I joined a project where 100,000 rows were added everyday. Now due to
additional customers the expectation is 2 million reocrds/day ie 10 GB worth
of textfiles. We have to estimate the hard disk, memory, # of CPUs etc.We
will have one yearworth of data in the db. Rest will be in tapes etc.
We will be using WIN2000, SQL Server2000.- Any comparable server sizing will
be appreciated.
1. Tohandle every day load, I thought that we will have a table for each day
(pre created in the database )and have a view with union all selecting
fromall these 365 tables. (This is the only way to partition in MSSQL Server
right?).
2. The requirement is to populate datawarehouse tables with all the data.
However there will be only inserts mostly but there can be updates too which
happenned in the past 12 days.Hence we have to use the data from the last
12 days and massage it etc and populate into datawarehouse tables.
How can I do this so that I will have the datawarehouse tables with n-12
days of data and I will alwys add the last 12 days data to it.
I am in the process of formulating recommendations with respect to the purchase of additional storage for our current SQL 2012 SharePoint (2013) instance. My recommendation is to purchase separate storage (i.e, 15k disks) for the TempDB and Tlogs respectively (two sets of raid 10 disks). Currently, this server is hosting several instances, including SP, using two arrays (one for database and the other for Tlogs).
I am attempting to find information/recommendations on how to go about projecting the amount of storage for each of these while factoring in for growth.
Additional Details:
how to best formulate a reasonable estimate. Our largest content database belongs to IT and is currently ~80GB. That said, this is currently an outlier. The remaining content databases are less than 10GB (most are less than 2-3 GB). However, SharePoint will be used for digital document imaging in addition to, eventually, replacing file shares as our primary document storage medium once we roll it out.
Our current tempDB is ~400MB, but the instance was recently started a few days ago, as we had to failover to our backup server for hardware maintenance. I do not have any historical data on TempDB growth at this time. Also, I don't know how useful this would be given we have not fully deployed yet.
We are considering migrating our Oracle database over to SQLserver 7.0. I'd like to do some sizing estimates, but I have not been able find any methods for sizing SQL server 7.0 databases. There didn't seem to be any calculation guidlines or formulas in the manual or the online documentation. The only formulas I have found on the WEB are for version 6.5. Does anyone have (or know where I can find)formulas that are valid for sizing SQL server 7.0 databases?
Note: an archived message on this site referred to an attachment containing sizing formulas, but the attachment was not accesible.
We are designing a system using .NET/ASP.NET and SQL Server (2000 Standard as a customer requirement). The system will be hosted into 2 dedicated servers (an web/application and a db server) and we need to estimate the hardware requirements needed.
Could anyone help me on sizing this? Is there any literature on how to do this? I found some sizing web sites but I'd like to double check them. I already have some estimation on data storage size/growth based on some information I've got from the customer.
Hello I am sizing a database server for Business Objects Enterprise XI R2. In addition to housing this database we plan on consolodating a few other databases to this server. I am wondering what type of array I should be considering for these databases.
We are experiencing some contention of resources between our RDBMS and our OLAP environment; both SQL2005; so we are going to put the OLAP side of life onto another seperate box. Therefore I need to work out what sort of requirements we are going to need; and this is where i have no idea.
I have had a look at the HP sizers, however this is looking primarily at normal RDBMS setups rather than specifically for OLAP. Is there any specifics that I need to consider/nail down before working this out?
To give you an idea: We currently have 210 million rows in our main fact table, and each row is averaging about 330 bytes The size of our current OLAP database is only 4GB It appears as though we are currently getting anywhere between 6 and 20-30 concurrent users
Considering the above; I would have thought a dual core cpu setup (maybe x2) with 8-10GB of ram would have been the ticket? Now I have done a server sizing exercise for a normal SQL2005 installation; considering temp db on seperate spindles to the log and database tables etc; but what sort of considerations do I need to do for a server running SSAS?
Thanks in advance for any assistance anyone can offer on this front
With the current web app that I am writing, I am starting to plan ahead to the scalability problems that I am planning on encountering with the number of users that I may have...
My hosting plan now allows for a 50MB SQL Server database, but, I know that will not last long, each user will be using 3-5MB each of the database, so I am going to outgrow my space fast.
