|
|
Posted by Nick Chan on 10/09/07 06:04
i've dealt with extreme traffic with dual xeon dual core with 6GB ram,
win 2003 ent, sql ent. we were using standard edition with sql 2003
standard. the db size then was about 4GB. traffic was high (for me) at
few hundred per sec.
we had to change the db design to utilize select-inserts rather than
traditional updates. and change all non critical selects with (NOLOCK)
locking. with (NOLOCK) saved my job.
but if u ask me about the improvement using enterprise version over
standard version, personally from my limited experience, i'd say
unnoticable.
now, using RAMDISK boost performance almost two-fold.
On Oct 9, 12:23 am, "Artie" <artie2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I was wondering if I could get some experienced opinions on SQL hardware to
> run an ERP app on SQL 2000. The app does not yet support SQL 2005. The ERP
> app has 25 users and likely won't exceed 30 users for several years. All
> traffic is on the LAN. The ERP clients basically submit SQL requests for
> reads and writes. The app makes heavy use of temp tables, temp views but
> not many stored procedures. The current size of the db is 6GB and will
> likely double in 4 years.
>
> Planned server:
> Windows Server 2003
> 4 GB RAM
> SQL 2000 Standard (ERP app does not yet support SQL 2005)
> RAID1 for OS
> RAID 10 for SQL data
> RAID1 for SQL logs
> RAID1 for temp db
> Dual, teamed NICs
>
> I would try to get 15K SCSI drives. Any thoughts on SATA instead of SCSI?
>
> Could I expect much of an impovement by using SQL 2000 Enterprise since it
> can use more RAM? I would rather wait for SQL 2005 to be supported.
>
> Does anyone have a Dell or HP server configured in an email-able cart that
> they would care to share?
>
> Thank you.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|