Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase ««12

What is the performance point at which it makes sense to get Enterprise instead of Standard Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Tuesday, July 23, 2013 9:33 PM
SSC Rookie

SSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 3:13 PM
Points: 40, Visits: 290
Mostly it's about features, but it is also about upgrade paths. If you go with standard and later decide that is not enough you can upgrade to enterprise edition in-place. If you go enterprise and decide it's more than you need you can't 'downgrade' the license - you need to do a reinstall.

Unless you are looking at specific enterprise features I'd suggest to go with standard edition.
Post #1476865
Posted Wednesday, July 24, 2013 12:00 AM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 10:16 PM
Points: 2,922, Visits: 2,521
TheSQLGuru (7/22/2013)
For me the biggest limitation in Standard Edition is the RIDICULOUSLY LOW maximum memory. Fortunately you can supplant that with SSD storage to some degree, although I will caution anyone who thinks that is a magic bullet. PageIOLatch_xx can still get you, but they will be less onerous than the tens to perhaps thousands of milliseconds you may see with rotating media and too little RAM. The other biggie, and I mean potentially non-functional application biggie, is deadlocks. I have had several clients that have started throwing a blizzard of deadlocks after moving to SSD storage, including one that had to roll back to rotating media to get their system reusable!!


What is your concern with Standard Edition memory - I would have thought that 64GB isn't ridiculously low



Post #1476881
Posted Wednesday, July 24, 2013 4:02 AM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 10:20 AM
Points: 1,224, Visits: 9,636
happycat59 (7/24/2013)

What is your concern with Standard Edition memory - I would have thought that 64GB isn't ridiculously low


The issue for me is that it hasn't moved with the times, so the limitation is getting increasingly out of date. To be honest, I think SQL Server (and Oracle) licensing in general is getting out of date.

Speccing up to 512GB of RAM in a modern server is under £5000. That's small business territory, but you'd have to plump for Enterprise Edition to use it.

Say you wanted to spec out a reasonable 4U server (40 cores, 512GB RAM etc.) it might come to around £25,000. To fully license it for any edition of SQL Server you'd need to spend £180k+ on EE licenses. That's a much higher ratio of hardware->software spend than it was 5-10 years ago.
Post #1476953
Posted Wednesday, July 31, 2013 7:03 AM
SSC-Enthusiastic

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

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, April 17, 2014 1:41 AM
Points: 170, Visits: 1,400
TheSQLGuru (7/22/2013)
.... The other biggie, and I mean potentially non-functional application biggie, is deadlocks. I have had several clients that have started throwing a blizzard of deadlocks after moving to SSD storage, including one that had to roll back to rotating media to get their system reusable!!


Very interesting
So the increased IO latency is keeping the code from deadlocking itself!

Never thought of that - I would normally expect to see the bottleneck shifting towards latches of some sort.
Weird huh.


Cheers,

JohnA

MCM: SQL2008
Post #1479459
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase ««12

Permissions Expand / Collapse