Hi,
I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition vs
sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality :
is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover mirror or
do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
Thanks"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
> hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
> on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
>
Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of RAM, and
lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition
> vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality
> : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover
> mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
>
One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
databases.
David|||Thanks David,
So for 1) i'm not sure you've answered the question. I know Workgroup
Edition is 32bit but it can run on Windows 2003 Standard 64bit edition using
WOW. Now because i have a 64bit Opteron will i see SQL run quicker in this
config as opposed to using Windows 2003 Standard 32bit Server? Also are
there any performance penalties using WOW?
For 3) i take it you mean you can only have one prinicipal server per
mirror?
So if i have two SQL server machines running different databases and i need
to use just 1 backup server incase one machine fails what are my best
options?
Log-Shipping? or Replication?
Clustering would be too expensive for us and Mirroring would also be too
expensive if you need one mirror for each SQL server machine.
Thanks.
"David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:%237r4ZseGGHA.1032@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of RAM,
> and lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
>
> No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
>
> One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
> databases.
> David
>|||Most of the benefits of 64 bit architectures are a result of the flat memory
space but Workgroup Edition is not going to be able to take advantage of
most of that. running a 32 bit edition in WOW allows 4 GB of user space so
there is some advantage there. Currently, 64 bit processors are generally
slower than the fastest 32 bit processors so in some cases a 32 bit
processor might actually give better performance than a 64 bit processor and
WOW. Of course, with a 64 bit machine you have the advantage of being able
to upgrade to Standard edition and take advantage of the flat memory space
if you run out of horsepower in WOW.
You can have multiple servers mirrored to a single DB Mirroring server
because individual databases are mirrored. You would have to be careful to
ensure that the mirror has enough resources to both handle the load of
mirroring databases from several server and the load of running the
databases when they're failed over.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uBwm4ejGGHA.3916@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Thanks David,
> So for 1) i'm not sure you've answered the question. I know Workgroup
> Edition is 32bit but it can run on Windows 2003 Standard 64bit edition
> using WOW. Now because i have a 64bit Opteron will i see SQL run quicker
> in this config as opposed to using Windows 2003 Standard 32bit Server?
> Also are there any performance penalties using WOW?
> For 3) i take it you mean you can only have one prinicipal server per
> mirror?
> So if i have two SQL server machines running different databases and i
> need to use just 1 backup server incase one machine fails what are my best
> options?
> Log-Shipping? or Replication?
> Clustering would be too expensive for us and Mirroring would also be too
> expensive if you need one mirror for each SQL server machine.
> Thanks.
>
> "David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
> message news:%237r4ZseGGHA.1032@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>|||Ok great.
Is there anything required to activate WOW on windows server or does it
automatically just work when you install the Workgroup Edition?
Also can you just confirm that the following scenario is doable:
Two SQL machines with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition
named SQL1 and SQL2 (both with there own separate internal ip address)
SQL1 has two databases called DB1 and DB2
SQL2 has two databases called DB3 and DB4
Spare Server (SPARE1) with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition for the Mirror
Witness Server (WIT1)
DB1,DB2,DB3,DB4 are mirrored to the Spare Server (SPARE1) with WIT1 as the
Witness Server
Now if both SQL1 and SQ2 fail at the same time can the Mirror take over all
the connections to these servers?
Thanks.
"Roger Wolter[MSFT]" <rwolter@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23DS1h9jGGHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Most of the benefits of 64 bit architectures are a result of the flat
> memory space but Workgroup Edition is not going to be able to take
> advantage of most of that. running a 32 bit edition in WOW allows 4 GB of
> user space so there is some advantage there. Currently, 64 bit processors
> are generally slower than the fastest 32 bit processors so in some cases a
> 32 bit processor might actually give better performance than a 64 bit
> processor and WOW. Of course, with a 64 bit machine you have the
> advantage of being able to upgrade to Standard edition and take advantage
> of the flat memory space if you run out of horsepower in WOW.
> You can have multiple servers mirrored to a single DB Mirroring server
> because individual databases are mirrored. You would have to be careful
> to ensure that the mirror has enough resources to both handle the load of
> mirroring databases from several server and the load of running the
> databases when they're failed over.
> --
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
> Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
> http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uBwm4ejGGHA.3916@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>|||WOW is always there. Any 32 bit software you install will run in the WOW.
Theoretically, your failover scenario will work if you keep in mind that the
mirror server will have to handle four databases in this case so unless this
server has significantly more power than the primary servers, performance
will suffer if you fail over all the databases.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OmGebPlGGHA.3448@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Ok great.
> Is there anything required to activate WOW on windows server or does it
> automatically just work when you install the Workgroup Edition?
> Also can you just confirm that the following scenario is doable:
> Two SQL machines with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition
> named SQL1 and SQL2 (both with there own separate internal ip address)
> SQL1 has two databases called DB1 and DB2
> SQL2 has two databases called DB3 and DB4
> Spare Server (SPARE1) with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition for the
> Mirror
> Witness Server (WIT1)
> DB1,DB2,DB3,DB4 are mirrored to the Spare Server (SPARE1) with WIT1 as the
> Witness Server
> Now if both SQL1 and SQ2 fail at the same time can the Mirror take over
> all the connections to these servers?
> Thanks.
>
> "Roger Wolter[MSFT]" <rwolter@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:%23DS1h9jGGHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>|||1. Each principal can have exactly 1 mirror. A witness can service as many
principal/mirror pairs as you want it to. Mirroring occurs at a database
level, so you can have an instance of SQL Server where there are multiple
databases on that instance in the role of a mirror.
Mike
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole
views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person
or entity either by inference or direct reference.
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
> hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
> on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition
> vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality
> : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover
> mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
> Thanks
>sql
Showing posts with label hardware. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hardware. Show all posts
Friday, March 30, 2012
Mirroring and 64 vs 32 bit performance
Hi,
I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition vs
sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality :
is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover mirror or
do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
Thanks
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
> on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
>
Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of RAM, and
lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition
> vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality
> : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover
> mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
>
One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
databases.
David
|||Thanks David,
So for 1) i'm not sure you've answered the question. I know Workgroup
Edition is 32bit but it can run on Windows 2003 Standard 64bit edition using
WOW. Now because i have a 64bit Opteron will i see SQL run quicker in this
config as opposed to using Windows 2003 Standard 32bit Server? Also are
there any performance penalties using WOW?
For 3) i take it you mean you can only have one prinicipal server per
mirror?
So if i have two SQL server machines running different databases and i need
to use just 1 backup server incase one machine fails what are my best
options?
Log-Shipping? or Replication?
Clustering would be too expensive for us and Mirroring would also be too
expensive if you need one mirror for each SQL server machine.
Thanks.
