SQLServerCentral / Discuss Content Posted by Tim Mitchell / Article Discussions / Article Discussions by Author / Small Scale SQL Server Deployment / Latest Posts

RE: Small Scale SQL Server Deployment

Ian Yates — Sat, 26 Nov 2005 05:22:00 GMT

You are right - in your link, under the headingTable 2. Comparison of MSDE with SQL Server Expressit clearly says 4GB for express vs 2GB for MSDE. Good to know - thanks for pointing that out.

RE: Small Scale SQL Server Deployment

Terry Grignon — Fri, 25 Nov 2005 09:50:00 GMT

Yes... that is what Microsoft reports: 4GB data.

Here's an excerpt from the MSDN site:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnsse/html/sseoverview.asp

The SQL engine supports 1 CPU, 1 GB RAM, and a 4 GB database size. ... The 4 GB database size limit applies only to data files and not to log files. However, there are no limits to the number of databases that can be attached to the server.

RE: Small Scale SQL Server Deployment

Ian Yates — Mon, 21 Nov 2005 21:10:00 GMT

So the 2GB limit in MSDE (2GB data + 2GB transaction) is now 4GB in Express (4GB data + 4GB transaction??)... Are you sure the 4GB is not 2GB + 2GB still?

RE: Small Scale SQL Server Deployment

Terry Grignon — Mon, 21 Nov 2005 07:35:00 GMT

4 GB for Express actually.

RE: Small Scale SQL Server Deployment

Phil Henry — Tue, 15 Nov 2005 01:59:00 GMT

Good, no nonesense, solid article, Tim - thanks for that.

I count myself as one of the small business users- with SQL 2000 sitting within a partitioned primary server- running a MIS that uses SQL for its data deposit, and utilising Crystal Reports.

With the myriad of rave reviews of SQL2005, and the knowledge that some day I going to have to upgrade - it was nice to read a straight forward, informing article without the hype. ( No criticism intended to any other contributors!)

Lets hope we see more from Tim

RE: Small Scale SQL Server Deployment

Undebtedly — Mon, 14 Nov 2005 19:02:00 GMT

I've attended the local SQL Server group only once in about four years. The reason is that attention has always been on large scale, enterprise level databases. The statement that small scale setups compose the vast majority of cases out there comes as a shock to me, though logically it makes sense.I'm part of an organization that has been using MSDE on laptops for years. I don't know of anyone else that does that...maybe I should write about it one of these days.

RE: Small Scale SQL Server Deployment

Ian Yates — Mon, 14 Nov 2005 16:19:00 GMT

MSDE / SQL Express also have a database size limit of 2GB...

But good article - nice to see comments & discussion on running smaller SQL Servers on a budget!

As for the MySQL stuff - I have to say that my last experience was with MySQL v3.5 or something and I found it to be rather awful, missing may important and basic features that I take for granted on SqlServer, such as stored procs. I too have seen several shops go with MySQL for their internal project and then decidea) They ask us to come in and bend our software to run on MySQL - answer is always no... Some haven't wanted to run MSDE for reasons unknown ORb) They end up throwing away everything they've done and have wasted a lot of time because they want something that MSSQL offers, or the in-house person who wrote the database leaves and there is no one who can maintain the software...[End rant]

RE: Small Scale SQL Server Deployment

Luke L — Mon, 14 Nov 2005 09:11:00 GMT

Nice Article. Thanks for the mention of Express and MSDE. So many small business forget these in favor of other "free" solutions using MySQL and PostgreSQL. Dont' forget that these all come with a learning curve and may cost you more in the long run.

RE: Small Scale SQL Server Deployment

SW21_Bob — Mon, 14 Nov 2005 07:55:00 GMT

The only thing you didn't mention (unless I missed it) is that size of the database isn't the only factor to consider. The transaction throughput is important too.

Another consideration is that most very small businesses will not have a dedicated database server. They will often have Small Business Server and run Exchange, Terminal Services, and many other services all off the same box. The hardware needs to be sized for what the server needs as a whole, not just the needs of SQL Server.

RE: Small Scale SQL Server Deployment

Johan Frisk — Mon, 14 Nov 2005 01:39:00 GMT

Great article on a subject that I hope to read more about. After all, as mentioned, the small scale setups constitute the vast majority of cases if not the most complicated ones.

Small Scale SQL Server Deployment

Tim Mitchell — Tue, 25 Oct 2005 16:39:00 GMT

Comments posted to this topic are about the content posted at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/tmitchell/smallscalesqlserverdeployment.asp