Would looking into (until i have enough subscribers to get a dedicated host), SQL Hosting be a good idea? Atleast to start off with something like http://www.alentus.com/hosting/sqlserver.asp ?
But then again, would a SQL Database growing to large get bad? Within a few years, i expect to have at max 5,000 users, so that could grow to a 25GB database... with millions of rows.
Would breaking it up into smaller databases for each N amount of users be a wise idea? Or would it not really matter?
We are planning to deploy the MS Reporting Services. Unfortunately,there isn't much guidance on how to effectively size a server.Here are my questions:1) In an environment with 1 reporting server (hosting the reportingdata layer, application, and management layer) connecting to 1 or moreSQL servers (over 2 trunked 1Gbps switches connections), what is theconstraining resource when running large reports against a database ofsay 4GB in size? CPU, RAM, DISK, or Network speed on the ReportingServer? Or the Data hosting SQL server? Or does it depend on code?2) If I have a Duel Core CPU, do I buy 1 CPU license. MS had respondedto the HyperThreading as 2 virtual CPUs with the statement that you buyCPU licenses based on socket count effectively. This would imply thatif I buy a 4 Duel Core AMD Opteron Proliant 585 (8 CPU cores in 4packages / sockets), I can run MS Reporting Services Standard Edition.Is that true?Any input or direction would be appreciated.Paul V.
Hello, We are establishing a database server for our product suite containg 14 products- these products is basically intended to be used by CAs and Accountants.
my databaseserver will have 14 databases- 4 are very small, 4 are complex and 6 are Very complex- there is a close intraction between all these databases. at any time there will be around 500 users using these products but since these products are seasonal there is a chance that all 500 users are connected to one database only.(but there is also a possiblity that load is equally distributed on all the databases) My product will run on intranat.
My requirement is: 1. What is best server configuration for hosting such type of database.(sqlserver 2005) 2. How many concurrent users sqlserver supports(MSaccess supports 15 concurrent users) 3. I want that if user has license for 10 users my Database should bear load of only 10 user.
I have been working on SQL Server Capacity Planning for a few weeks now and have gathered a lot of materials, but non of thes materials contain recommended best practices on SQL Server capacity planning and also they do not contain operational guidelines.
I would be glad if anyone can recommend a website or book that contain information on SQL Server Capacity Planning Best Practices.
I was browsing Microsoft's SQL Server site, looking forsome details about SQL Server 2005. Didn't find whatI was looking for...I'm thinking about moving an existing SQL Server 2000workload to a new box, using SQL Server 2005, andmaybe the 64-bit version.My questions are:1. What is the current target date for release of SQL Server 2005?Will 64-bit ship when 32-bit ships?2. Will 64-bit SQL Server 2005 require a special versionof Windows Server 2003 (e.g. Windows Server 2003 Enterprise x64)?Will it work with both Intel and AMD processors?3. How many CPUs, and how much memory, will be supported bySQL Server 2005, 32-bit and 64-bit, on each OS that can runSQL Server 2005.I'm looking for a chart here, something like the chart onpage 117 of Kalen Delaney's "Inside SQL Server 2000" book.SQL Server 2005 SQL Server 2005Feature Enterprise 32-bit Enterprise 64-bit------------------- ----------------- -----------------CPUs supportedWin Srvr 2003:Win Srvr 2003 Adv:Win Srvr 2003 Ent x64:Physical memorysupportedWin Srvr 2003:Win Srvr 2003 Adv:Win Srvr 2003 Ent x64:Has Microsoft published this info, and I just can find it?
We have a project already developed iusing VS 2003 Enterprise architect edition using sql server 2000(have lots of table and stored procs etc.) Now planning to switch to Sql server 2005 are there any issues associated with the switch.
I mean front end programming wise asp.net and vb.net front end codes do they work straight away or need to make any changes to all the front end codes, we are using datasets, data readers calling stored procs and also using lot of hash tables and XML object to make bulk loads to sql server via sqlxml3.0 sp3. Please help thank you very much for the information.