"David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:%237r4ZseGGHA.1032@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of RAM,
> and lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
>
> No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
>
> One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
> databases.
> David
>
|||Most of the benefits of 64 bit architectures are a result of the flat memory
space but Workgroup Edition is not going to be able to take advantage of
most of that. running a 32 bit edition in WOW allows 4 GB of user space so
there is some advantage there. Currently, 64 bit processors are generally
slower than the fastest 32 bit processors so in some cases a 32 bit
processor might actually give better performance than a 64 bit processor and
WOW. Of course, with a 64 bit machine you have the advantage of being able
to upgrade to Standard edition and take advantage of the flat memory space
if you run out of horsepower in WOW.
You can have multiple servers mirrored to a single DB Mirroring server
because individual databases are mirrored. You would have to be careful to
ensure that the mirror has enough resources to both handle the load of
mirroring databases from several server and the load of running the
databases when they're failed over.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uBwm4ejGGHA.3916@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Thanks David,
> So for 1) i'm not sure you've answered the question. I know Workgroup
> Edition is 32bit but it can run on Windows 2003 Standard 64bit edition
> using WOW. Now because i have a 64bit Opteron will i see SQL run quicker
> in this config as opposed to using Windows 2003 Standard 32bit Server?
> Also are there any performance penalties using WOW?
> For 3) i take it you mean you can only have one prinicipal server per
> mirror?
> So if i have two SQL server machines running different databases and i
> need to use just 1 backup server incase one machine fails what are my best
> options?
> Log-Shipping? or Replication?
> Clustering would be too expensive for us and Mirroring would also be too
> expensive if you need one mirror for each SQL server machine.
> Thanks.
>
> "David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
> message news:%237r4ZseGGHA.1032@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
|||Ok great.
Is there anything required to activate WOW on windows server or does it
automatically just work when you install the Workgroup Edition?
Also can you just confirm that the following scenario is doable:
Two SQL machines with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition
named SQL1 and SQL2 (both with there own separate internal ip address)
SQL1 has two databases called DB1 and DB2
SQL2 has two databases called DB3 and DB4
Spare Server (SPARE1) with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition for the Mirror
Witness Server (WIT1)
DB1,DB2,DB3,DB4 are mirrored to the Spare Server (SPARE1) with WIT1 as the
Witness Server
Now if both SQL1 and SQ2 fail at the same time can the Mirror take over all
the connections to these servers?
Thanks.
"Roger Wolter[MSFT]" <rwolter@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23DS1h9jGGHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Most of the benefits of 64 bit architectures are a result of the flat
> memory space but Workgroup Edition is not going to be able to take
> advantage of most of that. running a 32 bit edition in WOW allows 4 GB of
> user space so there is some advantage there. Currently, 64 bit processors
> are generally slower than the fastest 32 bit processors so in some cases a
> 32 bit processor might actually give better performance than a 64 bit
> processor and WOW. Of course, with a 64 bit machine you have the
> advantage of being able to upgrade to Standard edition and take advantage
> of the flat memory space if you run out of horsepower in WOW.
> You can have multiple servers mirrored to a single DB Mirroring server
> because individual databases are mirrored. You would have to be careful
> to ensure that the mirror has enough resources to both handle the load of
> mirroring databases from several server and the load of running the
> databases when they're failed over.
> --
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
> Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
> http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uBwm4ejGGHA.3916@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||WOW is always there. Any 32 bit software you install will run in the WOW.
Theoretically, your failover scenario will work if you keep in mind that the
mirror server will have to handle four databases in this case so unless this
server has significantly more power than the primary servers, performance
will suffer if you fail over all the databases.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OmGebPlGGHA.3448@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Ok great.
> Is there anything required to activate WOW on windows server or does it
> automatically just work when you install the Workgroup Edition?
> Also can you just confirm that the following scenario is doable:
> Two SQL machines with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition
> named SQL1 and SQL2 (both with there own separate internal ip address)
> SQL1 has two databases called DB1 and DB2
> SQL2 has two databases called DB3 and DB4
> Spare Server (SPARE1) with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition for the
> Mirror
> Witness Server (WIT1)
> DB1,DB2,DB3,DB4 are mirrored to the Spare Server (SPARE1) with WIT1 as the
> Witness Server
> Now if both SQL1 and SQ2 fail at the same time can the Mirror take over
> all the connections to these servers?
> Thanks.
>
> "Roger Wolter[MSFT]" <rwolter@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:%23DS1h9jGGHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
|||1. Each principal can have exactly 1 mirror. A witness can service as many
principal/mirror pairs as you want it to. Mirroring occurs at a database
level, so you can have an instance of SQL Server where there are multiple
databases on that instance in the role of a mirror.
Mike
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole
views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person
or entity either by inference or direct reference.
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
> on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition
> vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality
> : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover
> mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
> Thanks
>
I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition vs
sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality :
is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover mirror or
do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
Thanks
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
> on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
>
Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of RAM, and
lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition
> vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality
> : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover
> mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
>
One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
databases.
David
|||Thanks David,
So for 1) i'm not sure you've answered the question. I know Workgroup
Edition is 32bit but it can run on Windows 2003 Standard 64bit edition using
WOW. Now because i have a 64bit Opteron will i see SQL run quicker in this
config as opposed to using Windows 2003 Standard 32bit Server? Also are
there any performance penalties using WOW?
For 3) i take it you mean you can only have one prinicipal server per
mirror?
So if i have two SQL server machines running different databases and i need
to use just 1 backup server incase one machine fails what are my best
options?
Log-Shipping? or Replication?
Clustering would be too expensive for us and Mirroring would also be too
expensive if you need one mirror for each SQL server machine.
Thanks.
"David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:%237r4ZseGGHA.1032@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of RAM,
> and lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
>
> No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
>
> One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
> databases.
> David
>
|||Most of the benefits of 64 bit architectures are a result of the flat memory
space but Workgroup Edition is not going to be able to take advantage of
most of that. running a 32 bit edition in WOW allows 4 GB of user space so
there is some advantage there. Currently, 64 bit processors are generally
slower than the fastest 32 bit processors so in some cases a 32 bit
processor might actually give better performance than a 64 bit processor and
WOW. Of course, with a 64 bit machine you have the advantage of being able
to upgrade to Standard edition and take advantage of the flat memory space
if you run out of horsepower in WOW.
You can have multiple servers mirrored to a single DB Mirroring server
because individual databases are mirrored. You would have to be careful to
ensure that the mirror has enough resources to both handle the load of
mirroring databases from several server and the load of running the
databases when they're failed over.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uBwm4ejGGHA.3916@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Thanks David,
> So for 1) i'm not sure you've answered the question. I know Workgroup
> Edition is 32bit but it can run on Windows 2003 Standard 64bit edition
> using WOW. Now because i have a 64bit Opteron will i see SQL run quicker
> in this config as opposed to using Windows 2003 Standard 32bit Server?
