Post reply

Performance Differences -Standard vs. Enterprise (e.g. Intraquery parallelism)

  • April 13, 2006 at 7:49 am

    #167693

    Does anyone know with certainty that Intraquery parallelism is available only in 2005 Enterprise, and not in Standard? Can you provide documentation on this (I have searched relentlessly and will continue)?

    Also, any thoughts or better yet documentation on other PERFORMANCE differences between Standard and Enterprise?

    With so many features once reserved for Enterprise now available in Standard, we are considering a downgrade with the move to 2005. MS is trying to scare us. I could care less about online restores, or parallel index builds, but I do not want to degrade query performance.

    Thanks in advance.

    Terry

     

  • April 13, 2006 at 8:17 am

    #632401

    instarquery paralellism is available on both editions

    performance differences between editions will depend on the number fo CPUs and the amount of RAM although not all ram is available in enterprise if you are runing windows 2000 standard server where only 2Gb can be allocated to apps such as SQL enterprise.

    but for a 2GB 2CPU system performance should be the same.

    if you're considering the downgrade then make sure you have windows 2004 enterprise edition so that at least you can support the 4GB of 2005 standard SQL

    MVDBA

  • April 13, 2006 at 8:52 am

    #632420

    Thank you Mike.

    It is my understanding that intraquery paralellism is available on both editions also. But MS has scared management here with a verbal commnents. Do you have any documentation to support intraquery paralellism is available on both editions?

    Terry

  • April 13, 2006 at 9:06 am

    #632425

    none, as i've never had the reason to query it.

    since standard edition supports multimple cpus and i can see my queries in the query execution plan as using parallelism i've never even doubted that it would.

    i can post an execution plan if you like..

    MVDBA

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply