RE: IIS & SQL

From: Yuan Shao (v-yshao_at_online.microsoft.com)
Date: 03/10/04


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 03:34:18 GMT

Hello,

My name is Michael and I would like to thank you for using Microsoft
newsgroup.

Based on my experience, it is best to place SQL Server on a separated
Server. The kind of partition you choose to use is depending on your
situation and your requirements for SQL Server. If data must be quickly
recoverable, consider mirroring the transaction log and placing the
database on a RAID 5 disk. RAID 5 provides redundancy of all data on the
array, allowing a single disk to fail and be replaced in most cases without
system downtime. RAID 5 offers lower performance than RAID 0 or RAID 1 but
higher reliability and faster recovery.

A hardware disk array improves I/O performance because I/O functions, such
as striping and mirroring, are handled efficiently in firmware. Conversely,
an operating system-based RAID offers lower cost but consumes processor
cycles. When cost is a consideration and redundancy and high performance
are required, Microsoft Windows? NT? stripe sets with parity or Windows
2000 RAID-5 volumes are a good solution.

Data striping (RAID 0) is the RAID configuration with the highest
performance, but if one disk fails, all the data on the stripe set becomes
inaccessible. A common installation technique for relational database
management systems is to configure the database on a RAID 0 drive and then
place the transaction log on a mirrored drive (RAID 1). You can get the
best disk I/O performance for the database and maintain data recoverability
(assuming you perform regular database backups) through a mirrored
transaction log.

To troubleshoot the performance issue, I found the following articles for
your references.

319942 HOW TO: Determine Proper SQL Server Configuration Settings
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=319942

298475 HOW TO: Troubleshoot Application Performance Issues
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=298475

243589 HOW TO: Troubleshoot Slow-Running Queries on SQL Server 7.0 or Later
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=243589

243588 HOW TO: Troubleshoot the Performance of Ad-Hoc Queries
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=243588

HOW TO: Troubleshoot Application Performance with SQL Server
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=224587

Regards,

Michael Shao
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: SQL 2005 hardware recommendations
    ... Actually, RAID 1+0 is mirror, then stripe, not the other way around. ... I can even lose disk 5 or 6 and still function. ... partitions and sizes for the installation of SQL Server 2005 ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup)
  • Re: RAID 1 and SQL Server
    ... SQL Server does not know anything about the underlying disks or even if they are a single physical disk or a raid array. ... If they do not have a battery backed cache you should turn off the write back cache otherwise you risk loosing data in the even you get a disk failure. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup)
  • SQL Server Performance (slowdown)
    ... Sql Server installed on disk C: (RAID 5-5disks) ... SQL server 2000 Enterprise Sp3 ... Actually OLTP database collects some sort of information for about 50 ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.server)
  • SQL Server 2000 RAID Performance optimization
    ... Let me preface the following post: I know this is a hardware ... applied to a SQL Server installation, but I am doing that too. ... system suffers from a lot of disk contention and I ... This RAID 5 array is partitioned between the OS and SQL ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.server)
  • Re: Size of SQL IO block ?
    ... I support the Professional Association of SQL Server and it's community of SQL Server professionals. ... > Trying to understand how SQL writes data to disk? ... > At the same time, also in a RAID setting, how does data actually get> written.. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.server)