> Also are there any performance penalties using WOW?
> For 3) i take it you mean you can only have one prinicipal server per
> mirror?
> So if i have two SQL server machines running different databases and i
> need to use just 1 backup server incase one machine fails what are my best
> options?
> Log-Shipping? or Replication?
> Clustering would be too expensive for us and Mirroring would also be too
> expensive if you need one mirror for each SQL server machine.
> Thanks.
>
> "David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
> message news:%237r4ZseGGHA.1032@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
|||Ok great.
Is there anything required to activate WOW on windows server or does it
automatically just work when you install the Workgroup Edition?
Also can you just confirm that the following scenario is doable:
Two SQL machines with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition
named SQL1 and SQL2 (both with there own separate internal ip address)
SQL1 has two databases called DB1 and DB2
SQL2 has two databases called DB3 and DB4
Spare Server (SPARE1) with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition for the Mirror
Witness Server (WIT1)
DB1,DB2,DB3,DB4 are mirrored to the Spare Server (SPARE1) with WIT1 as the
Witness Server
Now if both SQL1 and SQ2 fail at the same time can the Mirror take over all
the connections to these servers?
Thanks.
"Roger Wolter[MSFT]" <rwolter@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23DS1h9jGGHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Most of the benefits of 64 bit architectures are a result of the flat
> memory space but Workgroup Edition is not going to be able to take
> advantage of most of that. running a 32 bit edition in WOW allows 4 GB of
> user space so there is some advantage there. Currently, 64 bit processors
> are generally slower than the fastest 32 bit processors so in some cases a
> 32 bit processor might actually give better performance than a 64 bit
> processor and WOW. Of course, with a 64 bit machine you have the
> advantage of being able to upgrade to Standard edition and take advantage
> of the flat memory space if you run out of horsepower in WOW.
> You can have multiple servers mirrored to a single DB Mirroring server
> because individual databases are mirrored. You would have to be careful
> to ensure that the mirror has enough resources to both handle the load of
> mirroring databases from several server and the load of running the
> databases when they're failed over.
> --
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
> Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
> http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uBwm4ejGGHA.3916@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||WOW is always there. Any 32 bit software you install will run in the WOW.
Theoretically, your failover scenario will work if you keep in mind that the
mirror server will have to handle four databases in this case so unless this
server has significantly more power than the primary servers, performance
will suffer if you fail over all the databases.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OmGebPlGGHA.3448@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Ok great.
> Is there anything required to activate WOW on windows server or does it
> automatically just work when you install the Workgroup Edition?
> Also can you just confirm that the following scenario is doable:
> Two SQL machines with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition
> named SQL1 and SQL2 (both with there own separate internal ip address)
> SQL1 has two databases called DB1 and DB2
> SQL2 has two databases called DB3 and DB4
> Spare Server (SPARE1) with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition for the
> Mirror
> Witness Server (WIT1)
> DB1,DB2,DB3,DB4 are mirrored to the Spare Server (SPARE1) with WIT1 as the
> Witness Server
> Now if both SQL1 and SQ2 fail at the same time can the Mirror take over
> all the connections to these servers?
> Thanks.
>
> "Roger Wolter[MSFT]" <rwolter@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:%23DS1h9jGGHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
|||1. Each principal can have exactly 1 mirror. A witness can service as many
principal/mirror pairs as you want it to. Mirroring occurs at a database
level, so you can have an instance of SQL Server where there are multiple
databases on that instance in the role of a mirror.
Mike
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole
views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person
or entity either by inference or direct reference.
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
> on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition
> vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality
> : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover
> mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
> Thanks
>
Mirroring and 64 vs 32 bit performance
Hi,
I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition vs
sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality :
is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover mirror or
do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
Thanks"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
> on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
>
Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of RAM, and
lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition
> vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality
> : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover
> mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
>
One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
databases.
David|||Thanks David,
So for 1) i'm not sure you've answered the question. I know Workgroup
Edition is 32bit but it can run on Windows 2003 Standard 64bit edition using
WOW. Now because i have a 64bit Opteron will i see SQL run quicker in this
config as opposed to using Windows 2003 Standard 32bit Server? Also are
there any performance penalties using WOW?
For 3) i take it you mean you can only have one prinicipal server per
mirror?
So if i have two SQL server machines running different databases and i need
to use just 1 backup server incase one machine fails what are my best
options?
Log-Shipping? or Replication?
Clustering would be too expensive for us and Mirroring would also be too
expensive if you need one mirror for each SQL server machine.
Thanks.
"David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:%237r4ZseGGHA.1032@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
>> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
>> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup
>> Edition on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
> Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of RAM,
> and lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
>
>> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition
>> vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
> No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
>> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality
>> : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover
>> mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
> One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
> databases.
> David
>|||Most of the benefits of 64 bit architectures are a result of the flat memory
space but Workgroup Edition is not going to be able to take advantage of
most of that. running a 32 bit edition in WOW allows 4 GB of user space so
there is some advantage there. Currently, 64 bit processors are generally
slower than the fastest 32 bit processors so in some cases a 32 bit
processor might actually give better performance than a 64 bit processor and
WOW. Of course, with a 64 bit machine you have the advantage of being able
to upgrade to Standard edition and take advantage of the flat memory space
if you run out of horsepower in WOW.
You can have multiple servers mirrored to a single DB Mirroring server
because individual databases are mirrored. You would have to be careful to
ensure that the mirror has enough resources to both handle the load of
mirroring databases from several server and the load of running the
databases when they're failed over.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uBwm4ejGGHA.3916@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Thanks David,
> So for 1) i'm not sure you've answered the question. I know Workgroup
> Edition is 32bit but it can run on Windows 2003 Standard 64bit edition
> using WOW. Now because i have a 64bit Opteron will i see SQL run quicker
> in this config as opposed to using Windows 2003 Standard 32bit Server?
> Also are there any performance penalties using WOW?
> For 3) i take it you mean you can only have one prinicipal server per
> mirror?
> So if i have two SQL server machines running different databases and i
> need to use just 1 backup server incase one machine fails what are my best
> options?
> Log-Shipping? or Replication?
> Clustering would be too expensive for us and Mirroring would also be too
> expensive if you need one mirror for each SQL server machine.
> Thanks.
>
> "David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
> message news:%237r4ZseGGHA.1032@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
>> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
>> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup
>> Edition on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
>>
>> Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of RAM,
>> and lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
>>
>> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition
>> vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
>> No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
>> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring
>> functionality : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just
>> one failover mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one
>> ?
>>
>> One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
>> databases.
>> David
>|||Ok great.
