April 8, 2003 at 12:01 am
OK - I know this is a vague one - and I'm not sure this is the right place for this but...
We've recently upgraded our database to a new (supposedly quicker) server and from sql7 to sql2000. Now our more intensive processes are severly bogging down and SQLServer itself seems to be running much slower (Previousely constraints were Client side - not Server side). Copying files across the net is fast so the network and the hardware is not (obviously) a problem.
Are there any traps in the upgrading to 2000 that can cause this problem. What within the database can be checked? (Max server memory seems fine.)
We'll be doing some more performance monitoring on it with info from the SQL Server help files but some extra pointers would be great.
Cheers,
Mike
April 8, 2003 at 12:06 am
Did you update statistics, defrag, etc after the upgrade!
April 8, 2003 at 12:18 am
Stats have been updated, and the db reindexed.
The db's only 800M in size and we've got a gig of ram and 1 gig VM. We can copy 1gig across the network in 5 mins.
The CPU is seems also to be running at 2/10ths of stuff all.
Cheers,
Mike.
April 8, 2003 at 12:41 am
April 8, 2003 at 5:39 am
We had a similar problem with a part of our program. Other programs had no problem. Setting the database compatibility level to 70 solved it.
Maybe the optimizer for 2000 did not fit the program, but I really don't know.
See if it works for you.
Joachim.
April 8, 2003 at 7:13 am
Are you sure it's the chip? Have you run Profiler against the new system?
Patrick Birch
Quand on parle du loup, on en voit la queue
April 8, 2003 at 10:37 am
Do you have the log files and data files pointing to 2 separate disks? Are you using a RAID 5 configuration? Does it seem like reads and writes are slower?
Darren
Darren
April 8, 2003 at 11:10 am
One of the advantages is that SQL 2000 manages memory without you, or is that a disadvantage...
Patrick
Quand on parle du loup, on en voit la queue
April 11, 2003 at 12:54 am
Is SQL configured to use all of the server memory? If so drop it down so the OS can grab some, that worked really well here. We have 2GB and let SQL use all of it and things ran a lot slower than on the old 512MB machine. Dropped SQL to 1GB and now it runs really sweet.
Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply