I was informed (by Microsoft) that for all SQL Servers prior 2008 recommended (or must) stripe size is 64k
Does anyone knows full set of settings that must be applied when
setting up raid 5 for sql server box
Thanks
Dear All,
I've been asked to build a 64bit Windows 2003 server which will SQL Server Enterprise 2000 64bit edition on it. This is my first foray into the world of 64 Server OSs, so hoping to get some advise from the wise. This will be used as a back end to a web application. This server has been purchased with 5 disks (all 146GB disks) in it. Currently this has been setup from the manufacturer as RAID 1+1 with 1 disk not allocated.
I was going to reconfigure the logical drives to have RAID 1 (2 drives) which has OS and swapfile on it, and RAID 5 (3 drives) with all SQL data (the main DB I am estimating to be 20-30GB) on it.
Reading through a couple of forums and google results regarding determining stripe size, it seems some people are recommending putting the tempdb and logs on a seperate drive to the rest of the SQL data, as well as trying to get the optinum strip size.
Can you let me know your opinions on if my proposed logical drive setup seems OK (or just keep one logical drive as either RAID5 or 6), and if tempdb and logs should be on the OS, or should stay on the RAID 5 array? Also, for the stripe size, should I think the same as a 32bit OS, and just use 128/64 or 64/64?
Geoff
edit: SQL Server type corrected.
HI There,
Generally speaking, is it better to use a large or small stripe size for a Raid 5 array (4 drives) ? I would appreciate any specifics also.
Thanks in advance.
Charlie
I heard that is said that MSQ SQL 2000 doesn't work correctly with raid (for example raid 5)
I have my application in 2 companies. The first one with not a raid controller (even though the computer has a raid controller) executes a backup when no users are online in more than 8 minuter and the file of the database backup is 3,5 GB. The memory of the computer is 2GB.
In the other company when more than 20 users work in the database with a raid controller the backup is occured in 2,6 minutes and the database backup file is more than 6 GB. The memory of this computer is 4 GB.
What is your opinion?
Is this rumor true?
Do you suggest I should apply raid 5 to the first server?
Regards,
Manolis
We have a Dell 6450 quad 1.6MHz, 4GB RAM running SQL 2000 on Win 2000server with 2 PERC3/QC cards. Server has 4 internal drives configuredas two raid-1 drives (OS and SQL logs). Server has 7 more drives inexternal drive rack for RAID-5 SQL data. We did not have a UPSavailable for server at installation so I set cache as write-through,even though should not matter since it writes back at restart right?.I am planning on switching back to write-back cache and was wonderinghow do users run this setting and any problms/caveats? How do I tellif the PERC cards are mirrored? Or does one PERC card run 4 internaldrives and other card run raid5? How much performance boost do youget from using write-back? What are the recommended settings for readcache (readahead, adaptive etc)? Can you post some reference websites? Thanks P
View 1 Replies View RelatedFolks
What stripe size is recommended for Win2K Server which will be running a ~10 Gb database with normal read write ? I was thing 32K ..
can anyone help me? I just installed WinNT 4 SP3 and now trying to install SQL 6.5 on an IBM Netfinity 5500 with RAID 5. There is one 500mb partition for the system and then one 12 gig partition and SQL only seems to see ~117mb of the 12 gig partition. Is this a known prob? Thanks for any input
Josh
I am configuring a new database server, without SAN access, and want to know what is the best practice for SCSI RAID configuration. Do most folks prefer RAID 5 or RAID 10 configurations where their databases will reside?
I've always heard that RAID 5 (or better, RAID 10) is preferred for the actual database (mdf), but RAID 1 for logging.
If I have a dedicated physical volume for each, what's the performance hit for selecting RAID 1 for the MDF files? 3%, 20%, 200%?
Doing so (all RAID1) will allow me to have a separate physical volume for the TEMP database - that is heavily used by my app.