Is there anything required to activate WOW on windows server or does it
automatically just work when you install the Workgroup Edition?
Also can you just confirm that the following scenario is doable:
Two SQL machines with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition
named SQL1 and SQL2 (both with there own separate internal ip address)
SQL1 has two databases called DB1 and DB2
SQL2 has two databases called DB3 and DB4
Spare Server (SPARE1) with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition for the Mirror
Witness Server (WIT1)
DB1,DB2,DB3,DB4 are mirrored to the Spare Server (SPARE1) with WIT1 as the
Witness Server
Now if both SQL1 and SQ2 fail at the same time can the Mirror take over all
the connections to these servers?
Thanks.
"Roger Wolter[MSFT]" <rwolter@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23DS1h9jGGHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Most of the benefits of 64 bit architectures are a result of the flat
> memory space but Workgroup Edition is not going to be able to take
> advantage of most of that. running a 32 bit edition in WOW allows 4 GB of
> user space so there is some advantage there. Currently, 64 bit processors
> are generally slower than the fastest 32 bit processors so in some cases a
> 32 bit processor might actually give better performance than a 64 bit
> processor and WOW. Of course, with a 64 bit machine you have the
> advantage of being able to upgrade to Standard edition and take advantage
> of the flat memory space if you run out of horsepower in WOW.
> You can have multiple servers mirrored to a single DB Mirroring server
> because individual databases are mirrored. You would have to be careful
> to ensure that the mirror has enough resources to both handle the load of
> mirroring databases from several server and the load of running the
> databases when they're failed over.
> --
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
> Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
> http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uBwm4ejGGHA.3916@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> Thanks David,
>> So for 1) i'm not sure you've answered the question. I know Workgroup
>> Edition is 32bit but it can run on Windows 2003 Standard 64bit edition
>> using WOW. Now because i have a 64bit Opteron will i see SQL run quicker
>> in this config as opposed to using Windows 2003 Standard 32bit Server?
>> Also are there any performance penalties using WOW?
>> For 3) i take it you mean you can only have one prinicipal server per
>> mirror?
>> So if i have two SQL server machines running different databases and i
>> need to use just 1 backup server incase one machine fails what are my
>> best options?
>> Log-Shipping? or Replication?
>> Clustering would be too expensive for us and Mirroring would also be too
>> expensive if you need one mirror for each SQL server machine.
>> Thanks.
>>
>> "David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
>> message news:%237r4ZseGGHA.1032@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
>> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
>> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup
>> Edition on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
>>
>> Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of RAM,
>> and lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
>>
>> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard
>> Edition vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit
>> Edition?
>> No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
>> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring
>> functionality : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just
>> one failover mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each
>> one ?
>>
>> One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
>> databases.
>> David
>>
>|||WOW is always there. Any 32 bit software you install will run in the WOW.
Theoretically, your failover scenario will work if you keep in mind that the
mirror server will have to handle four databases in this case so unless this
server has significantly more power than the primary servers, performance
will suffer if you fail over all the databases.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OmGebPlGGHA.3448@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Ok great.
> Is there anything required to activate WOW on windows server or does it
> automatically just work when you install the Workgroup Edition?
> Also can you just confirm that the following scenario is doable:
> Two SQL machines with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition
> named SQL1 and SQL2 (both with there own separate internal ip address)
> SQL1 has two databases called DB1 and DB2
> SQL2 has two databases called DB3 and DB4
> Spare Server (SPARE1) with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition for the
> Mirror
> Witness Server (WIT1)
> DB1,DB2,DB3,DB4 are mirrored to the Spare Server (SPARE1) with WIT1 as the
> Witness Server
> Now if both SQL1 and SQ2 fail at the same time can the Mirror take over
> all the connections to these servers?
> Thanks.
>
> "Roger Wolter[MSFT]" <rwolter@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:%23DS1h9jGGHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> Most of the benefits of 64 bit architectures are a result of the flat
>> memory space but Workgroup Edition is not going to be able to take
>> advantage of most of that. running a 32 bit edition in WOW allows 4 GB
>> of user space so there is some advantage there. Currently, 64 bit
>> processors are generally slower than the fastest 32 bit processors so in
>> some cases a 32 bit processor might actually give better performance than
>> a 64 bit processor and WOW. Of course, with a 64 bit machine you have
>> the advantage of being able to upgrade to Standard edition and take
>> advantage of the flat memory space if you run out of horsepower in WOW.
>> You can have multiple servers mirrored to a single DB Mirroring server
>> because individual databases are mirrored. You would have to be careful
>> to ensure that the mirror has enough resources to both handle the load of
>> mirroring databases from several server and the load of running the
>> databases when they're failed over.
>> --
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights.
>> Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
>> http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
>> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:uBwm4ejGGHA.3916@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> Thanks David,
>> So for 1) i'm not sure you've answered the question. I know Workgroup
>> Edition is 32bit but it can run on Windows 2003 Standard 64bit edition
>> using WOW. Now because i have a 64bit Opteron will i see SQL run quicker
>> in this config as opposed to using Windows 2003 Standard 32bit Server?
>> Also are there any performance penalties using WOW?
>> For 3) i take it you mean you can only have one prinicipal server per
>> mirror?
>> So if i have two SQL server machines running different databases and i
>> need to use just 1 backup server incase one machine fails what are my
>> best options?
>> Log-Shipping? or Replication?
>> Clustering would be too expensive for us and Mirroring would also be too
>> expensive if you need one mirror for each SQL server machine.
>> Thanks.
>>
>> "David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
>> message news:%237r4ZseGGHA.1032@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
>> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
>> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup
>> Edition on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
>>
>> Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of
>> RAM, and lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
>>
>> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard
>> Edition vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit
>> Edition?
>> No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
>> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring
>> functionality : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just
>> one failover mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each
>> one ?
>>
>> One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
>> databases.
>> David
>>
>>
>|||1. Each principal can have exactly 1 mirror. A witness can service as many
principal/mirror pairs as you want it to. Mirroring occurs at a database
level, so you can have an instance of SQL Server where there are multiple
databases on that instance in the role of a mirror.
--
Mike
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole
views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person
or entity either by inference or direct reference.
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
> on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition
> vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality
> : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover
> mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
> Thanks
>
I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition vs
sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality :
is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover mirror or
do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
Thanks"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
> on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
>
Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of RAM, and
lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition
> vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality
> : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover
> mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
>
One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
databases.
David|||Thanks David,
So for 1) i'm not sure you've answered the question. I know Workgroup
Edition is 32bit but it can run on Windows 2003 Standard 64bit edition using
WOW. Now because i have a 64bit Opteron will i see SQL run quicker in this
config as opposed to using Windows 2003 Standard 32bit Server? Also are
there any performance penalties using WOW?
