL Server.
>--
>Keith
>
>"JZHU" <hzhua16@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:005901c39f14$1673b570$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Our company is pondering whether we should upgrade from
>> standard version to enterprise version. Some high level
>> people is very concerned about the price.
>> Is there any good article/whitepaper for this? Something
>> like industry standard, micrsoft recommendataion,etc?
>> Thanks.
>.
>|||> Thanks. My major concern is about the memory. Our database
> is around 150-200 GB right now, and support 2000-3000
> users. The standard version only support 2G memory. Is it
> too little?
Could be, but it depends of the sweetspot for your memory usage. How about acquiring Developer
Edition and run your benchmark test against this? It is only some $50.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"JZHU" <hzhua16@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:047a01c39f1e$596c2240$a101280a@.phx.gbl...
> Thanks. My major concern is about the memory. Our database
> is around 150-200 GB right now, and support 2000-3000
> users. The standard version only support 2G memory. Is it
> too little? Currently, when we run the query, most of the
> time, it has physical read instead of logical read.
> >--Original Message--
> >What are your reasons for upgrading? Unless you use the
> features specific to Enterprise, it might not be worth the
> cost.
> >
> >You can refer to
> >http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/default.asp
> >for all sorts of information on SQL Server.
> >
> >--
> >Keith
> >
> >
> >"JZHU" <hzhua16@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:005901c39f14$1673b570$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
> >> Our company is pondering whether we should upgrade from
> >> standard version to enterprise version. Some high level
> >> people is very concerned about the price.
> >> Is there any good article/whitepaper for this? Something
> >> like industry standard, micrsoft recommendataion,etc?
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >.
> >
standard version to enterprise version. Some high level
people is very concerned about the price.
Is there any good article/whitepaper for this? Something
like industry standard, micrsoft recommendataion,etc?
Thanks.What are your reasons for upgrading? Unless you use the features =specific to Enterprise, it might not be worth the cost.
You can refer to http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/default.asp
for all sorts of information on SQL Server.
-- Keith
"JZHU" <hzhua16@.hotmail.com> wrote in message =news:005901c39f14$1673b570$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
> Our company is pondering whether we should upgrade from
> standard version to enterprise version. Some high level
> people is very concerned about the price. > Is there any good article/whitepaper for this? Something
> like industry standard, micrsoft recommendataion,etc?
> > Thanks.|||Thanks. My major concern is about the memory. Our database
is around 150-200 GB right now, and support 2000-3000
users. The standard version only support 2G memory. Is it
too little? Currently, when we run the query, most of the
time, it has physical read instead of logical read.
>--Original Message--
>What are your reasons for upgrading? Unless you use the
features specific to Enterprise, it might not be worth the
cost.
>You can refer to
>http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/default.asp
>for all sorts of information on SQL Server.
>--
>Keith
>
>"JZHU" <hzhua16@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:005901c39f14$1673b570$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Our company is pondering whether we should upgrade from
>> standard version to enterprise version. Some high level
>> people is very concerned about the price.
>> Is there any good article/whitepaper for this? Something
>> like industry standard, micrsoft recommendataion,etc?
>> Thanks.
>.
>|||> Thanks. My major concern is about the memory. Our database
> is around 150-200 GB right now, and support 2000-3000
> users. The standard version only support 2G memory. Is it
> too little?
Could be, but it depends of the sweetspot for your memory usage. How about acquiring Developer
Edition and run your benchmark test against this? It is only some $50.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"JZHU" <hzhua16@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:047a01c39f1e$596c2240$a101280a@.phx.gbl...
> Thanks. My major concern is about the memory. Our database
> is around 150-200 GB right now, and support 2000-3000
> users. The standard version only support 2G memory. Is it
> too little? Currently, when we run the query, most of the
> time, it has physical read instead of logical read.
> >--Original Message--
> >What are your reasons for upgrading? Unless you use the
> features specific to Enterprise, it might not be worth the
> cost.
> >
> >You can refer to
> >http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/default.asp
> >for all sorts of information on SQL Server.
> >
> >--
> >Keith
> >
> >
> >"JZHU" <hzhua16@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:005901c39f14$1673b570$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
> >> Our company is pondering whether we should upgrade from
> >> standard version to enterprise version. Some high level
> >> people is very concerned about the price.
> >> Is there any good article/whitepaper for this? Something
> >> like industry standard, micrsoft recommendataion,etc?
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >.
> >
Friday, February 10, 2012
be notified when connections = 5
I would like to be notified of when my database connection hit 5. That way I know when I ned to upgrade from msde to standard edition. I have the server email ready but not sure how to moniter the connections.Create an alert in performance monitor.|||sounds streight forward thanks.|||The limitation on MSDE is on 5 concurrently running processes. You can periodically check DBCC CONCURRENCYVIOLATION (sp?) to see if you have hit that limit. So long as you keep the queries short, you could concievably keep 20 or 30 people happy enough with the application.|||it is one of those situations where I really do not know how many users I will get at a time. That is why I want to have a way to moniter it. If I have to by the full version fine, if I can hold of awhile great.|||The concurrent workload governor looks at concurrent batches - not connections. Knowing that, I would enable the logging using the DBCC CONCURRENCYVIOLATION(STARTLOG) command and/or use active transactions in the performance monitor.|||ok, great. thanks for the info.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)