Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Redgate
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase ««12

Provisioning Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Tuesday, May 28, 2013 4:05 AM
Hall of Fame

Hall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of Fame

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 5:06 AM
Points: 3,034, Visits: 3,709
Using the Cloud can significantly speed up the server provisioning cycle.

It used to take about 3 months for us to move from proposal to in-use server, but after out move to AWS last year this is now about 2 - 3 days. The technical bits of this typically take under 1 day, but there are those pesky approvals to get done.

This change in speed has forced a change of thinking on us. Cost management of server spend used to get buried in the Capex process for getting new servers. Removing the Capex process initially resulted in cost management becoming an orphan that no-one properly looked after.

We have now moved to making the Operations Team responsible for budget management for server costs, resulting in KPIs around this for the Windows System people. Moving to the Cloud gives some interesting new opportunities, but also some new challenges to overcome.


Original author: SQL Server FineBuild 1-click install and best practice configuration of SQL Server 2016, 2014, 2012, 2008 R2, 2008 and 2005. 11 May 2016: now over 37,000 downloads.
Disclaimer: All information provided is a personal opinion that may not match reality.
Quote: "When I give food to the poor they call me a saint. When I ask why they are poor they call me a communist." - Archbishop Hélder Câmara
Post #1457253
Posted Tuesday, May 28, 2013 9:28 AM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 7:55 PM
Points: 34,081, Visits: 18,219
Revenant (5/24/2013)
GBimberg (5/24/2013)
My current upgrade project will have been running about a year when it’s complete. Of course, I am assuming that there are no new surprises.

This is the last hardware upgrade, that I can ask for, for the next 5 years.

My deepest sympathy. I think in this situation I would be looking for a new job.


Why? I'd hope many servers can last 5 years at this point. If there's a need to upgrade, fine, but being on a 2-3 year cycle these days seems silly with the power of the hardware.

I would hope that if something grows fast and you need an upgrade, you get it, but having a standard in place like 5 years makes sense to me.







Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1457398
Posted Tuesday, May 28, 2013 9:49 AM
SSC-Enthusiastic

SSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-Enthusiastic

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, December 29, 2015 8:27 AM
Points: 153, Visits: 155
Companies that have set hardware upgrade cycles do so to keep their maintenance agreements with their hardware vendors up to date.

Like Steve said, it makes perfect sense to be on a 5 year hardware cycle barring any failures (which should be covered under a maintenance agreement).
Post #1457414
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase ««12

Permissions Expand / Collapse