For 3) i take it you mean you can only have one prinicipal server per
mirror?
So if i have two SQL server machines running different databases and i need
to use just 1 backup server incase one machine fails what are my best
options?
Log-Shipping? or Replication?
Clustering would be too expensive for us and Mirroring would also be too
expensive if you need one mirror for each SQL server machine.
Thanks.
"David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:%237r4ZseGGHA.1032@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
>> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
>> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup
>> Edition on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
> Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of RAM,
> and lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
>
>> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition
>> vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
> No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
>> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality
>> : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover
>> mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
> One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
> databases.
> David
>|||Most of the benefits of 64 bit architectures are a result of the flat memory
space but Workgroup Edition is not going to be able to take advantage of
most of that. running a 32 bit edition in WOW allows 4 GB of user space so
there is some advantage there. Currently, 64 bit processors are generally
slower than the fastest 32 bit processors so in some cases a 32 bit
processor might actually give better performance than a 64 bit processor and
WOW. Of course, with a 64 bit machine you have the advantage of being able
to upgrade to Standard edition and take advantage of the flat memory space
if you run out of horsepower in WOW.
You can have multiple servers mirrored to a single DB Mirroring server
because individual databases are mirrored. You would have to be careful to
ensure that the mirror has enough resources to both handle the load of
mirroring databases from several server and the load of running the
databases when they're failed over.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uBwm4ejGGHA.3916@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Thanks David,
> So for 1) i'm not sure you've answered the question. I know Workgroup
> Edition is 32bit but it can run on Windows 2003 Standard 64bit edition
> using WOW. Now because i have a 64bit Opteron will i see SQL run quicker
> in this config as opposed to using Windows 2003 Standard 32bit Server?
> Also are there any performance penalties using WOW?
> For 3) i take it you mean you can only have one prinicipal server per
> mirror?
> So if i have two SQL server machines running different databases and i
> need to use just 1 backup server incase one machine fails what are my best
> options?
> Log-Shipping? or Replication?
> Clustering would be too expensive for us and Mirroring would also be too
> expensive if you need one mirror for each SQL server machine.
> Thanks.
>
> "David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
> message news:%237r4ZseGGHA.1032@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
>> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
>> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup
>> Edition on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
>>
>> Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of RAM,
>> and lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
>>
>> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition
>> vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
>> No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
>> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring
>> functionality : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just
>> one failover mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one
>> ?
>>
>> One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
>> databases.
>> David
>|||Ok great.
Is there anything required to activate WOW on windows server or does it
automatically just work when you install the Workgroup Edition?
Also can you just confirm that the following scenario is doable:
Two SQL machines with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition
named SQL1 and SQL2 (both with there own separate internal ip address)
SQL1 has two databases called DB1 and DB2
SQL2 has two databases called DB3 and DB4
Spare Server (SPARE1) with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition for the Mirror
Witness Server (WIT1)
DB1,DB2,DB3,DB4 are mirrored to the Spare Server (SPARE1) with WIT1 as the
Witness Server
Now if both SQL1 and SQ2 fail at the same time can the Mirror take over all
the connections to these servers?
Thanks.
"Roger Wolter[MSFT]" <rwolter@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23DS1h9jGGHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Most of the benefits of 64 bit architectures are a result of the flat
> memory space but Workgroup Edition is not going to be able to take
> advantage of most of that. running a 32 bit edition in WOW allows 4 GB of
> user space so there is some advantage there. Currently, 64 bit processors
> are generally slower than the fastest 32 bit processors so in some cases a
> 32 bit processor might actually give better performance than a 64 bit
> processor and WOW. Of course, with a 64 bit machine you have the
> advantage of being able to upgrade to Standard edition and take advantage
> of the flat memory space if you run out of horsepower in WOW.
> You can have multiple servers mirrored to a single DB Mirroring server
> because individual databases are mirrored. You would have to be careful
> to ensure that the mirror has enough resources to both handle the load of
> mirroring databases from several server and the load of running the
> databases when they're failed over.
> --
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
> Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
> http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uBwm4ejGGHA.3916@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> Thanks David,
>> So for 1) i'm not sure you've answered the question. I know Workgroup
>> Edition is 32bit but it can run on Windows 2003 Standard 64bit edition
>> using WOW. Now because i have a 64bit Opteron will i see SQL run quicker
>> in this config as opposed to using Windows 2003 Standard 32bit Server?
>> Also are there any performance penalties using WOW?
>> For 3) i take it you mean you can only have one prinicipal server per
>> mirror?
>> So if i have two SQL server machines running different databases and i
>> need to use just 1 backup server incase one machine fails what are my
>> best options?
>> Log-Shipping? or Replication?
>> Clustering would be too expensive for us and Mirroring would also be too
>> expensive if you need one mirror for each SQL server machine.
>> Thanks.
>>
>> "David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
>> message news:%237r4ZseGGHA.1032@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
>> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
>> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup
>> Edition on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
>>
>> Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of RAM,
>> and lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
>>
>> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard
>> Edition vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit
>> Edition?
>> No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
>> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring
>> functionality : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just
>> one failover mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each
>> one ?
>>
>> One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
>> databases.
>> David
>>
>|||WOW is always there. Any 32 bit software you install will run in the WOW.
Theoretically, your failover scenario will work if you keep in mind that the
mirror server will have to handle four databases in this case so unless this
server has significantly more power than the primary servers, performance
will suffer if you fail over all the databases.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OmGebPlGGHA.3448@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Ok great.
> Is there anything required to activate WOW on windows server or does it
> automatically just work when you install the Workgroup Edition?
> Also can you just confirm that the following scenario is doable:
> Two SQL machines with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition
> named SQL1 and SQL2 (both with there own separate internal ip address)
> SQL1 has two databases called DB1 and DB2
> SQL2 has two databases called DB3 and DB4
> Spare Server (SPARE1) with copy of SQL 2005 Standard Edition for the
> Mirror
> Witness Server (WIT1)
> DB1,DB2,DB3,DB4 are mirrored to the Spare Server (SPARE1) with WIT1 as the
> Witness Server
> Now if both SQL1 and SQ2 fail at the same time can the Mirror take over
> all the connections to these servers?
> Thanks.
>
> "Roger Wolter[MSFT]" <rwolter@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:%23DS1h9jGGHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> Most of the benefits of 64 bit architectures are a result of the flat
>> memory space but Workgroup Edition is not going to be able to take
>> advantage of most of that. running a 32 bit edition in WOW allows 4 GB
>> of user space so there is some advantage there. Currently, 64 bit
>> processors are generally slower than the fastest 32 bit processors so in
>> some cases a 32 bit processor might actually give better performance than
>> a 64 bit processor and WOW. Of course, with a 64 bit machine you have
>> the advantage of being able to upgrade to Standard edition and take
>> advantage of the flat memory space if you run out of horsepower in WOW.