RAID 5 beats RAID 10Can I get some feedback on these results? We were having some seriousIO issues according to PerfMon so I really pushed for RAID 10. Theresults are not what I expected.I have 2 identical servers.Hardware:PowerEdge 28502 dual core dual core Xeon 2800 MHz4GB RAMController Cards: Perc4/DC (2 arrays), Perc4e/Di (1 array)PowerVault 220SEach Array consisted of 6-300 GB drives.Server 1 = Raid 103, 6-disk arraysServer 2 = Raid 5 (~838 GB each)3, 6-disk arrays (~1360 GB each)TestWinner% FasterSQL Server - UpdateRAID 513Heavy ETLRAID 516SQLIO - Rand WriteRAID 1040SQLIO - Rand ReadRAID 1030SQLIO - Seq WriteRAID 515SQLIO - Seq ReadRAID 5MixedDisktt - Seq WriteRAID 518Disktt - Seq ReadRAID 52000Disktt - Rand ReadRAID 562Pass Mark - mixedRAID 10VariesPass Mark -Simulate SQL ServerRAID 51%I have much more detail than this if anyone is interested.
View 13 Replies View Related
I am trying to resize a database initial log file from 500M to 2M. I€™m using€?
ALTER DATABASE <DBNAME> MODIFY FILE ( NAME = <DBLOGFILENAME, SIZE = 2 ) "
And I'm getting "MODIFY FILE failed. Specified size is less than current size." I tried going into the database properties and setting the log file to 2M, but it doesn€™t keep the changes.
Any help with this process?
Novice wants to learn why it is not recommended to install sql 2005 express on to a 2003 domain controller. I have installed sql 2005 express on a 2003 domain controller and when I tried to run management studio it failed to run. there seems to be no problem with the engine, oh I also installed books online I wonder... can there be an issue with the books online and management studio I remember there were problems in the beta era. Now I am wondering if it's a good idea at all I feel like I have been left at train station with all my luggage, I have all this equipment... work stations, a server, printers and no resolution to my problem. most of all I want to learn why I shouldn't install sql on a domain controller... can someone please explain in detail.
dbarselow
Arnie I have sql express, 2003 R2 as a domain controller, a laptop I use as a remote connection to the server. What I want to accomplish is to connect to a website using the server as a branch headquarters type of connections. I was told to look into using sharepoint services. I noticed my server has this service. Can't I use sql in this type of senario. I want to be able to have content uploaded to the web site by verious employees then have that content scanned and cleaned if needed and made available for my server. And from there I would have what I need to continue my publishing the content.
View 1 Replies View RelatedHello,
I have been told by DBA's that you should never put SQL Server on Domain controller.
Can any one give me good (VALID) reason why I should not do that?
Thanks for you help in advance ALL
Hi
I have an installation of Cognos Controller 8.2. The installation of application seems to be all 100%.I can create blank SQL database use the application to upgrade the tables but as soon as I populate the database with data and try to optimise from the application there is an issue. It gives me the error below:
Standard error
Number 5
Source: Frango dircect.Optimise.DeleteTempFox#controllerProxyClie nt
Description: System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapException
server was unable to process request-->System.Security.Security Exception: Permission Denied
I have checked permissions on the database and all is fine "fastnet" is added as the DB owner and the SQL instance is 100%, Can anyone please shed some light on this.
I have a problem with OLAP running on a Server that is domain controller, the problems is that after the Server was promoted to Domain controller, all users are allowed to see all databases and cubes, I did the same test on another server and found same problem after upgrading to domain controller.
I already tried demoting the server as domain controller to member server, but did not work.
Anyone knows how to revert this thanks,
Ronnet :mad:
One last question ( for today)...
The recomindation to not install SQL express on a Domain Controller. Is there a specific technical reason or is it just the general don't use the DC has a Terminal server / sql server / application server line of thought?
The reason I ask is we have been using SQL 2000 on a W2k3 server configured as a DC as well as for Terminal Services. (yes I am aware of the security risks) but in a small network with 5 or less ft clients and 30 thin, I can't justify a seperate DC and App server.
Kay
I have 2 questions, the first one is more of a DC/AD issue, but I don't think there is a forum for that. But that question leads directly into my other question which involves SQL Server. I hope someone can give me some feedback.
We have a small network of about 12 users, and we are running SBS 2003 as our DC and Exchange server. We are going to start doing a lot of heavy lifting with data so we got another box to run Server 2003 Standard and SQL Server 2005 Standard. But now it's been suggested that we also install a second DC on the new SQL box. I am opposed because a DC should be on it's own box, and the SQL Server will need all of the available resources. I don't really think we need a second domain controller anyway, considering we have such a small office and good backups.