Hi allI am having a SQL Server database of arround 110GB and 250 Users. Whatis best suited hardware requirements for handling of such a database. Iam having following requirements from the server:1. Feeding purpose : On which continously feeding is done by average200 users.2. Reporting purpose : on which average hundred of repords are runningat a time.Right now i am having two servers for both of the above said purposeswith the following configuration.Feeding ServerHPSERVER 370G43.2 Xeon Single processor3GB RAM1 SCSI 73GB 15000 RPM(OS & Transaction Log), 4 SCSI * 73GB with RAID 0(Data Files) and 2 IDE * 300GB (Backups)Reporting ServerBoard SE7520BD2V2 x XEON 3.2 GHz CPU 800 FSB with 2MB Cache4GB RAM3 SCSI * 73GB with RAID 0 (Data Files and Transaction Log), 2 SATA *300GB (Backups) , 1 80GB IDE(OS)I want to fullfill both of my requirements from a single . I want toknow what upgrades or changes I need to do in the configurationaccording to the load and performence on existing servers. Here is thetable of performence counters along with their values to show the loadand performence for both of the servers.ReportServer ValueFeedingServer ValueCounter Instance Avg. Min. Max. Avg.Min. Max.Pages/sec 0.081 0 8.001 0.020 1.993Avg. Disc Queue length _Total 18.658 13.592 51.89634.421 0 175.783% Processor Time _Total 36.841 5.469 64.45379.837 54.688 100Buffer Cache hit ratio 97.702 93.595 99.46397.41 77.261 99.989Checkpoint pages/sec 0 0 00 0 0Lazy writes/sec 1.243 0 30.003 14.2630 97.194Page life expectancy 17 4 8110 6 14Avg. DiskBytes/transfer _Total 37934.133 7903.004128427.747 53806.538 8025.801 141750.562Avg. DiskBytes/Read _Total 16737.419 8192 42895.86254228.822 8170.499 143489.965Avg. Disk Bytes/Write _Total 12298.494 0 6553611708.014 0 92842.667% Disk Time _Total 77.555 49.976 261.966 760.35612.534 4890.383Users Connections 17 17 18195 185 212Batch Requests/sec 0.859 0 2373.215 0 205.009Transactions/sec _Total 1.768 0 18.00159.314 3 241.814Page splits/sec 0 0 0 1.030 5.007Please suggest what should be the configuration for my new server.Should I consider buying an Dual Itanium Processor based system with 16Gigs of Ram and 8 Hard Disks in Raid 0. Or Should I consider buying aQuad Xeon Dual Core Processor based system. Or may be my existing HPserver can be upgraded to dual processor and 8 Gigs of Ram and 2-3 morehard disks? Pls recommend what should be the factors that sould beconsidered, guiding priciples and my approact to reach a decision.With Best RegardsParveen Beniwal
I am replacing the corporate SQL Server at work. The new server will have 6 striped disks of 160G with about 4G of RAM. The current SQL Server currently has two instances which run web applications and a small database warehouse about 6G. Analysis Services is also installed.
Due to a couple of new apps being added to the server and the SQL Server 2000 enterprise license we acquired, i was thinking of adding 2 more instances so that the applications can be independently managed in terms of restarting the SQL Server. I also would like to permanently fix the memory settings on each instance to give more resources to more important applications. The log and data files would also be spilt onto 2 separate hard disks. i understand there are implications on performance such as CPU etc. Is it normally advisable to have more than 1 or 2 instances ? Most of the applications are not very CPU intensive. What other implications or performance issues would l have ?
I've been fixing some issues lately where weekly maintenance has been causing logs to grow and filling disks.
Is there any rule of thumb for allocating log space for doing reorgs and rebuilds in a worst case scenario? I'm thinking 3x the largest database size?
I've been watching them run on databases in the range of 50GB where the logs are growing well over that for rebuilds or even reorgs. Once you have a few databases like this on a server, you can suddenly eat through a lot of disk space just for holding logs during maintenance.
Hi,Is 'sqlserver.exe' the only windows process does everything for thatinstance of the database?Please explain in details the SQL server process architecture.Thanks*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
Thank you in advance for any advice that is provided from by the Dev Shed Users.
I'm on a development team that has been having an ongoing discussion/argument about the best way to handle our users needs while in Europe.
