Re: New SQL Server 2000 installation

Tech-Archive recommends: Speed Up your PC by fixing your registry

Hank,

Thanks for the reply. Right now we're running SQL on a Gateway desktop with
a single IDE drive and 512MB RAM -- and don't have any performance issues.
It's a scary setup for a number of reasons, but it actually works just fine.

The PE1850 only holds two drives, so I'm stuck with a mirrored SCSI
configuration. (You have to admit that's much better than a single IDE!)

- Steve

"Hank Arnold" <rasilon@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:u6PKhKoZFHA.3328@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>I would at a minimum add 1GB of RAM, unless you have data to support that
>it will only need 1GB. Remember, the OS has to share that memory....
>
> You *really* should have another physical drive. It's not a great idea to
> run the program and the database files and transaction logs all on one
> drive. If that's not going to happen, then, I defer to the experts on
> whether you should use a single partition or two. My inclination would be
> for two, but I'm definitely not an expert....
>
> --
> Regards,
> Hank Arnold
>
> "Steve M." <majiktt@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:O6sO0ljZFHA.3648@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm going to be setting up a new SQL server and was hoping to get some
>> recommendations (tips and best practices) because I've never installed
>> SQL server before.
>>
>> The server I have for the project is a Dell PE1850: single 3GHz Xeon, 1GB
>> RAM, 36GB hard drive capacity (hardware RAID 1). It will run Windows 2003
>> Server Standard edition.
>>
>> We have a separate IIS server that will host the websites using this SQL
>> server.
>>
>> I found Microsoft's "10 Steps to Help Secure SQL Server 2000" and an
>> article on TechRepublic called "Install SQL Server 2000 for optimal
>> usability." Can anyone recommend any other resources or make any setup
>> suggestions based on your own experiences?
>>
>> Also, I have a specific question:
>>
>> How should I partition the drives for administration purposes? (I know
>> there won't be a performance improvement with partitioning since I'm
>> doing RAID 1.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Steve
>>
>
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Checkpoint causes need for better IO subsystem?
    ... excellent articles on clustered index selection and its impact on ... clustered index sql kimberly tripp ... Microsoft SQL Server MVP ... the random write capability of the drives comes into play, ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.tools)
  • RE: Trying to RESTORE a sql 2000 db on a different drive letter.
    ... During the installation of sql server, if you did not pick the d: ... the data drive or the system files drives, it will not have the necessary ... Right click on the database you want to restore. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup)
  • Re: How to: Remove Physical Disk from SQL Cluster Group (If possible)
    ... than SQL server) without stopping the SQL service. ... resource, remove the dependency, and then bring online SQL Server. ... The container has some drives that ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering)
  • Re: Log file partition
    ... I support the Professional Association for SQL Server ... Most are system databases which are in simple mode anyway. ... Three drives are for fault tolerance and performance. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.server)
  • Re: Access 2007->SQL Server2005 "connection was forcibly closed",G
    ... I moved every table I was able to move to the SQL ... closed connections - but all of these errors are in the version which used ... the SQL Server 2000 and everything worked ... communication between ODBC (OLEDB and Native Client, ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.connect)