>> You can have multiple servers mirrored to a single DB Mirroring server
>> because individual databases are mirrored. You would have to be careful
>> to ensure that the mirror has enough resources to both handle the load of
>> mirroring databases from several server and the load of running the
>> databases when they're failed over.
>> --
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights.
>> Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
>> http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
>> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:uBwm4ejGGHA.3916@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> Thanks David,
>> So for 1) i'm not sure you've answered the question. I know Workgroup
>> Edition is 32bit but it can run on Windows 2003 Standard 64bit edition
>> using WOW. Now because i have a 64bit Opteron will i see SQL run quicker
>> in this config as opposed to using Windows 2003 Standard 32bit Server?
>> Also are there any performance penalties using WOW?
>> For 3) i take it you mean you can only have one prinicipal server per
>> mirror?
>> So if i have two SQL server machines running different databases and i
>> need to use just 1 backup server incase one machine fails what are my
>> best options?
>> Log-Shipping? or Replication?
>> Clustering would be too expensive for us and Mirroring would also be too
>> expensive if you need one mirror for each SQL server machine.
>> Thanks.
>>
>> "David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
>> message news:%237r4ZseGGHA.1032@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> "greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
>> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
>> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup
>> Edition on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
>>
>> Yes. Workgroup Edition only comes in 32bit and can only use 3GB of
>> RAM, and lacks the tuning tools of SQL Server.
>>
>> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard
>> Edition vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit
>> Edition?
>> No. For small workloads there shouldn't be much difference.
>> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring
>> functionality : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just
>> one failover mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each
>> one ?
>>
>> One mirror per database, although the mirror server can mirror multiple
>> databases.
>> David
>>
>>
>|||1. Each principal can have exactly 1 mirror. A witness can service as many
principal/mirror pairs as you want it to. Mirroring occurs at a database
level, so you can have an instance of SQL Server where there are multiple
databases on that instance in the role of a mirror.
--
Mike
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole
views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person
or entity either by inference or direct reference.
"greg" <greg_platt@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Y7SECZGGHA.208@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have a few questions regarding sql server 2005 .
> Hardware will be running with a single dual core 64 bit Opteron 175.
> 1) Are there any performance advantages running sql 2005 Workgroup Edition
> on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition? If so what are they?
> 2) Are there any benchmarks on how much faster sql 2005 Standard Edition
> vs sql 2005 Workgroup Edition runs on Windows 2003 64 bit Edition?
> 3) For sql 2005 Standard Edition and the database mirroring functionality
> : is it possible to mirror multiple sql servers to just one failover
> mirror or do you need a separate sql box to mirror each one ?
> Thanks
>
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Minimum Hardware Requirements For SQL Client
What would be the minumum hardware (and software) requirements to have
SQL client on 10 of our contractors' computer with a maximum database
size of 5GB?
Thank you very much
mike
The client machines can be pretty wimpy because the server process the T-SQL
and just returns the results the clients.
At a minimum I would want a PIII running Win2k with 256MB RAM.
Keith
"Mike" <mj1sql@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9a55bd2d.0410070814.5589c64e@.posting.google.c om...
> What would be the minumum hardware (and software) requirements to have
> SQL client on 10 of our contractors' computer with a maximum database
> size of 5GB?
> Thank you very much
> mike
SQL client on 10 of our contractors' computer with a maximum database
size of 5GB?
Thank you very much
mike
The client machines can be pretty wimpy because the server process the T-SQL
and just returns the results the clients.
At a minimum I would want a PIII running Win2k with 256MB RAM.
Keith
"Mike" <mj1sql@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9a55bd2d.0410070814.5589c64e@.posting.google.c om...
> What would be the minumum hardware (and software) requirements to have
> SQL client on 10 of our contractors' computer with a maximum database
> size of 5GB?
> Thank you very much
> mike
Minimum Hardware Requirement Warning
Hi all, we have released a shrink-wrapped software package that uses SQL Server Express as it's backend. I am currently tracking down an issue to do with SQL Server Express not installing correctly, and at the end of a lot of investigation I have come to the conclusion that it is a CPU problem.
The CPU is not "PII Compatible" enough for SQL Express. It appears as though the Cache prefetching instructions are the most likely culprit, but I was just wondering why the SQL Server Installer allows the user to continue with only a warning about the minimum hardware requirement not being met?
It seems to me that a lot of time and pain would be saved if the installer just said "Sorry, but you have no hope in hell of running SQL Server... go out and buy yourself a real machine" instead of allowing the user to continue all the way through the install and finally crash out at the final step.
Hey Scott,
Yeah, it turns out that the cache prefetching is required and we're not checking for it up front. I've filed a request to add that check for the next version of the product.
-Jeffrey.
|||Thanks, that would be a great help.|||Sorry, signed in with the wrong passport.
This will be a great help, thanks.
minimal hardware requirement for SQL failover clustering
HI,
I would like to build a SQL 2000 failover clustering to improve my network
knowledge. For testing and learning purpose, what's the minimal hareware
requirment?
Best Regards,
Lynn
Hi
Hardware should be from the the Microsoft HCL
But typically:
2 Identical Servers with Minimum 512Mb RAM
4 NICs
1 x SAN
2 x SAN connectivity
Network and other cabling
Or as Uttam answered yesterday:
"
Lynn,
For testing purposes, you may find this useful
Using Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 to Create and Configure a Two-Node
Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Cluster
This guide provides step-by-step instructions for using Virtual Server 2005
to create and configure a two-node server cluster.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...y/cvs2005.mspx
If you do not want to install virtual server and want to build using minimum
hardware, long ago I had build a two node cluster using two laptops
with
SCSI card and one
SCSI disk and a cross-over cable. This is the bare minimum. I also was able
to install SQL Server 2000 clustered instance on this bare min cluster. It
worked and was good
for testing but NOT supported and also it did not work sometimes as
expected. Ofcourse, I would not do this for a real test cluster or dev
cluster.
Best Regards,
Uttam Parui
Microsoft Corporation
"
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Lynn" <Lynn@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4B93ABB7-5F40-478D-B4E9-009520E72C94@.microsoft.com...
> HI,
> I would like to build a SQL 2000 failover clustering to improve my network
> knowledge. For testing and learning purpose, what's the minimal hareware
> requirment?
> --
> Best Regards,
> Lynn
|||Mike,
Thank you so much for your quick response. It's very useful.
Rihgt now, I already have a machine with 512 RAM, and I would like buy a new
machine with higher hardware component. Is "two identical machines" the
must-be? Or, I can configure two-node failover clustering with two different
hardware component machines.
