June 15, 2012 at 10:56 am
Hello,
I have a question regarding an ACTIVE/ACTIVE Cluster enviornment using SQL Server 2008 R2. We have several instances of SQL which we currently need to migrate from SQL 2005 to the new cluster, but I am having trouble determining the system requirements for the cluster to handle all the instances.
Please see system specs below of current system (this is basically what most of the server instances currently look like).
Processor - 2 x Intel Xeon (Quad Core) E5430 @ 2.66GHz
Ram - 16 GB
Disk Space -
Sql Data Drive: Size: 70 G, Used: 41 G, Free: 28 G
Sql DB Backup to Disk Drive: Size: 80 G, Used: 29 G, Free: 51G
SQL Log Drive: 36 G, Used: 17 G, Free: 19 G
# of Databases: 15 (including System Databases)
Total size of DB: About 60 GB
Page file usage: 13.2 GB
The CPU Utilization on this server is always low, under between 1 to 10% most of the time. We typicall have around 1000+ users at any given time trying to access our system (which includes all instances).
Please let me know how many instances we could utilize on the new cluster below given that most of our current instances are setup the same as above and disk space isnt a problem. What recommendations would you consider?
New SQL Cluster (ACTIVE/ACTIVE - 2 NODE) Configuration Setup:
Processor - 2 x Intel Xeon (Quad Core) E5430 @ 2.66GHz
Ram - 64 GB
Please let me know if I need to provide any more info.
June 15, 2012 at 11:01 am
kylemkr85 (6/15/2012)
Hello,I have a question regarding an ACTIVE/ACTIVE Cluster enviornment using SQL Server 2008 R2. We have several instances of SQL which we currently need to migrate from SQL 2005 to the new cluster, but I am having trouble determining the system requirements for the cluster to handle all the instances.
Please see system specs below of current system (this is basically what most of the server instances currently look like).
Processor - 2 x Intel Xeon (Quad Core) E5430 @ 2.66GHz
Ram - 16 GB
Disk Space -
Sql Data Drive: Size: 70 G, Used: 41 G, Free: 28 G
Sql DB Backup to Disk Drive: Size: 80 G, Used: 29 G, Free: 51G
SQL Log Drive: 36 G, Used: 17 G, Free: 19 G
# of Databases: 15 (including System Databases)
Total size of DB: About 60 GB
Page file usage: 13.2 GB
The CPU Utilization on this server is always low, under between 1 to 10% most of the time. We typicall have around 1000+ users at any given time trying to access our system (which includes all instances).
Please let me know how many instances we could utilize on the new cluster below given that most of our current instances are setup the same as above and disk space isnt a problem. What recommendations would you consider?
New SQL Cluster (ACTIVE/ACTIVE - 2 NODE) Configuration Setup:
Processor - 2 x Intel Xeon (Quad Core) E5430 @ 2.66GHz
Ram - 64 GB
Please let me know if I need to provide any more info.
Why would you want to run so many instances for such few databases. First thing i would do is to plan the consolidation of the instances, leave only databases that require a separate instance (based on policy, security or resource usage).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ya can't make an omelette without breaking just a few eggs" 😉
June 15, 2012 at 11:13 am
Ill take that into consideration. We have about 7 independent SQL servers right now with about 8 to 15 databases on each one. Would our current cluster environment be able to support that much? Do we need more CPU or RAM for this?
June 15, 2012 at 11:22 am
kylemkr85 (6/15/2012)
Hello,I have a question regarding an ACTIVE/ACTIVE Cluster enviornment using SQL Server 2008 R2. We have several instances of SQL which we currently need to migrate from SQL 2005 to the new cluster, but I am having trouble determining the system requirements for the cluster to handle all the instances.
Please see system specs below of current system (this is basically what most of the server instances currently look like).
Processor - 2 x Intel Xeon (Quad Core) E5430 @ 2.66GHz
Ram - 16 GB
Disk Space -
Sql Data Drive: Size: 70 G, Used: 41 G, Free: 28 G
Sql DB Backup to Disk Drive: Size: 80 G, Used: 29 G, Free: 51G
SQL Log Drive: 36 G, Used: 17 G, Free: 19 G
# of Databases: 15 (including System Databases)
Total size of DB: About 60 GB
Page file usage: 13.2 GB
The CPU Utilization on this server is always low, under between 1 to 10% most of the time. We typicall have around 1000+ users at any given time trying to access our system (which includes all instances).
Please let me know how many instances we could utilize on the new cluster below given that most of our current instances are setup the same as above and disk space isnt a problem. What recommendations would you consider?
New SQL Cluster (ACTIVE/ACTIVE - 2 NODE) Configuration Setup:
Processor - 2 x Intel Xeon (Quad Core) E5430 @ 2.66GHz
Ram - 64 GB
Please let me know if I need to provide any more info.
You are upgrading from Active/Active SQL 2005 Cluster, to Active/Active SQL 2008R2 Cluster ..correct?
Regards,
TA
Regards,
SQLisAwe5oMe.
