September 9, 2008 at 2:04 pm
My computer specks are
AMD Athelon 64X Dual Core 2.8 Mhz Black edition
8 Gigs of DDR@ 667 Ram
Plenty of Hard Drive Space and External USB space
My primary boot on the computer is XP Pro 64 bit - then i kickstart VMWARE and run Vista Ulti 64 and then the SQL Serv. 2008 in the Vista VM.
i have a huge table with 260 million rows and 12 columns.
i have split it into 115 partitions and and am running MS SQL server 2008 on a VMWare VM running on
Vista Ultimate 64 Bit edition.
Most of my "where clauses" are on 3 columns - Date, Root(char 5) and Symbol(char 5) - I have a clustered index on Date and non-clustered index on Root and Symbol. The date clustered index takes care of the Range Left partition function in order to sort the data into the appropriate file groups.
My data will not be changed ( i.e updated or deleted ) - No modifications will occurr -- just reads and inserts on a monthly basis !!
MY GOAL IS TO GET TTHE FASTEST DATA READS I.E SELECT * FROM TABLE WHERE DATE = 'VALUE'
Questions i have are -
1. Is running SQL server IN Vista over A VMWARE vm any different from running SQL server directly on Vista without VMWARE?
2. Is running SQL server direcly over Windows Server 2008 better than Vista ??
3. Is setting the min/max memory on SQL server to about 6 megs better thank leaving it dynamically managed by SQL server.
4. Is my partitioning strategy appropriate or do i have too many or too less .....
5. My hard disk foot print is 29 gigs of data for my dtabase --- if i do compress it (i.e i thought page compression because i have allot of repetetive data) then will it slow down my sql where statements ...... ?? i have no issue on the gigs used i just want to be able to retrieve data fast.
6. Does SQL server 2008 have anything like Oracle has for GRID computing ?? i.e using the power of 2 or 3 machines to run your server on ... I believe SQL clusters are more of a fail safe mechanism rather than a GRID implimentation ?? please can someone shed some light on this .....
thanks in advance for any input !!
September 9, 2008 at 9:30 pm
1. Yes, less resources available.
2. Depends, SErver is better suited to server resource management. for one user, probably not.
3. You change this to match needs, there is no better. If it doesn't impact your performance, dynamic should work.
4. Not sure
5. Depends. You have to test. Compression takes resources to complete. If that is less than the time for disk retrieval, than it can be faster.
6.No
September 10, 2008 at 11:06 am
thanks Steve for the reply - i have another question for you
the SQL server installed the x86 version instead of the x64 version on my virtual machine .... is'nt it supposed to recognize my atholon 64 bit processor ??
Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply