Re: Capacity Issues with SQL
- From: "Dr.Conti" <drconti@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 22:05:05 +0200
Will all those 140 people use the 2 TS all together at the same time - read
70 Users pro server?
I dont know I would avoid to go over 50 for one - plus imagine one dies. You
have righ away 70
people without a chance to work. So go for 3 Servers.
--
Regards,
Dr.Conti (PubForum - The SBC Community Conference owner)
http://www.pubforum.net
"kevint" <kevint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:80E1C45B-DBA1-4F50-B8FA-58D51D9C2442@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Thanks Patrick and Dr Conti, you've both been very helpful.
>
> We're running a bespoke CRM tool running SQL as its backend. Storage for
> it
> is undecided as yet, we've got an ESA12000 SAN from HP with about 1.5TB on
> it
> currently but that can scale if it needs to. We've not anticipated this to
> create too much extra storage, maybe 100GB at most.
>
> After reading Patrick's website and Brian Madden's website ( both very
> informative - where do you get the time!!!), I think we've settled on 2 x
> DL380 DP with 8GB Ram in each( should cover the TS) and then a 4 way
> processor to cover the database.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Kevin
>
> "Patrick Rouse" wrote:
>
>> Definitely use different hardware for your TS and SQL Servers, especially
>> when looking at a solution of this size.
>>
>> You'll need to do some testing to see how many terminal servers you need,
>> as
>> some apps don't scale well, i.e. some apps allow for 5-75 sessions per
>> dual-xeon TS, and some only allow for 25, depending on the resource needs
>> of
>> the applications being used.
>>
>> What is the database application, and who said you needed 8CPUs (and to
>> put
>> everything on this box)? Have you thought of your storage requirements,
>> i.e.
>> will the databases be on a SAN or SCSI Attached Storage. The best setups
>> are
>> RAID 1+0 for SQL Data Files, and the transaction logs on a separate
>> array.
>>
>> http://www.workthin.com/tshw.htm
>>
>> --
>> Patrick Rouse
>> Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
>> http://www.workthin.com
>>
>>
>> "Dr.Conti" wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Kevin,
>> >
>> >
>> > we have a similar configuration here running (Oracle and SQL). I would
>> > suggest to use, like you have thinked
>> > of, a frontend server as this is the best Option IMHO. However 140
>> > Users at
>> > once :o)
>> > I doubt that you will be able to do that with one server. So better
>> > think of
>> > 3 Servers - thus
>> > you will have fault tolerance and less then 140 angry users :-)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Dr.Conti (PubForum owner)
>> > http://www.pubforum.net
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "kevint" <kevint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> > news:69D902BD-DB51-4FF2-B7D1-1CD112336FA2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > Got a question regarding capacity within TS 2003. I am looking to
>> > > deploy a
>> > > Win 2003 Enterprise server with SQL ( either standard or enterprise)
>> > > and I
>> > > have been advised to go for an 8 processor box with 32GB RAM, but I
>> > > have
>> > > 140
>> > > users that will need to log on via TS. I have been told that TS only
>> > > supports
>> > > quad processors and 4GB RAM, does this mean I will need to do deply a
>> > > front
>> > > end server to run the TS from?
>> >
>> >
>> >
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Capacity Issues with SQL
- From: Alex Balcanquall [MSFT]
- Re: Capacity Issues with SQL
- References:
- Capacity Issues with SQL
- From: kevint
- Re: Capacity Issues with SQL
- From: Dr.Conti
- Re: Capacity Issues with SQL
- From: Patrick Rouse
- Re: Capacity Issues with SQL
- From: kevint
- Capacity Issues with SQL
- Prev by Date: Re: TS 2003, wing.dll issue
- Next by Date: Re: Set default printer in TS for all users
- Previous by thread: Re: Capacity Issues with SQL
- Next by thread: Re: Capacity Issues with SQL
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading