December 22, 2017 at 7:35 pm
That's the choice I've been given. 1 month into work at a small business with 1 well used 2008 r2 SQL Server (average 9k transactions/sec. with sustained periods of 20K mainly due to BizTalk EDI. 3 db's around 100 GB, 12 smaller ones, Hyper V environment not efficiently configured (1 lun to rule them all)
Which would you choose? What other questions would you ask before deciding? (we use SQL server very generically).
December 23, 2017 at 4:09 am
Why is SQL 2016 Enterprise not an option?
SQL 2012 is out of support, so just from that, it's a sub-par choice.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
December 23, 2017 at 7:07 am
ReReplaced - Friday, December 22, 2017 7:35 PMThat's the choice I've been given. 1 month into work at a small business with 1 well used 2008 r2 SQL Server (average 9k transactions/sec. with sustained periods of 20K mainly due to BizTalk EDI. 3 db's around 100 GB, 12 smaller ones, Hyper V environment not efficiently configured (1 lun to rule them all)Which would you choose? What other questions would you ask before deciding? (we use SQL server very generically).
My vote would always be for the latest version simply because you get to use much better features and a lot more powerful database engine. So, I would suggest, go for SQL 2016 ( or if possible SQL 2017 as its already on GA).
Need to be just aware that standard edition comes with resource limitations ( Max: 128 GB RAM, 24 core processor ).
Main item to think about is if the application would support SQL 2016 or SQL 2017.
Regards,
Raj
December 23, 2017 at 8:43 am
ReReplaced - Friday, December 22, 2017 7:35 PMThat's the choice I've been given. 1 month into work at a small business with 1 well used 2008 r2 SQL Server (average 9k transactions/sec. with sustained periods of 20K mainly due to BizTalk EDI. 3 db's around 100 GB, 12 smaller ones, Hyper V environment not efficiently configured (1 lun to rule them all)Which would you choose? What other questions would you ask before deciding? (we use SQL server very generically).
Are those actual transactions or technical transactions?
What hardware are you on?
😎
December 25, 2017 at 8:58 am
This was removed by the editor as SPAM
December 26, 2017 at 8:25 am
Hardware? 2016 standard has some limits.
December 29, 2017 at 4:47 pm
GilaMonster - Saturday, December 23, 2017 4:09 AMWhy is SQL 2016 Enterprise not an option?SQL 2012 is out of support, so just from that, it's a sub-par choice.
Hi Gail,
That's a valid point I should pay attention to - with a few 2005 and a raft of 2008 r2's to deal with it is easy to forget 2012's light is low too. I've been told the SQL 2016 standard licenses have already been purchased, just waiting to be set up/configured - or as another post suggests I'd be advising 2017 purchases.
December 29, 2017 at 4:49 pm
arr.nagaraj - Saturday, December 23, 2017 7:07 AMReReplaced - Friday, December 22, 2017 7:35 PMThat's the choice I've been given. 1 month into work at a small business with 1 well used 2008 r2 SQL Server (average 9k transactions/sec. with sustained periods of 20K mainly due to BizTalk EDI. 3 db's around 100 GB, 12 smaller ones, Hyper V environment not efficiently configured (1 lun to rule them all)Which would you choose? What other questions would you ask before deciding? (we use SQL server very generically).
My vote would always be for the latest version simply because you get to use much better features and a lot more powerful database engine. So, I would suggest, go for SQL 2016 ( or if possible SQL 2017 as its already on GA).
Need to be just aware that standard edition comes with resource limitations ( Max: 128 GB RAM, 24 core processor ).Main item to think about is if the application would support SQL 2016 or SQL 2017.
Great point on the 2017 GA. I've been told the 2016 licenses have already been purchased, but if we are doing this it's worth the ask if 2017 is an option.
December 29, 2017 at 5:02 pm
Eirikur Eiriksson - Saturday, December 23, 2017 8:43 AMReReplaced - Friday, December 22, 2017 7:35 PMThat's the choice I've been given. 1 month into work at a small business with 1 well used 2008 r2 SQL Server (average 9k transactions/sec. with sustained periods of 20K mainly due to BizTalk EDI. 3 db's around 100 GB, 12 smaller ones, Hyper V environment not efficiently configured (1 lun to rule them all)Which would you choose? What other questions would you ask before deciding? (we use SQL server very generically).
Are those actual transactions or technical transactions?
What hardware are you on?
😎
when we are hovering around 8K transactions, I want to believe many of those are technical transactions, but have not had time to dig into the details of the transactions.
Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply