Re: transactions per seconds - how many?
- From: "Adrian Moore" <queryadataset@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 06:23:49 -0600
Peter,
For a sproc that does updates, 220 transactions per second is about the best
you are going to get out of SQL-Server. Use a custom updateCommand on the
adapter and batch the updates per transaction to increase performance.
If you want real-time performance you'll need to look at other database
vendors like Polyhedra (http://www.polyhedra.com) which can process several
thousand transactions per second.
Ad.
"Rogas69" <rogas69@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:OyeI$bdZFHA.3364@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to ask you, how many transactions per second can you achieve
> on your sql servers? I have simple stored procedure that updates records
> in small table - and I cannot go over 220 trans per sec using ado .net...
> Is it ok?
> I am using generated dataadapter (framework 2.0, beta2). The procedure
> returns string (ExecuteScalar).
> The sql server runs double xeon machine and 2 scsi drives. Database files
> are split between drives. Memory and processors aren't the bottle neck,
> average disk queue is not as well. Page splits are minimal.
>
> Peter
>
>
.
- References:
- transactions per seconds - how many?
- From: Rogas69
- transactions per seconds - how many?
- Prev by Date: Re: Best way to get started?
- Next by Date: Re: Small Projects
- Previous by thread: transactions per seconds - how many?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|