| Linchi Shea 2006-10-25, 6:00 am |
| I have been doing a lot of hardware-related SQL performance testing, and one
lesson I learned, which turns out to be obvious, is that you really need to
conduct some tests yourself if you want to be sure.
It is often effective and efficient to start with three classes of standard
server configurations, small, medium, and large, test your app on each, and
just pick one that has enough capacity for your app. There are too many
choices out there, and it would be too overwhelming to try to make a decide
with too many factors all beign considered at the same time.
That said, I would not consider Itanium given what you described. No need to
go there.
Linchi
"Parveen.Beniwal.Daffodil@gmail.com" wrote:
> Hi all
>
> I am having a SQL Server database of arround 110GB and 250 Users. What
> is best suited hardware requirements for handling of such a database. I
> am having following requirements from the server:
>
> 1. Feeding purpose : On which continously feeding is done by average
> 200 users.
> 2. Reporting purpose : on which average hundred of repords are running
> at a time.
>
> Right now i am having two servers for both of the above said purposes
> with the following configuration.
>
> Feeding Server
>
> HPSERVER 370G4
> 3.2 Xeon Single processor
> 3GB RAM
> 1 SCSI 73GB 15000 RPM(OS & Transaction Log), 4 SCSI * 73GB with RAID 0
> (Data Files) and 2 IDE * 300GB (Backups)
>
> Reporting Server
>
> Board SE7520BD2V
> 2 x XEON 3.2 GHz CPU 800 FSB with 2MB Cache
> 4GB RAM
> 3 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 to
> know what upgrades or changes I need to do in the configuration
> according to the load and performence on existing servers. Here is the
> table of performence counters along with their values to show the load
> and performence for both of the servers.
>
> ReportServer Value FeedingServ
er Value
> Counter Instance Av
g. Min. Max. Avg. Min. Max.
> Pages/sec 0.081 0 8.001 0.02 0 1.993
> Avg. Disc Queue length _Total 18.658 13.592 51.896 34.421 0 175.783
> % Processor Time _Total 36.841 5.469 64.453 79.837 54.688 100
> Buffer Cache hit ratio 97.702 93.595 99.463 97.41 77.261 99.989
> Checkpoint pages/sec 0 0 0 0 0 0
> Lazy writes/sec 1.243 0 30.003 14.263 0 97.194
> Page life expectancy 17 4 81
10 6 14
> Avg. Disk
> Bytes/ transfer _Total 379
34.133 7903.004 128427.747 53806.538 8025.801 141750.562
> Avg. Disk
> Bytes/Read _Total 16737.419 8192 42895.862 54228.822 8170.499 143489.965
> Avg. Disk Bytes/Write _Total 12298.494 0 65536 11708.014 0 92842.667
> % Disk Time _Total 77.555 49.976 261.966 760.356 12.534 4890.383
> Users Connections 17 17
18 195 185 212
> Batch Requests/sec 0.859 0 23 73.215 0 205.009
> Transactions/sec _Total 1.768 0 18.001 59.314 3 241.814
> Page splits/sec 0 0 0 1.03 0 5.007
>
> Please suggest what should be the configuration for my new server.
> Should I consider buying an Dual Itanium Processor based system with 16
> Gigs of Ram and 8 Hard Disks in Raid 0. Or Should I consider buying a
> Quad Xeon Dual Core Processor based system. Or may be my existing HP
> server can be upgraded to dual processor and 8 Gigs of Ram and 2-3 more
> hard disks? Pls recommend what should be the factors that sould be
> considered, guiding priciples and my approact to reach a decision.
>
> With Best Regards
> Parveen Beniwal
>
>
|