August 28, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Hi,
In our organization, we have 3 SQL Server instances were installed on same server for BizTalk Server 2006 R2 Application.
ServerA\INS1 has BizTalkMsgBoxDb database
ServerA\INS2 has BizTalkDTADb database
ServerA\INS3 has BizTalkMgmtDb and SSODB databases
I did not understand what is the purpose of creating 3 instances for BizTalk Server 2006 R2 Application? Is the Best Practice from MS? Any performance increase? If yes in what way we achieve the performance improvement?
Please advice
August 28, 2009 at 10:53 pm
Typically installing multiple instances on the same server is not related to performance increase but moreso to business policy, politics, or something of that nature.
Though this article is for BizTalk 2009, it is performance based. It may be of some use.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
August 29, 2009 at 1:49 am
I've seen this where the design team ideally want to separate out databases onto separate servers but when it comes to deployment the costs involved mean the separate servers become separate instances on the server with the idea of moving them off at a later date
August 30, 2009 at 6:12 am
We have all these databases running on same instance.
In my opinion, having single databases running on different instances and they all on same server, will decrease the performance and increase the overhead.
August 30, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Separate instances are sometimes implemented when a business wants to create clear separation. This may be for security reasons, compliance and regulatory reasons, or to create clear separation between software applications.
There is no performance benefit to be gained from creating separate instances of SQL Server. If the intention is to separate the physical resources that are to be allocated to a particular instance i.e. memory then the Resource Governor feature, available in SQL Server 2008, would be a more appropriate implementation choice.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply