Re: Planning for a new server
- From: "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 07:39:47 -0400
RAID can certainly improve performance over a single disk solution. A
single disk can only support so many I/O requests where as a RAID can
support many more depending on the type. This will only help if you are
currently having disk queue issues now though.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Hank Arnold" <rasilon@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23GYq4GcZFHA.3908@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> My understanding is that RAID won't improve performance. It will improve
> recovery prospects in the event of a failure. Different types of RAID will
> have different performance impacts.....
>
> --
> Regards,
> Hank Arnold
>
> "Richard Hollis" <richard_hollis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:%23tKfokQZFHA.612@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> The current server only has only 1GB of RAM, of which, like you say, the
>> OS
>> and IIS are going to compete for. It isn't 2GB- I'm not sure if you
>> thought
>> it was. Are there any documented standards to be aiming for in
>> performance
>> terms for a query to execute? I've always tried to ensure that my
>> queries
>> are optimized and not working too hard.
>>
>> Will RAID-ing the drives make a big difference?
>>
>> Richard
>>
>> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:%23F4wRUJZFHA.2884@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Richard,
>>>
>>> You can't really tell how much memory you need simply from the size of
>>> the
>>> db's as it depends more on how you use the data and how well optimized
>> your
>>> app and schema are. Even so the total of your 3 db's is around 1.9GB
>>> and
>>> you probably don't need all of that in memory all the time. Chances are
>> you
>>> are using Std Edition of SQL Server which can only use 2GB of memory.
>>> But
>> I
>>> suspect that is more than enough for your situation even if it has not
>> been
>>> fully optimized. But when you run other applications on the same server
>>> they compete with the resources such as memory, CPU, Disk etc. How much
>> IIS
>>> competes with SQL Server is hard to say. But I can tell you that if all
>> you
>>> had was 2GB then you can not use all 2GB for SQL Server as IIS and the
>>> OS
>>> need some as well. Going with 4GB would certainly leave room for those.
>>> Faster processors are always better again it's hard to say how much
>>> difference you will notice based on how you are actually using the
>>> system
>>> now. I doubt you will need more than 2 procs though. I would also make
>>> sure you have tuned you application and schema (indexes etc.) to ensure
>> you
>>> are doing as little work as possible and you may find your current
>>> system
>> is
>>> just fine. If you are scanning the tables all the time adding new
>> hardware
>>> will only help so much.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>>>
>>>
>>> "Richard Hollis" <richard_hollis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:em7yoOEZFHA.1384@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> > Hi
>>> >
>>> > We are ready to upgrade our SQL Server hardware. I currently have
>>> > three
>>> > databases (running on V7) which are as follows:
>>> >
>>> > 1.5gb - simple recovery model - static database for lookups
>>> > 300mb - simple recovery model - static database for lookups
>>> > 100mb - normal recovery model - actively used
>>> >
>>> > All databases are currently running on a XEO dual pro 1.8ghz with 1gb
>>> > of
>>> > RAM. SQL server has 500mb of reserved memory. We run IIS on the same
>> box
>>> > and have probably around a total of 300 unique users a day. Things
>>> > are
>>> > really starting to grind though as we are getting more users.
>>> >
>>> > What is the best way to calculate the amount of RAM for a new machine?
>>> > Due
>>> > to the amount of lookups on the two static databases and the amount of
>>> > usage
>>> > the active database has I assume that it would be advantageous to try
>> and
>>> > get everything in to RAM - loading the box with 4GB? Can I run IIS on
>>> > this
>>> > new hardware without any issue? If I separate the IIS and SQL then
>>> > I'm
>>> > going to be dragging the data across the network cards instead and
>> getting
>>> > a
>>> > connection hit between them? What about CPU's? Will a much newer
>>> > dual
>>> > pro
>>> > with 4GB of RAM really nail it?
>>> >
>>> > Thanks
>>> > Richard
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
.
- References:
- Planning for a new server
- From: Richard Hollis
- Re: Planning for a new server
- From: Andrew J. Kelly
- Re: Planning for a new server
- From: Richard Hollis
- Re: Planning for a new server
- From: Hank Arnold
- Planning for a new server
- Prev by Date: Re: Planning for a new server
- Next by Date: Device activation error
- Previous by thread: Re: Planning for a new server
- Next by thread: SQL INstall
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
