October 29, 2003 at 1:02 pm
Anyone know any good books/articles about selecting hardware and configurations for SQL Server? I've got to select some new boxes soon for a production environment.
October 29, 2003 at 1:26 pm
Start with Microsoft's web site for SQL Server. There you can find system requirements for each version. That will give you minimum requirements.
-SQLBill
October 29, 2003 at 1:55 pm
Thanks 🙂 Do you have any sources for more complicated configurations (# of processors, RAID, RAM to optimize performance and expand as the database gets bigger)???
October 30, 2003 at 7:10 am
There is no exact rule.
Tell us how your production environment is (database size, number of concurrent users, number of transactions per minute, type of application (OLTP, OLAP), average size of the transactions/queries, required response time...)
and we will try to tell you what we think to be the best HW infrastructure to choose.
One thing is sure: If you choose a bigger HW then required no user will complain, but if you choose a smaller one...
Bye
Gabor
Bye
Gabor
October 30, 2003 at 7:27 am
Hiring a consultant knowledgeable in SQL Server design can be a very good idea.
--Jonathan (HP Master ASE-SQL Server )
--Jonathan
October 30, 2003 at 7:29 am
quote:
(HP Master ASE-SQL Server)
as for acronyms, what does this stand for?
Frank
--
Frank Kalis
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Webmaster: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs
My blog: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs/frankkalis/[/url]
October 30, 2003 at 7:39 am
quote:
quote:
(HP Master ASE-SQL Server)as for acronyms, what does this stand for?
Frank
http://www.hp.com/certification/region/na/mase/iss/sql_server.html
--Jonathan
--Jonathan
October 30, 2003 at 7:44 am
Thanks for explanation!
Frank
--
Frank Kalis
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Webmaster: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs
My blog: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs/frankkalis/[/url]
October 30, 2003 at 7:52 am
ASE - Ask Someone Else.
Jeremy
October 30, 2003 at 7:57 am
select the best as you can.
October 30, 2003 at 12:39 pm
I have 2 highly transactional DBs, 1 reporting DB, and 2 not so big DBs. They are used by a web application that should have no less than 2% downtime.
Currently I have one server on RAID 5.
I was thinking of one server with RAID 5 for data, RAID 1 for transaction logs, and RAID 1 for OS files with 4 processors.
I am the only one in my organization who knows the little bit I do about SQL Server.
October 30, 2003 at 12:47 pm
October 30, 2003 at 12:50 pm
Check this out - especially Chapter:6
October 30, 2003 at 1:14 pm
quote:
I have 2 highly transactional DBs, 1 reporting DB, and 2 not so big DBs. They are used by a web application that should have no less than 2% downtime.Currently I have one server on RAID 5.
I was thinking of one server with RAID 5 for data, RAID 1 for transaction logs, and RAID 1 for OS files with 4 processors.
I am the only one in my organization who knows the little bit I do about SQL Server.
If you can end up with two servers, put the DSS databases on one and the OLTP databases on the other. It's better to use RAID 10 for the data on the OLTP server. Depending on factors you have not given us, you may want to buy fewer processors and use the money for more disks or more RAM. Your plan to use separate RAID 1 arrays for executables and tran logs is good. Buy good fault-tolerant caching array controllers.
--Jonathan
--Jonathan
Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply