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 "ideal" hardware configuration for SQL Server 2008 Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Monday, May 3, 2010 11:18 AM


SSC-Insane

SSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-Insane

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 8:47 PM
Points: 23,293, Visits: 32,028
Actually, for a database server that needs to host 150+ databases, I'd be looking at a minimum of 64GB to 128GB ram, more would be better.

IIRC, our network services group purchased a 16TB iSCSI san for storing backup files (database, file server, email, etc) and dedup software as well instead of a dedicated hardware appliance for around 32K, maybe a bit more.



Lynn Pettis

For better assistance in answering your questions, click here
For tips to get better help with Performance Problems, click here
For Running Totals and its variations, click here or when working with partitioned tables
For more about Tally Tables, click here
For more about Cross Tabs and Pivots, click here and here
Managing Transaction Logs

SQL Musings from the Desert Fountain Valley SQL (My Mirror Blog)
Post #914833
Posted Monday, May 3, 2010 12:17 PM


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: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 2:27 PM
Points: 3,309, Visits: 6,702
Here is a link that might be of interest for you. Since you have around 200K budget, you could take a look at it. It is a TPC Benchmark.


-Roy
Post #914864
Posted Monday, May 3, 2010 12:27 PM
SSC Rookie

SSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, July 29, 2014 8:06 AM
Points: 48, Visits: 281
Roy,
Thank you! Very cool site.
Post #914870
Posted Monday, May 3, 2010 12:38 PM


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: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 2:27 PM
Points: 3,309, Visits: 6,702
I hope it will help you. I actually got it today morning from a friend of mine. If we had this site, it would have been easy for us when we set up our server. We had to do it the hard way (Experimenting with different HW set ups for IO) before we found one similar to what they had stated.

-Roy
Post #914879
Posted Tuesday, May 4, 2010 6:13 AM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 8:59 PM
Points: 1,231, Visits: 6,640
bdavey (5/3/2010)
Ok Lynn, how about this:

If you had $200K to spend on hardware, including storage, for an SQL server setup what would it be?


I would look at one of the Fast Track Data Warehouse setups Microsoft is promoting.
Hardware and SAN are matched for optimal data movement.
[url=http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2008/en/us/fasttrack.aspx][/url]

Greg E
Post #915230
Posted Tuesday, May 4, 2010 10:28 AM
SSC Rookie

SSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, July 29, 2014 8:06 AM
Points: 48, Visits: 281
Thanks Greg. It great to find these predesigned solutions.

One question though. Is the "Fast Track" optimized for only data warehouses? We do have a lot of OLTP too.
Post #915464
Posted Tuesday, May 4, 2010 10:36 AM


SSC-Dedicated

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

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 5:56 PM
Points: 33,202, Visits: 15,348
Fast Track is only for data warehouses. OLTP loads vary so widely.

It's still hard to guess your load. Maybe Lynn is closed on memory, but 1GB a day/150 databases, isn't a lot. That's like 7MB a day/db, correct? Not a lot of writes.

Depending on the batches, transactions, etc., you could have lots of variation on what you need. I'd also consider DR here, since I'm assuming having 150 dbs crash would be bad. I might even lean towards a 3 or 4 node cluster if you can do that, or even 3-4 servers (2 primary, 1-2 backup) with mirroring.







Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #915471
Posted Tuesday, May 4, 2010 11:49 AM


SSC-Insane

SSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-Insane

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 1:51 PM
Points: 21,644, Visits: 15,317
With the considerations for DR, one must also include considerations for Business Continuity.


200K may seem like a lot of money but it can disappear in a heartbeat with the purchase of a SAN (depending on size), Backup Solution, DR Solution, and Business Continuity Solution. Ideally, you would want something that would not need replaced after five years.




Jason AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
I have given a name to my pain...
MCM SQL Server


SQL RNNR

Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw
Posting Data Etiquette - Jeff Moden
Hidden RBAR - Jeff Moden
VLFs and the Tran Log - Kimberly Tripp
Post #915537
Posted Tuesday, May 4, 2010 11:59 AM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 8:59 PM
Points: 1,231, Visits: 6,640
bdavey (5/4/2010)
Thanks Greg. It great to find these predesigned solutions.

One question though. Is the "Fast Track" optimized for only data warehouses? We do have a lot of OLTP too.


Steve is correct - these are designed for huge data loads / query activity.
But you may want to ask Microsoft more directly on specifics.

We deal with a data warehouse, so it looks like something we will get to.
But it does nothing for our AS load.
Greg E
Post #915553
Posted Saturday, December 17, 2011 7:56 AM
SSC Rookie

SSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 3:04 PM
Points: 36, Visits: 366
bdavey (5/3/2010)
Thanks Lynn, Greg, & Steve. I think I see the error of may ways now. Let me define this a little more.

It is a single cluster environment (1 active, 1 passive).
It is about 90% OLTP (10% warehouse).
It has 2 instances with 150+ databases.
The total space consumed, excluding backups, is about 500 Gig.
Space is expected to grow at about a 500 Mb/day.
We expect to replace our hardware every 5 years.
Rack mount is definitely prefered.
Not concerned with SLA's at this point.
Backup replication & storage does not need to be considered in this purchase.
The majority of the growth occurs during normal U.S. business hours.
$200k is the very maximum. I would probably scale down from this.


Your are concerned with SLA or you wouldn't have a cluster.
2 Dell R910 with 256GB of RAM each (go with the lowest number of procs) add more later if needed
3 years of SAN space(reassess expected growth over time) depending on your infrastructure this could blow your budget or not be a factor.
Run raid 10 for all.
1TB of for the data lun
250GB for the Log lun
10 GB for SQL system (with MSDB moved to data and log luns)
20 GB for SQL TempDB
1GB for MSDTC LUN
1 Idera SQL Diagnostic Manager license
Post #1223474
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase ««12

Permissions Expand / Collapse