February 10, 2006 at 2:45 pm
Yelena,
You commented that you prefer app/db consolidation over db/db consolidation. I personally would stay clear of that as you cannot lock down the amount of memory an application will attempt to take while you can with the multiple instances of SQL Server. Additionally, you now have someone who manages the application having the capability to manage your database server which I am very concerned about. Too picky on my part probably but if I am going to be paged in the middle of the night because of a bad server configuration I want to know that it was my fault (or someone on my team). Just my thoughts.
I would be curious to hear other comments on this as well.
David
@SQLTentmaker“He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” - Jim Elliot
February 10, 2006 at 4:14 pm
David,
I don't outsource these 2 activities to different people. I do both myself for my projects. As well as basic server support outside of the Infrastructure standard activities. You do have to be qualified to support both (or all 3 I would say). Unless you and your team do everything on the machine yourself or superwise it (everything is in one hands) you will be paged.
Regards,Yelena Varsha
February 10, 2006 at 4:47 pm
Basically, I agree Yelena's suggestion to put Appl/DB on the same server; this might be better under the condition of only one default instance.
This way, the memory and storage utilization are better to control. And internal appl service patch and internal database service patch are for one destination!
p.s. Thanks sqlServerCentral to bring a couple of good articales today: from DTS in SQL2005 to monitoring blocks.
just one suggestion:today's question of the day is kind of not very proper, from my point of view. Wish to bring some more daily and 'real' questions.
thanks
-D
Viewing 3 posts - 16 through 17 (of 17 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply