Showing posts with label single. Show all posts
Showing posts with label single. 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
>sql

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
>

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
>

Mirroring + remoting

Hi,

I have a 3-tier app that is currently running on a simple single server setup. However, I have to adapt it to run on the following setup:

1) Client .NET app on client systems with remoting connection to...

2) Host .NET app with a DAL connecting to ...

3) SQL Server 2005 mirrored

Using mirroring, if the principle SQL server goes down it switches automatically to the mirror server.

My question relates to my connections. What do I need to do to make sure the Client and Host apps follow SQL?

There are two setups I have in mind:

1) Host app + SQL on same box

2) Host app on its own server + SQL on its server (+mirror)

With these scenarios:

Setup 1 - SQL fails but server continues - Host app has to connect to mirror - clients continue to connect to Host on principle server.

Setup 1 - Whole server fails - Host on mirror server connects to mirror SQL and clints now have to locate Host on mirror.

Setup 2 - SQL's server fails so mirror switches in. Only Host app has to re-direct. Clients connect to same Host app.

This is new to me, so if anyone can advise, or direct me to the right info.

Hi,

I assume your solution employs the Presentation Layer <-> Business Layer <-> Data Layer architecture. Since you want to maximise transparency to the client application (pres layer), in my opinion, it's better to go with option 2 and put the host app on a separate server from the database to decrease the probability of multiple failures (if the machine with host + sql goes down - both will be inaccessible).

If you do this and code the host app to use ADO.NET to connect to the database, you could take advantage of the ability of the SqlConnection object to automatically re-connect to the failover partner in a mirrored configuration. This MSDN article explains how this works - http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/5h52hef8.aspx.

In addition, if you want complete transparency to the client application, you will still have to make it handle the case where the host fails.

-- Kaloian.

|||

Thanks Kaloian,

That leaves me with the problem of having the clinet apps fail over to another server when the host app's server fails. I guess I'm asking is there a remoting option to fail over, similar to the Failover Partner attribute in the sql connection string? Or am I going to have to trap the failure and code the switch?

|||

As far as I know there's no such mechanism, but you may want to post this question to the .NET Remoting newsgroup - http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowForum.aspx?ForumID=41&SiteID=1

- Kaloian.

Mirroring + remoting

Hi,

I have a 3-tier app that is currently running on a simple single server setup. However, I have to adapt it to run on the following setup:

1) Client .NET app on client systems with remoting connection to...

2) Host .NET app with a DAL connecting to ...

3) SQL Server 2005 mirrored

Using mirroring, if the principle SQL server goes down it switches automatically to the mirror server.

My question relates to my connections. What do I need to do to make sure the Client and Host apps follow SQL?

There are two setups I have in mind:

1) Host app + SQL on same box

2) Host app on its own server + SQL on its server (+mirror)

With these scenarios:

Setup 1 - SQL fails but server continues - Host app has to connect to mirror - clients continue to connect to Host on principle server.

Setup 1 - Whole server fails - Host on mirror server connects to mirror SQL and clints now have to locate Host on mirror.

Setup 2 - SQL's server fails so mirror switches in. Only Host app has to re-direct. Clients connect to same Host app.

This is new to me, so if anyone can advise, or direct me to the right info.

Hi,

I assume your solution employs the Presentation Layer <-> Business Layer <-> Data Layer architecture. Since you want to maximise transparency to the client application (pres layer), in my opinion, it's better to go with option 2 and put the host app on a separate server from the database to decrease the probability of multiple failures (if the machine with host + sql goes down - both will be inaccessible).

If you do this and code the host app to use ADO.NET to connect to the database, you could take advantage of the ability of the SqlConnection object to automatically re-connect to the failover partner in a mirrored configuration. This MSDN article explains how this works - http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/5h52hef8.aspx.

In addition, if you want complete transparency to the client application, you will still have to make it handle the case where the host fails.

-- Kaloian.

|||

Thanks Kaloian,

That leaves me with the problem of having the clinet apps fail over to another server when the host app's server fails. I guess I'm asking is there a remoting option to fail over, similar to the Failover Partner attribute in the sql connection string? Or am I going to have to trap the failure and code the switch?

|||

As far as I know there's no such mechanism, but you may want to post this question to the .NET Remoting newsgroup - http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowForum.aspx?ForumID=41&SiteID=1

- Kaloian.

Monday, March 26, 2012

Mirror a view to a table

I would like to replicate a single view to a table that is stored on another db server (connected as linked server object).
Is there a way to imitate the behavior of a trigger (insert, delete, update) for a view?
I could assign the triggers to the table that provides the primary key.
So I could handle insert, delete events.
But what about updates that affect row in other tables that are used in this view?

Code Snippet

CREATE TRIGGER mirror_tableA_insert
ON [TESTDB].[dbo].[tableA]
FOR INSERT
AS
BEGIN
set nocount on
SET XACT_ABORT ON
set REMOTE_PROC_TRANSACTIONS off
INSERT INTO OPENQUERY(TESTLINKED, 'SELECT * FROM tableA')

SELECT *
FROM [TESTDB].[dbo].[myView] orig
INNER JOIN inserted i
ON i.prim = orig.prim

END

Thanks in advance for any hints!

Marcus

Use replication service instead of using the Trigger.

|||

It is not totally clear what you are attempting to accomplish.

Why are you using OPENQUERY instead of a LinkedServer?

And you may be better served by exploring an 'INSTEAD OF' TRIGGER.

|||

Arnie Rowland wrote:


It is not totally clear what you are attempting to accomplish.
Why are you using OPENQUERY instead of a LinkedServer?
And you may be better served by exploring an 'INSTEAD OF' TRIGGER.

I would like to replicate this view to a MySQL database that is used for a website.

Basically it's data synchronization job. So all dml statements that affect this view should trigger a procedure that synchronizes the MySQL table with the view on the SQLServer.


Yes I managed to set up a linked server for the MySQL DB through the MyODBC 3.51 driver.
First I tried to copy all the rows in this view to a MySQL table using a INSERT INTO OPENQUERY statement.

But a trigger can't be added to a view.

Manivannan.D.Sekaran wrote:

Use replication service instead of using the Trigger.


Yes the replication service would be the way to go when the target server (subscriber) would be a DB2 or Oracle database. But my target datatbase is MySQL (using it for a website).
Maybe it's possible to define this OLE DB data source as subscriber?

|||

You can't do directly, but there are some thrid party tools available. C-JDBC: Clustered JDBC is one of the tool.(http://c-jdbc.objectweb.org/)

|||

Marc Cicero wrote:

But a trigger can't be added to a view.

As I wrote earlier, you may wish to explore an INSTEAD OF TRIGGER.

An INSTEAD OF TRIGGER can work on a VIEW.