|
I question it too. I have the report results on a
..csv file if you'd like to see it.
Most workstations at P4, XP w/512 mb. Some of them
had been 256 mb and upgrading them to 512 did help on the workstation
performance but not much improvement on acquiring the data/query
results.
After their analysis they came back with a $28,000
proposal but there is no way they will get any of that work. Especially since
many aspects of it aren't even necessary.
I really appreciate your comments Cris. Thank you
for your time.
db
=================================
typically...
A custom Access DB is not going to be dual
processor aware, based on my experience
And an Access DB on the server is not a true
Client Server product...all the processing is on the workstations
What is the OS and specs of the machines
accessing the DB?
There are numerous articles out there which will
compare SQL to Access
I'd really question the perfmon
feedback. If you accepted their report...did they get additional
work??
--
Cris Hanna
[SBS-MVP]
-------------------------------------------------
Please do
not email me directly for assistance. Reply only in the Newsgroups for
the benefit of everyone
Thank
you so much for your feedback,
There are 3 drives. Single OS drive
and 2 raid 1 drives for data. I think I
would tend to agree that
incorporating Gigabit speeds could help with the
data flow. What is your
opinion on the performance increase obtained from
converting to
SQL?
I have had an independent company setup a perfmon and give feedback,
They
said "You can view the critical graphs on sheets Data-Processor1,
Data-Processor2. The server processors are having a hard time
keeping up
with the demand." Personally I don't see that the
processors are struggling
from what I see but I'm no "expert". They have
recommended installing a
hardware firewall to turn off the windows
firewall to save resources.
Thank
you
db
===================================
"Cris Hanna
[SBS-MVP]" <crisnospamhanna@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote in message news:eeBH$7liFHA.3568@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx...
Well
given that money is an issue...
Why are you spending probably close to
5000 plus time for the upgrade? Yes
that will probably put a
nice penny in your pocket but not sure it will do
anything for the
client.
Why not up the ram in the current server?
will that server take 3 GB of
RAM??
Gigabit Switch (assuming internal
wiring will support it) is really cheap
from Dell right now (Dell
PowerConnect 2724 24 port Managed Gigabit Switch
$412.00)
Gigabit NIC in the Server (3Com Gigabit Card at
Dell 112.00)
Gigabit NICs in the workstation (Linksys Gigabit Cards
at Dell 23.00 each)
460.00 for 20 adapters.
So for Say a little
over a $1000 (plus your time) you've eliminated 2 of the
3 bottlenecks
you identified. Now the client has more money available for
programmers to convert the program to SQL and you solve Number
3
There is a potential issue here with the single disk on the current
server
as everything is happening on that single disk.
Setting up perfmon could
help you determine if the disk simply over
worked...raid 1 would not help
there...raid 5 could if hardware
based
--
Cris Hanna
[SBS-MVP]
-------------------------------------------------
Please do
not email me directly for assistance. Reply only in the
Newsgroups
for the benefit of everyone
"Doug B -db-" <dburrows_nospam-@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote in message
news:i6fCe.155246$PR6.134346@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx...
Looking
for feedback: If you were going to make the best improvement and do
it in
steps what would you recommend to your client?
My client has
a Custom Access application. Version 1 of the program ran
good. Version 2
runs much slower which I assume is because it handles
more
information/tables. We are looking at trying to improve the
performance with
either hardware upgrades and/or converting the access
app. to SQL based. My
client's budget is limited due to the amount he's
soaked into the
development of other things.
From what I can see
there are 3 possible bottlenecks. Server, Network speed
and the
application.
My client Current network: 20 users; (12 max
using the access app.)
SBS 2000, Dual Xeon P3 866. SCSI 160, 1.5 gb
ram, 100mb Ethernet.
Considering Dell server w/raid 1 &
5. 2gb ram, dual Xeon 3.0 (2mb cache).
Gigabit network. SBS
2003.
My personal thoughts are that converting the Database
program to a SQL based
app would show and best increase but I'm looking
for some opinions.
Thanks all.
db
| 