So my questions are: does anyone have an opinion as to whether or not we really need a second domain controller in our 12 person Small Business Server environment. I'm thinking there wouldn't be a whole lot of benefit. We certainly don't need it to share the load, and a SBS dc cannot give up it's FSMO roles so i don't see how a second dc would be able to properly serve as a failover should the first one go down.
My second question is: what kind of impact on the SQL Server would there be by installing a DC? I know it's not Microsoft recommended to have them on the same box.
Thanks,
-Rick
I have a guy who wants me to move his databases to an external drive. Hardware is my major weakness and I usually think I am McGyver when I can swap out a RAM board in my home PC. Whenever guys in the office start talking hardware, I go hide in the bathroom.
I know I have read that this is a very bad idea in some book and a few message board threads. This guy is going to use SCSI and it is going to be attached to the same controller as his other disks. I know he should have a battery backup for the drive especially if it employs write caching and that it should be formatted to NTFS and not FAT32.
I googled echnettedBOLedMSDNed this for 2 hours yesterday because I remember reading something about disc controllers and external drives and SQL Server being a recipe for disaster but I could not find anything to back me up.
Any words of wisdom or advice?
I want to install SQL Express 2K5 on a lightly used second Windows 2003 SP1 DC. I know about the warning not to do this type of install. However, the group is small and their budget does not allow for another server just for one application. With that being said, the error message I keep getting is "can't create local groups......" (I know that you do not have local groups with AD). So, is there a work around to this issue or can someone point me in the right direction as how to install on a domain controller? Thanks in advance for your time!!!
View 3 Replies View RelatedHello everyone, I have searched the forum regarding this topic and have found numerous good threads about installing SQL Express on a DC. My question is, I am assuming that if installing SQL Express on a Domain Controller is not recommended, that installing the MSDE 2000 on a Domain Controller is not recommended either?
Thanks in advance to all replies!
Tim
Hi
I have a customer that was using Sql 2005 Express on a W2k3 server. They then decided to turn the server in to a second domain controller. When they did this Sql Express stopped working, I'm guess because the account the service was running as nolonger existed (Network Service account). Because of this they demoted it back to just a member server, but still the sql express service wouldn't start.
When I look at their server now I have noticed that the Sql2005$ accounts Sql express created during installation are all missing.
What I want to do now is set the Sql express setvice to use a domain account (using the SqlServer configuration manager), but I'm concerned that because the sql2005$ groups are missing things won't run as expected.
Should I be worried about these accounts?
What would happen when it becomes a domain controller anyway, won't these local account disappear and hence my new sqlexpress service account wouldn't have permission to the sql server data folders??
Thanks for your help
Graham
Hello Everyone,
I saw a lot of webcast about security in Sql Server and many of those talk about that is not recomendable install Sql Server on Windows Server Domain Controller. Actually, I don't know Why not? Someone can explain me, please?
Thank youª!!!
Julian Castiblanco P.
ITPros-DC
Bogotá,Colombia
Any one know the answer?
View 1 Replies View RelatedIf my SQL Server authentication is windows integrated authentication, whenever my application makes a connection to SQL server does it contact the windows active directory domain controller to authenticate the windows user account? How does windows integrated authentication work in the background?
View 9 Replies View RelatedI have SQL 2005 installed in a virtual (ESX) environment with a separate DC. Every minute or so an event shows up in the Application Event Log that says:
Type: Failure Audit
User: dgtestdc1$
Computer: sql1
Source: MSSQLSERVER
Category: (4)
Event ID: 18456
Description:
Login failed for user 'dgtestdc1$'. [Client: <ip address>]
Data includes: SQL1 master
Any idea what is causing this and how to fix it?
Thanks,
Mindy
SQL Server 2005 SP2, installed as a default instance at the domain controller.
SSIS connection failed with the message
Failed to retrieve data for this request. (Microsoft.SqlServer.SmoEnum)
The RPC server is unavailable.
No firewalls, client and server in the same subnet, ping is ok.
I suspect the issue is similar to described here: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/940232
I've given the user all the rights to DCOM MsDTSServer, but I cannot include him to the local "Distributed COM users" group because the domain controller doesn't have local group at all.
I have included the user into the "domain admins" group, after that user got a connection. But this is not good, you know what I mean. Does any other solution exists, without reinstallation SQL Server to another server or giving the administrator's rights to the user?
