SQL Clone
SQLServerCentral is supported by Redgate
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 


What do you do with a new SQL Server?


What do you do with a new SQL Server?

Author
Message
Carolyn Richardson
Carolyn Richardson
SSCommitted
SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1872 Visits: 3488
Comments posted to this topic are about the item What do you do with a new SQL Server?

Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable - Mark Twain
Carolyn
SQLServerSpecialists
Jeff Moden
Jeff Moden
SSC Guru
SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 86113 Visits: 41096
Nice, clear, well written article with good advice. Thanks!

--Jeff Moden

RBAR is pronounced ree-bar and is a Modenism for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column.
If you think its expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur. -- Red Adair

Helpful Links:
How to post code problems
How to post performance problems
Forum FAQs
Anipaul
Anipaul
SSCertifiable
SSCertifiable (7.3K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.3K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.3K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.3K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.3K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.3K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.3K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.3K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 7305 Visits: 1407
Well written and well segmented document.....



Andy sql
Andy sql
SSCommitted
SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1607 Visits: 1315
Yes, I agree, good concise advice.

Just one quick question - you mention the Fill Factor defaults to 100% in 2005, whereas it was 90% in 2000. [To be precise, it defaults to zero, which is the same as 100%]

Would you suggest changing the default Fill Factor to 90%? Or to some other value? Or leave the system-wide default and change the fill factor on a per-index basis?

Andy
paul.ibison
paul.ibison
Valued Member
Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 52 Visits: 144
Nice article - I voted 5 Smile

A few things I'dd add:
(1) check the server collation. Where I currently am DBA I have to standardise the collations across 20 servers because previous DBAs didn't see a difference between SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS and
Latin1_General_CI_AS Sad. This is best dealt with sooner rather than later to avoid the pain of changing all the column collations, checking code, constraints etc.
(2) Check that the correct version of SQL Server is being used. On some of my systems consultants have installed SQL 2005 Enterprise Edition when Standard will do fine - unlike SQL 2000 the general functionality is much closer to Enterprise and there is a difference of £10k or so per processor.
(2) Check the physical memory and if AWE is enabled if necessary (and change Boot.ini etc).
(3) Check the audit of licenses and if multiple procs are being taken account of in a multi-core machine.
(4) Check that the master key is being backed up if it is used.
(5) BUILTIN\Administrators - policy for enabling/disabling exists?
(6) Who is in the sysadmin role and are they supposed to be there (I have inherited several application users in the sysadmin role!).

Probably other checks I've forgotten but this is all I can think of right now. Personally I poll the servers for most of this type of info and collect it centrally, and fortunately our life for this sort of administration will become easier with the Policy based Management in SQL 2008. Anyway, thanks again for the useful article.

Paul Ibison
kate-395233
kate-395233
SSC Journeyman
SSC Journeyman (94 reputation)SSC Journeyman (94 reputation)SSC Journeyman (94 reputation)SSC Journeyman (94 reputation)SSC Journeyman (94 reputation)SSC Journeyman (94 reputation)SSC Journeyman (94 reputation)SSC Journeyman (94 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 94 Visits: 766
Hi Carolyn! This is a very helpful article, thanks. We are upgrading to SQL 2005 this week so this article will prove very useful to double check we haven't missed anything. Hope all is well with you.
Kate (from just one of the many companies Carolyn has helped improve in the past)
Carolyn Richardson
Carolyn Richardson
SSCommitted
SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1872 Visits: 3488
AndyD

Default fill factors at 0% is fine if you have high spec’d servers and small databases that are not heavily used. In these cases also 90% won’t make a great deal of difference either. What you want to default it to is your call based on the use of the database – heavy reads say leave at 0% (100%) / heavy writes say adjust to 90% - but what do I know!!!!. The default will only be used on new table creation anyway.

Fill factors are not a precise science, I would start monitoring use and adjust the fill factors of the most heavily used and fragmenting tables.

Paul

More for my list thanks. Collations can always be an issue in the UK, they’ve been the bane of my life on several occasions in the past.

Kate

Nice to here from you, I’ve sent you a private message.

Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable - Mark Twain
Carolyn
SQLServerSpecialists
TiBoT
TiBoT
Grasshopper
Grasshopper (16 reputation)Grasshopper (16 reputation)Grasshopper (16 reputation)Grasshopper (16 reputation)Grasshopper (16 reputation)Grasshopper (16 reputation)Grasshopper (16 reputation)Grasshopper (16 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 16 Visits: 25
Nice article. Very direct and to the point.

I'd consider a different title, tho, because it's always good to review your backup procedures.
Jeff Moden
Jeff Moden
SSC Guru
SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 86113 Visits: 41096
AndyD (6/12/2008)
Yes, I agree, good concise advice.

Just one quick question - you mention the Fill Factor defaults to 100% in 2005, whereas it was 90% in 2000. [To be precise, it defaults to zero, which is the same as 100%]

Would you suggest changing the default Fill Factor to 90%? Or to some other value? Or leave the system-wide default and change the fill factor on a per-index basis?

Andy


I remember seeing an article on the difference between 0% and 100% fill factors... Dunno if I can find it, again, but I'll look...

--Jeff Moden

RBAR is pronounced ree-bar and is a Modenism for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column.
If you think its expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur. -- Red Adair

Helpful Links:
How to post code problems
How to post performance problems
Forum FAQs
Andy sql
Andy sql
SSCommitted
SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1607 Visits: 1315
Jeff Moden (6/12/2008)

I remember seeing an article on the difference between 0% and 100% fill factors... Dunno if I can find it, again, but I'll look...


I was only regurgitating what is stated in BOL... from my point of view it seems strange that 0% and 100% mean the same thing Hehe
Go


Permissions

You can't post new topics.
You can't post topic replies.
You can't post new polls.
You can't post replies to polls.
You can't edit your own topics.
You can't delete your own topics.
You can't edit other topics.
You can't delete other topics.
You can't edit your own posts.
You can't edit other posts.
You can't delete your own posts.
You can't delete other posts.
You can't post events.
You can't edit your own events.
You can't edit other events.
You can't delete your own events.
You can't delete other events.
You can't send private messages.
You can't send emails.
You can read topics.
You can't vote in polls.
You can't upload attachments.
You can download attachments.
You can't post HTML code.
You can't edit HTML code.
You can't post IFCode.
You can't post JavaScript.
You can post emoticons.
You can't post or upload images.

Select a forum

































































































































































SQLServerCentral


Search