Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
Mojo
Starting Member
19 Posts |
 Posted - 2002-02-28 : 19:16:07
|
| I have been outsourcing all of my SQL Server 2000 needs and have been told to look at what it would take to bring it in-house.At another forum I have seen posts where some people have said slighlty negative things about the hardware requirements of SQL Server 2000. Here is the lastest post about the minimum requirements to realistically run SQL Server 2000. I know I can look at the Microsoft website, but they are always VERY optimistic about operating systems and figured the same about their database. The post below was not from my question but it relates:"Well for "starters" you'll need a minimum of a PIII 850, 512 RAM and a SCSI HDD (don't even think about using a IDE HDD) for the web server. Then figure a PIII850 w/ 1GB RAM and another SCSI HDD for the SQL server(put them both on the same box and you are doomed before you start). Now add one DNS server (you can run one on the web server)- since you need two seperate servers. Oh yeah - add at the very least another IP address (the DNS servers have to have different IPs)."I have seen a few cases where some people have claimed that you need at high end application server to run SQL Server 2k. Is this true?Thanks,Joe |
|
|
byrmol
Shed Building SQL Farmer
1591 Posts |
Posted - 2002-02-28 : 19:31:30
|
| Hardware requirements are determined by the current request load of the apps and the future request load!If you are not doing 10^6 TPS then you can use a "light" server.Find out what your apps requires then build the box.We have about 5 SQL Servers for dev.. none of them have over 256 MB RAM, no RAID and "slow" processors PII450. When we stress test apps, they hold up just fine...DavidMTomorrow is the same day as Today was the day before. |
 |
|
|
nr
SQLTeam MVY
12543 Posts |
Posted - 2002-02-28 : 19:41:54
|
| Think about how much these things cost.Relational databases are very sensitive to memory - especiallly so sql server if it is well developed so go for lots.Reserving a server for the database alone is a good idea re memory - otherwise how do you control it.512M RAM is not a lot - why skimp, I think this is small nowadays, again if the database is well designed it shouldn't need it - but 2G? go for it, probably min is 256M but why try it (one of my dev machines has 128M and runs it but not happily).Scsi vs ide? Do you want a raid array? If so scsi will probably be the option if not then it's up to you. Scsi should be faster.PIII 850 - are they still available? Not important compared to memory.Probably add a processor rather than go for faster.I would say go for as much memory as possible and dedicate a server to sql server.DNS servers - no idea except that you need two to host a site.>> I have seen a few cases where some people have claimed that you need at high end application server to run SQL Server 2k. memory!==========================================Cursors are useful if you don't know sql.Beer is not cold and it isn't fizzy.Edited by - nr on 02/28/2002 20:14:17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hardware requirements...?