Thank you.
I am currently runinng Sql Server 2000 on a Windows 2003 domain controller. I cannot access my local sql server using windows authentication. All i receive is a cannot generate SSPI context error. I understand this is probably related to a security policy issue on the domain controller. Also Sqlserveragent service will not remain running and shutdowns immediately after it is started. This also produces an SSPI context error in the error log. If anyone can help with my configuartion of windows server 2003 such that sql server will recognize a valid sysadmin role for my domain admin account it would be greatly appreciated.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI've just got RS Enterprise Edition.
Installed it in a Test Server, ok.
Installed it in a DEV server, having some errors.
My DEV server is an "ALL in 1" server, which is also a Domian Controller.
While Test Server is not a DC.
The installation was succesful but when I open RS Manager thru the web, it gives me a ASP.NET error:
Access to the path "D:Program FilesMicrosoft SQL ServerMSSQLReporting ServicesReportManagerin" is denied.
Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code.
Exception Details: System.UnauthorizedAccessException: Access to the path "D:Program FilesMicrosoft SQL ServerMSSQLReporting ServicesReportManagerin" is denied.
ASP.NET is not authorized to access the requested resource. Consider granting access rights to the resource to the ASP.NET request identity. ASP.NET has a base process identity (typically {MACHINE}ASPNET on IIS 5 or Network Service on IIS 6) that is used if the application is not impersonating. If the application is impersonating via <identity impersonate="true"/>, the identity will be the anonymous user (typically IUSR_MACHINENAME) or the authenticated request user.
To grant ASP.NET write access to a file, right-click the file in Explorer, choose "Properties" and select the Security tab. Click "Add" to add the appropriate user or group. Highlight the ASP.NET account, and check the boxes for the desired access.
I tried doing everything I can possible think of from the error message advice, including adding rights to ASPNET user from ISS to that particular folder...no success.
What I'm suspecting is I can't install RS in a DC box. But I can't find this info anyway in the web.
Anyone can point me to the correct direction or any advice?
I have observed that a temporary loss of a domain controller can causeproblems creating new ado connections between a client machine runningado and a separate sql server machine that are members of the domain.I understand why this happens when creating connections with windowsauthentication. What is a mystery is that it also sometimes effectsnew connections that use "sql authentication". Below is a descriptionof my test scenario.a. Setup 3 machines.i. one domain controller machine. windows 2000 based. I have triedboth a regular domain setup and a domain setup in compatibility mode.ii. one sql server machine that is a member of the domain. windows2000.iii. one client machine running an ado test program that communicateswith the sql server machine. I have tried both 2000 and xp.b. Start your test ado program and create a connection.c. Fire a query.d. It should work.e. Unplug the network cord on the domain controller.f. Create a new connection and fire a new connection about a minute orso after.g. It should work. Apparently the client caches account informationfrom the domain controller for a certain amount of time. The timeseems to be shorter by default in xp than 2000.h. Wait 20 minutes or more.i. Create another new connection. You will notice a timeout error.If your using windows authentication the timeout will happen 100% ofthe time. That is to be expected. If your using sql authenticationthe timeout seems to happen about 50% of the time. I can't explain itother than some strange Microsoft bug. I speculate that it may besome bug with the way ado caches connections. Perhaps a previouslysetup windows authentication connection gets reused by a request for asql authentication connection. However I haven't been able to proveit.Any insight you can offer would be appreciated. I also have a testprogram you can use to reproduce this behavior if you are interested.Thanks,Frank
View 2 Replies View Relatedhow to configure sql express 2008 R2 on windows server 2008 R2 domain controller?? and one more thing, what log on should I use for sql express service in sql server configuration manager on domain controller??
View 2 Replies View RelatedI would like to install SQL server 2005 cluster on Windows 2003 cluster. Is domain controller (AD and DNS) necessary for the SQL server 2005 cluster? If yes, may I install it on one of the SQL server 2005 cluster nodes? Thanks in advance
View 2 Replies View RelatedMy SQL 7 is on RAID 5. Sometimes on non-peak hours, on RAID disks first
two lights ( from left ) are constantly on for hours. NT Task manager, nothing
unusual, SQL current activity - no running user processes. Isn't second light
on RAID comes on if any disk activity ( Read/Write ).
Suggestions are appreciated.
Thanks,
Ivan