Best Regards,
Lynn
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
> Hi
> Hardware should be from the the Microsoft HCL
> But typically:
> 2 Identical Servers with Minimum 512Mb RAM
> 4 NICs
> 1 x SAN
> 2 x SAN connectivity
> Network and other cabling
> Or as Uttam answered yesterday:
> "
> Lynn,
> For testing purposes, you may find this useful
> Using Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 to Create and Configure a Two-Node
> Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Cluster
> This guide provides step-by-step instructions for using Virtual Server 2005
> to create and configure a two-node server cluster.
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...y/cvs2005.mspx
> If you do not want to install virtual server and want to build using minimum
> hardware, long ago I had build a two node cluster using two laptops with
> SCSI card and one
> SCSI disk and a cross-over cable. This is the bare minimum. I also was able
> to install SQL Server 2000 clustered instance on this bare min cluster. It
> worked and was good
> for testing but NOT supported and also it did not work sometimes as
> expected. Ofcourse, I would not do this for a real test cluster or dev
> cluster.
> Best Regards,
> Uttam Parui
> Microsoft Corporation
> "
> --
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "Lynn" <Lynn@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:4B93ABB7-5F40-478D-B4E9-009520E72C94@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Are you looking to build a Highly Available 2-node cluster that is fully supported by Microsoft and the hardware vendor? Or are you just looking to build a 2-node cluster
for testing?
Yesterday, I had already answered for the latter.
For the former -- i.e. to build a highly available cluster supported by Microsoft and hardware vendor, you need a "Qualified complete cluster solution". So, where does
one find the list of complete cluster solutions that are qualified?
The most current Cluster Hardware Compatibility List (HCL) is available at the following Microsoft Web site:
http://www.microsoft.com/hcl (http://www.microsoft.com/hcl)
When you visit this site, click the Cluster category. The Cluster and Cluster/Datacenter categories display only complete cluster solutions that have been qualified. The
subcategories list components that have passed Cluster Component Candidate testing. These cluster components are listed for Original Equipment Manufacturers
(OEMs) and System Integrators to design complete clusters and then submit a complete cluster solution for testing.
The most current Cluster Windows Server Catalog (WSC) is available at the following Microsoft Web Site:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/catalog/server/ (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/catalog/server/)
When you visit this site, click the Hardware tab, and then click on the Cluster Solutions category. The Cluster Solutions category displays only complete cluster solutions
that have been qualified.
NOTE:
Customers should not use this list to build a cluster solution because using these individual components in a cluster does not qualify as a complete HCL or WSC
solution. Microsoft fully supports only clusters that are complete solutions that are listed in the Cluster category on the HCL or WSC.
To answer you qs "Is "two identical machines" the must-be? Or, I can configure two-node failover clustering with two different hardware component machines."
ANS. Currently today, a vendor can submit a solution for testing / qualification if the hardware is dissimilar. For example a Proliant DL380 as one node and a Proliant
DL580 as another node. But the ENTIRE SOLUTION still needs to be submitted as a COMPLETE SOLUTION and Windows Hardware Quality Labs (WHQL) qualified.
Now it is true that these are rare...
Recommended Reading
======================
The Microsoft support policy for server clusters, the Hardware Compatibility List, and the Windows Server Catalog
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;309395
The Microsoft support policy for a SQL Server failover cluster
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;327518
Best Regards,
Uttam Parui
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Are you secure? For information about the Strategic Technology Protection Program and to order your FREE Security Tool Kit, please visit
http://www.microsoft.com/security.
Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet access update their Microsoft software to better protect against viruses and security vulnerabilities. The easiest
way to do this is to visit the following websites: http://www.microsoft.com/protect
http://www.microsoft.com/security/guidance/default.mspx
I would like to build a SQL 2000 failover clustering to improve my network
knowledge. For testing and learning purpose, what's the minimal hareware
requirment?
Best Regards,
Lynn
Hi
Hardware should be from the the Microsoft HCL
But typically:
2 Identical Servers with Minimum 512Mb RAM
4 NICs
1 x SAN
2 x SAN connectivity
Network and other cabling
Or as Uttam answered yesterday:
"
Lynn,
For testing purposes, you may find this useful
Using Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 to Create and Configure a Two-Node
Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Cluster
This guide provides step-by-step instructions for using Virtual Server 2005
to create and configure a two-node server cluster.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...y/cvs2005.mspx
If you do not want to install virtual server and want to build using minimum
hardware, long ago I had build a two node cluster using two laptops
withSCSI card and one
SCSI disk and a cross-over cable. This is the bare minimum. I also was able
to install SQL Server 2000 clustered instance on this bare min cluster. It
worked and was good
for testing but NOT supported and also it did not work sometimes as
expected. Ofcourse, I would not do this for a real test cluster or dev
cluster.
Best Regards,
Uttam Parui
Microsoft Corporation
"
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Lynn" <Lynn@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4B93ABB7-5F40-478D-B4E9-009520E72C94@.microsoft.com...
> HI,
> I would like to build a SQL 2000 failover clustering to improve my network
> knowledge. For testing and learning purpose, what's the minimal hareware
> requirment?
> --
> Best Regards,
> Lynn
|||Mike,
Thank you so much for your quick response. It's very useful.
Rihgt now, I already have a machine with 512 RAM, and I would like buy a new
machine with higher hardware component. Is "two identical machines" the
must-be? Or, I can configure two-node failover clustering with two different
hardware component machines.
Best Regards,
Lynn
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
> Hi
> Hardware should be from the the Microsoft HCL
> But typically:
> 2 Identical Servers with Minimum 512Mb RAM
> 4 NICs
> 1 x SAN
> 2 x SAN connectivity
> Network and other cabling
> Or as Uttam answered yesterday:
> "
> Lynn,
> For testing purposes, you may find this useful
> Using Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 to Create and Configure a Two-Node
> Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Cluster
> This guide provides step-by-step instructions for using Virtual Server 2005
> to create and configure a two-node server cluster.
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...y/cvs2005.mspx
> If you do not want to install virtual server and want to build using minimum
> hardware, long ago I had build a two node cluster using two laptops
with> SCSI card and one
> SCSI disk and a cross-over cable. This is the bare minimum. I also was able
> to install SQL Server 2000 clustered instance on this bare min cluster. It
> worked and was good
> for testing but NOT supported and also it did not work sometimes as
> expected. Ofcourse, I would not do this for a real test cluster or dev
> cluster.
> Best Regards,
> Uttam Parui
> Microsoft Corporation
> "
> --
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "Lynn" <Lynn@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:4B93ABB7-5F40-478D-B4E9-009520E72C94@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Are you looking to build a Highly Available 2-node cluster that is fully supported by Microsoft and the hardware vendor? Or are you just looking to build a 2-node cluster
for testing?
Yesterday, I had already answered for the latter.