June 15, 2012 at 11:24 am
No, we are moving from non-cluster SQL 2005 environment to a clustered SQL 2008 R2 environment. We have already moved 2 instances over to it, but are questioning if it can support the rest or if more resources are necessary.
June 15, 2012 at 11:27 am
kylemkr85 (6/15/2012)
Ill take that into consideration. We have about 7 independent SQL servers right now with about 8 to 15 databases on each one. Would our current cluster environment be able to support that much? Do we need more CPU or RAM for this?
So, you are saying you have 7 stand alone SQL servers which you want to move those to Active/Active SQL server 2008R2 cluster? Am I correct?
I believe you can have upto 25 SQL instances per cluster. CPU and RAM depends on how high the transactions volume in concerned.
Regards,
TA
Regards,
SQLisAwe5oMe.
June 15, 2012 at 11:43 am
kylemkr85 (6/15/2012)
No, we are moving from non-cluster SQL 2005 environment to a clustered SQL 2008 R2 environment. We have already moved 2 instances over to it, but are questioning if it can support the rest or if more resources are necessary.
I think you shouldn't have any issues to move these instances to the cluster.....but I would recommened to look into what Perry said about consolidating them.....since you only have about 15 DBs and I am not sure why you need 7 instances for it unless, it is specified by your company. So, by consolidating you can save money to the company. Also, since you have active/active cluster, you should try to load balance the instances......meaning if you go with 7 instances, try to install 4 on one node and 3 on the other node, then add the instances to each other node to make it active/active.
Regards,
TA
Regards,
SQLisAwe5oMe.
June 15, 2012 at 11:49 am
Sorry I didnt mean we have 7 instances right now. I just meant we have 7 standalone servers with about 10 - 15 databases on each one. So a total of about 70 - 90 dbs we will need to move. So if we can consolidate these into lets say 4 instances on the SQL cluster, would that work? Also, is there an easy way to determine the transaction volume on each DB or pull a history?
June 15, 2012 at 11:58 am
kylemkr85 (6/15/2012)
Sorry I didnt mean we have 7 instances right now. I just meant we have 7 standalone servers with about 10 - 15 databases on each one. So a total of about 70 - 90 dbs we will need to move. So if we can consolidate these into lets say 4 instances on the SQL cluster, would that work? Also, is there an easy way to determine the transaction volume on each DB or pull a history?
I am little confused......let me explain what I understood.....so, you have 7 instances installed in a 1 stand alone server(windows server)?......and you have 10-15 DBs per instance?.....Am I correct?.....
Or you are saying....you have 7 windows server and 1 SQL server installed in each of the windows server?
Please clarify.
Thanks,
TA
Regards,
SQLisAwe5oMe.
June 15, 2012 at 12:13 pm
We have 7 windows server and 1 SQL server installed in each of the windows server. Each SQL server has about 10 - 15 databases.
June 15, 2012 at 12:20 pm
You should definitely be looking to consolidate here where possible.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ya can't make an omelette without breaking just a few eggs" 😉
June 15, 2012 at 12:21 pm
kylemkr85 (6/15/2012)
We have 7 windows server and 1 SQL server installed in each of the windows server. Each SQL server has about 10 - 15 databases.
Wow....was that the requirement from the application team to have each SQL server installed in a separate windows server?
Regards,
TA
Regards,
SQLisAwe5oMe.
June 15, 2012 at 12:34 pm
This system was in place years ago. I just started here about 2 weeks ago and they are looking to move everything to a cluster environment now along with migrating to sql server 2008 r2. I have never been involved with setting this up before, so just looking for some pointers. So, do you think it would be possible to consolidate the current servers into 4 instances on the cluster environment and try to balance it by application on each instance? Unless of course the application requires its own instance. Maybe run the more hefty ones on their own node and the others mix and match on each of the nodes? In case of fail over though, the system must handle all the load. So I am just wondering if the current system in place would be able to support it.
June 15, 2012 at 12:41 pm
kylemkr85 (6/15/2012)
This system was in place years ago. I just started here about 2 weeks ago and they are looking to move everything to a cluster environment now along with migrating to sql server 2008 r2. I have never been involved with setting this up before, so just looking for some pointers. So, do you think it would be possible to consolidate the current servers into 4 instances on the cluster environment and try to balance it by application on each instance? Unless of course the application requires its own instance. Maybe run the more hefty ones on their own node and the others mix and match on each of the nodes? In case of fail over though, the system must handle all the load. So I am just wondering if the current system in place would be able to support it.
Yes, if understood all your requirements correctly.....I would think yes......you should look into consolidate and save money for the company and make an impression. As you may already know....you should do more research/homework before you jump into conclusion.
Just curious, if they are planning to migrate to 2008r2 servers.....how many SQL servers do you have at your place in total.
Regards,
TA
Regards,
SQLisAwe5oMe.
June 15, 2012 at 12:53 pm
Alright, thank you for the input and suggestions. We have about 10 including our testing environments currently which we will be migrating.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 16 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply