SQLServerCentral / Discuss Content Posted by Adam Machanic / Article Discussions / Article Discussions by Author / An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor / Latest Posts

RE: An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor

Steve Jones - SSC Editor — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 08:55:01 GMT

SQL Sentry's Performance Advisor is really a performance tuning tool, not really a monitoring tool. They perform separate functions.

RE: An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor

george sibbald — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 10:36:31 GMT

thanks

RE: An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor

priya.sinha — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 10:29:40 GMT

[quote][b]george sibbald (2/14/2011)[/b][hr]well if you are pointing at physical server names you still need to know which node is supporting which instances or you might wonder why CPU usage just fell through the floor :-)[/quote]Hi,This information is available under Overviews in SQL Monitor. For a cluster, there are various Overviews available at virtual cluster, nodes and sql instance level. If you look at view which is available at the virtual cluster level, you should be able to see the list of all the resoures and the node which is currently supporting it. This is copied for SQL Monitor UI:Name Status Active node Resource group Resource type Cluster Disk 1 Online sqlcluster2 Cluster Group Physical DiskSQL Server Online sqlcluster1 SQL Server (MSSQLSERVER) SQL Server Thanks,Priya

RE: An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor

Ian D-387508 — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 09:45:59 GMT

How would you compare SQL Monitor to SQL Sentry? The one thing I do not like about SQL Sentry is that it is not web based.

RE: An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor

george sibbald — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 09:41:18 GMT

well if you are pointing at physical server names you still need to know which node is supporting which instances or you might wonder why CPU usage just fell through the floor :-)

RE: An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor

Adam Machanic — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 08:48:00 GMT

[quote][b]bradmcgehee@hotmail.com (2/14/2011)[/b][hr]The SSC cluster is an active/active cluster, and SQL Monitor is monitoring both of them with ease. Node 1 runs the SSC databases, and node 2 runs the Simple-Talk databases.[/quote]Makes sense. So the situation described in the article only applies to active/passive clusters.

RE: An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor

bradmcgehee@hotmail.com — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 08:46:34 GMT

The SSC cluster is an active/active cluster, and SQL Monitor is monitoring both of them with ease. Node 1 runs the SSC databases, and node 2 runs the Simple-Talk databases.

RE: An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor

Steve Jones - SSC Editor — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 08:37:17 GMT

[quote][b]Adam Machanic (2/14/2011)[/b][hr][quote]You say servers must be defined by physical name which is obviously an issue with clusters, but the SSC servers being monitored are clustered? Is this a case then of monitoring all the nodes in the cluster but having to know which node is currently active?[/quote]I don't know if the SSC servers are clustered or not. Yes, you can put both physical names in, but AFAIK the tool doesn't tell you which node is active.[/quote]Yes, the SSC servers are clustered. No idea which one is active as of now, but I'll ask if the tool shows this.

RE: An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor

jts_2003 — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 08:16:43 GMT

I am just starting to set up SQL Monitor to monitor a clustered server, so I'll see if I get the same problems you had with registering the server.

RE: An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor

Adam Machanic — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 07:57:10 GMT

[quote][b]george sibbald (2/14/2011)[/b][hr]does it focus down on individual queries as the cause of high resource usage, show query plans, suggest possible improvements?[/quote]No. It's more of a server-wide picture, with occasional deeper insight when certain events hit. As I mentioned in the article, I'm very much looking forward to additional enhancements.[quote]You say servers must be defined by physical name which is obviously an issue with clusters, but the SSC servers being monitored are clustered? Is this a case then of monitoring all the nodes in the cluster but having to know which node is currently active?[/quote]I don't know if the SSC servers are clustered or not. Yes, you can put both physical names in, but AFAIK the tool doesn't tell you which node is active.

RE: An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor

george sibbald — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 07:12:08 GMT

does it focus down on individual queries as the cause of high resource usage, show query plans, suggest possible improvements?You say servers must be defined by physical name which is obviously an issue with clusters, but the SSC servers being monitored are clustered? Is this a case then of monitoring all the nodes in the cluster but having to know which node is currently active?

RE: An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor

Michael Lysons — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 03:28:14 GMT

Nice one, Adam. I'm just getting round to using SQL Monitor after winning a copy from Red Gate. My colleagues still find it a bit freaky when I say stuff like, "How's that long running query working out for you?" - I don't think they like the Big Brother of it all :-D

An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor

Adam Machanic — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 00:01:24 GMT

Comments posted to this topic are about the item [B]An In-Depth Examination of Red Gate SQL Monitor[/B]