For the former -- i.e. to build a highly available cluster supported by Microsoft and hardware vendor, you need a "Qualified complete cluster solution". So, where does
one find the list of complete cluster solutions that are qualified?
The most current Cluster Hardware Compatibility List (HCL) is available at the following Microsoft Web site:
http://www.microsoft.com/hcl (http://www.microsoft.com/hcl)
When you visit this site, click the Cluster category. The Cluster and Cluster/Datacenter categories display only complete cluster solutions that have been qualified. The
subcategories list components that have passed Cluster Component Candidate testing. These cluster components are listed for Original Equipment Manufacturers
(OEMs) and System Integrators to design complete clusters and then submit a complete cluster solution for testing.
The most current Cluster Windows Server Catalog (WSC) is available at the following Microsoft Web Site:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/catalog/server/ (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/catalog/server/)
When you visit this site, click the Hardware tab, and then click on the Cluster Solutions category. The Cluster Solutions category displays only complete cluster solutions
that have been qualified.
NOTE:
Customers should not use this list to build a cluster solution because using these individual components in a cluster does not qualify as a complete HCL or WSC
solution. Microsoft fully supports only clusters that are complete solutions that are listed in the Cluster category on the HCL or WSC.
To answer you qs "Is "two identical machines" the must-be? Or, I can configure two-node failover clustering with two different hardware component machines."
ANS. Currently today, a vendor can submit a solution for testing / qualification if the hardware is dissimilar. For example a Proliant DL380 as one node and a Proliant
DL580 as another node. But the ENTIRE SOLUTION still needs to be submitted as a COMPLETE SOLUTION and Windows Hardware Quality Labs (WHQL) qualified.
Now it is true that these are rare...
Recommended Reading
======================
The Microsoft support policy for server clusters, the Hardware Compatibility List, and the Windows Server Catalog
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;309395
The Microsoft support policy for a SQL Server failover cluster
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;327518
Best Regards,
Uttam Parui
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Are you secure? For information about the Strategic Technology Protection Program and to order your FREE Security Tool Kit, please visit
http://www.microsoft.com/security.
Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet access update their Microsoft software to better protect against viruses and security vulnerabilities. The easiest
way to do this is to visit the following websites: http://www.microsoft.com/protect
http://www.microsoft.com/security/guidance/default.mspx
Monday, March 19, 2012
minimal hardware for building testing failover clustering for SQL
Hi,
I am trying to practice to build a failover clustering for SQL 2000. Does
anyone know the minimal hardware request for a testing clutering? thank you
for your help.
Best Regards,
Lynn
Lynn,
For testing purposes, you may find this useful
Using Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 to Create and Configure a Two-Node Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Cluster
This guide provides step-by-step instructions for using Virtual Server 2005 to create and configure a two-node server cluster.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...y/cvs2005.mspx
If you do not want to install virtual server and want to build using minimum hardware, long ago I had build a two node cluster using two laptops with SCSI card and one
SCSI disk and a cross-over cable. This is the bare minimum. I also was able to install SQL Server 2000 clustered instance on this bare min cluster. It worked and was good
for testing but NOT supported and also it did not work sometimes as expected. Ofcourse, I would not do this for a real test cluster or dev cluster.
Best Regards,
Uttam Parui
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Are you secure? For information about the Strategic Technology Protection Program and to order your FREE Security Tool Kit, please visit
http://www.microsoft.com/security.
Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet access update their Microsoft software to better protect against viruses and security vulnerabilities. The easiest way
to do this is to visit the following websites: http://www.microsoft.com/protect
http://www.microsoft.com/security/guidance/default.mspx
I am trying to practice to build a failover clustering for SQL 2000. Does
anyone know the minimal hardware request for a testing clutering? thank you
for your help.
Best Regards,
Lynn
Lynn,
For testing purposes, you may find this useful
Using Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 to Create and Configure a Two-Node Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Cluster
This guide provides step-by-step instructions for using Virtual Server 2005 to create and configure a two-node server cluster.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...y/cvs2005.mspx
If you do not want to install virtual server and want to build using minimum hardware, long ago I had build a two node cluster using two laptops
with SCSI card and oneSCSI disk and a cross-over cable. This is the bare minimum. I also was able to install SQL Server 2000 clustered instance on this bare min cluster. It worked and was good
for testing but NOT supported and also it did not work sometimes as expected. Ofcourse, I would not do this for a real test cluster or dev cluster.
Best Regards,
Uttam Parui
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Are you secure? For information about the Strategic Technology Protection Program and to order your FREE Security Tool Kit, please visit
http://www.microsoft.com/security.
Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet access update their Microsoft software to better protect against viruses and security vulnerabilities. The easiest way
to do this is to visit the following websites: http://www.microsoft.com/protect
http://www.microsoft.com/security/guidance/default.mspx
Friday, March 9, 2012
Migration to new cluster enviroment
My production system is on stand alone Server and it is a publisher on the
replication system. I need to Migrate to a new hardware with fail over
cluster and upgrade to SQL 2005 .
I need to do that with out impacting replication. What is my options? Can I
do that Or not
If this was to stand alone new hardware I will have no issue.
Thanks for your help
You can't do it without any impact to replication, but you should be able to
with minimal impact.
Build out your new system and test thoroughly. Once you are confident that
the new system performs adequately, then drop your publication on the
production database and copy it (several options here for you) to the new
system.
You will have to redirect your clients to the new host name and reestablish
replication publication.
This should be doable during a reasonable off hours maintenance window.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
<msnews.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:ek7ECL6THHA.1552@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> My production system is on stand alone Server and it is a publisher on the
> replication system. I need to Migrate to a new hardware with fail over
> cluster and upgrade to SQL 2005 .
> I need to do that with out impacting replication. What is my options? Can
I
> do that Or not
> If this was to stand alone new hardware I will have no issue.
> Thanks for your help
>
replication system. I need to Migrate to a new hardware with fail over
cluster and upgrade to SQL 2005 .
I need to do that with out impacting replication. What is my options? Can I
do that Or not
If this was to stand alone new hardware I will have no issue.
Thanks for your help
You can't do it without any impact to replication, but you should be able to
with minimal impact.
Build out your new system and test thoroughly. Once you are confident that
the new system performs adequately, then drop your publication on the
production database and copy it (several options here for you) to the new
system.
You will have to redirect your clients to the new host name and reestablish
replication publication.
This should be doable during a reasonable off hours maintenance window.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
<msnews.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:ek7ECL6THHA.1552@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> My production system is on stand alone Server and it is a publisher on the
> replication system. I need to Migrate to a new hardware with fail over
> cluster and upgrade to SQL 2005 .
> I need to do that with out impacting replication. What is my options? Can
I
> do that Or not
> If this was to stand alone new hardware I will have no issue.
> Thanks for your help
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)