We are developing a Purchase Order application in VB.net using MSSQL Server 2000. We have about 5 out of 10 users that take a six-week trip to Europe. While in Europe the users will need to use the application. However, there are some cities they visit where the network connection will be slim to none.
The ongoing argument is as follows:
-Should we create a server running SQL Server 2000 for them to take Europe and sync up the two databases when they return?
-Should we create a version of the application running MS Access?
-Should we create a version of the application running MySQL?
-Should we do something completely different that we haven't thought of?
-Also, I'm not sure if the following is a possible architecture, from what I've found online I haven't seen an architecture that runs both SQL Server and Access (hope this makes sense):
Build the VB.net application running a shell of the database in Access (locally) that temporarily houses the data and tracks the database transactions made while using the system. Then upon closing the application a ?module? would execute that would perform the transactions made by the user on SQL Server. Then we could dump the SQL Server Database to an Access database before they go to Europe, and run their changes on the SQL Server Database when they return. Users at home will not be making changes to the same data as those in Europe.
Hi, I am planning on having an SSIS dedicated server in a new install of SQL 2005. We will be using MSDB to store the packages. But I have a question.
Since we will be using MSDB to store the packages, how should the setup be? Should SQL also be installed on the SSIS server? Or can we use the SQL server (seperated dedicated server) to store the files?
Since SQL Agent is installed with SQL Server, can we use our SQL Server to schedule the packages? Or if using the SQL Server to schedule the packages make the packages run on that server (instead of the SSIS server)?
Basically I am confused on what needs to be installed on the SSIS server (since we will be using MSDB storage) and where the packages should be scheduled (if scheduled on SQL but SSIS is installed on a different server, where will it process??).
Hi, can anyone answer me this? I recently inherited a SQL Server database set up. The user database size is about 3 times as big as necessary - does this matter? Does it have an impact on performance and if so is there anything I can do to reduce the size? From what I have managed to gather so far you cannot use alter db to change the database to a smaller size than it was originally created at. If anyone can help it would be most appreciated!
Hello, I'm looking for a sizing Excel (or any other format) file, that permits me evaluate the size of my sql server database, actually I have one excel file for Oracle, where I only put the expected # of rows, the average size of the columns, and other few data, and I can get the size (in Megabytes) of a table or an Index.
I was told that my company is thinking about inplementing a "backup" server for out content loading server (aka load server)... this server loads files from several companies and then replicates the data out to our production environment to be seen. This server has serveral DTS/IS packages that do all this data movement and manipulation... I am not too up to date on technology for what they are asking so I thought I would ask here for some recommendations to head in the right direction...
I am not sure if clustering will work or maybe mirroring the database...
The server now is a publisher so the backup server would have to pick up if the #1 failed and then give command back to #1 once it is good... this is the part I have no idea about...
The #2 server would not have to really do anything but keep its data up to date unless #1 fails so you could say it would be fine to be a passive server...
I've got a question that I can't seem to find an answer for, I was hoping someone here might be able to point me in the right direction. I've set up a stored procedure that will email someone if any entries are added to a table . However, the output is garbled looking (see below)
Client Number SSN Client Name Old SD New SD ------------- ----------- ---------------------------------------- -------- -------- 800901 899-34-3482 John Smith 04/20/20 05/01/20 400909 144-23-0029 John Smith 04/09/20 04/11/20 447788 445-89-9967 kjl;j;j 04/05/20 04/12/20 300099 234-90-7815 John Johnson 04/08/20 04/15/20
What's happened is the client name field is too wide, so the New SD field kicks down to the next line. I'd like to clean this up. Is there a way I can either increase the length of the row before it moves to the next line, or can I re-size the client name field to match the size of the data. In other words, cli_name_vc is declared as a varchar(40). If the longest name that comes up in the query is 18 characters long, can I re-size the output so that it does not take up 40 characters?
I am planning to install SP3, anyone have suggestion before installation what are the precaution I need to take. please post your comments. Thanks in advance.
hi, can any one tell me what is the meaning of capacity planning and where do I get info about it,and how does this help me in sql server admin role thanks
my company wants implements transactional replication. We have three servers one in chicago(production) second server in chicago, third server in kansas city.Can give me plan for implementing the replication.
