I have 3 busines applications that will be porting to SQL server. Can I size
a SQL server to house the 3 databases and the associated programs on the same
box? Or should I put up a SQL box and have the apps on a seperate server? We
are a small company so the IT budget is small so I'm looking for the most
cost effective solution. But I'm also concerned about the single point of
failure this will create. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks,
rwbeck"rwbeck" <rwbeck@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A7DC6DB7-2123-4F1B-B362-77DE287D1CF9@.microsoft.com...
> I have 3 busines applications that will be porting to SQL server. Can I
size
> a SQL server to house the 3 databases and the associated programs on the
same
> box? Or should I put up a SQL box and have the apps on a seperate server?
We
> are a small company so the IT budget is small so I'm looking for the most
> cost effective solution. But I'm also concerned about the single point of
> failure this will create. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
> Thanks,
> rwbeck
How big are the databases? How much activity will be going on in those
systems? How much activity in the front-end applications?
Depending on what and how the front-end is developed, you may have many
different points of "single point of failure".
The best answer is to use Tier 1 hardware for your production environment.
If it is small and fairly low in activity, then you can put it all on the
same box. You should continually monitor your SQL Server's performance to
ensure that everything is operating and playing well together. If the SQL
Server is being starved for memory or CPU cycles etc., then you may want to
start looking at a multi-box solution. It is all about balancing.
Ensure that you have a good backup and RECOVERY strategy and PRACTICE it.
Perform a sample disaster recovery, and I'm not just talking about restoring
the database on the same server. Pretend you had a fire in the building and
have to rebuild a new server from scratch. Where is the s/w located for
the O/S, SQL Server etc. Where are the backups of your current software
packages that runs on this system. How will it connect to it's users
(remember we had a "fire" in the building and lost everying in the
building.). How long does it take to truly recover. Write it all down in
a disaster recovery plan.
HTH
Rick Sawtell|||Thank you for the input. I'm providing answers to the questions you posted.
Each of the 3 DB's are 2-3GB. Two of the three are core apps, all 40 users
are in one all day(Case management/contact management). The second is
accessed concurrently by no more than 10 users. The third is time and billing
which is accessed sporadically throughout the day. The hardware will
definitely be tier 1.
Do you think it is feasible to house 3 DBs of that size on one tier 1
server? As far as sizing, using the requirements of each application do we
double up or is there some basic formula we can reference to help with sizing
a server for this type of deployment.
Are there any other sources you think I should reference that would help?
Thanks again.
Rwbeck
"Rick Sawtell" wrote:
> "rwbeck" <rwbeck@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:A7DC6DB7-2123-4F1B-B362-77DE287D1CF9@.microsoft.com...
> > I have 3 busines applications that will be porting to SQL server. Can I
> size
> > a SQL server to house the 3 databases and the associated programs on the
> same
> > box? Or should I put up a SQL box and have the apps on a seperate server?
> We
> > are a small company so the IT budget is small so I'm looking for the most
> > cost effective solution. But I'm also concerned about the single point of
> > failure this will create. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
> > Thanks,
> >
> > rwbeck
>
> How big are the databases? How much activity will be going on in those
> systems? How much activity in the front-end applications?
> Depending on what and how the front-end is developed, you may have many
> different points of "single point of failure".
> The best answer is to use Tier 1 hardware for your production environment.
> If it is small and fairly low in activity, then you can put it all on the
> same box. You should continually monitor your SQL Server's performance to
> ensure that everything is operating and playing well together. If the SQL
> Server is being starved for memory or CPU cycles etc., then you may want to
> start looking at a multi-box solution. It is all about balancing.
> Ensure that you have a good backup and RECOVERY strategy and PRACTICE it.
> Perform a sample disaster recovery, and I'm not just talking about restoring
> the database on the same server. Pretend you had a fire in the building and
> have to rebuild a new server from scratch. Where is the s/w located for
> the O/S, SQL Server etc. Where are the backups of your current software
> packages that runs on this system. How will it connect to it's users
> (remember we had a "fire" in the building and lost everying in the
> building.). How long does it take to truly recover. Write it all down in
> a disaster recovery plan.
> HTH
> Rick Sawtell
>
>|||"rwbeck" <rwbeck@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9067FEAF-604C-41A8-83C4-33967AD48CD9@.microsoft.com...
> Thank you for the input. I'm providing answers to the questions you
posted.
> Each of the 3 DB's are 2-3GB. Two of the three are core apps, all 40 users
> are in one all day(Case management/contact management). The second is
> accessed concurrently by no more than 10 users. The third is time and
billing
> which is accessed sporadically throughout the day. The hardware will
> definitely be tier 1.
> Do you think it is feasible to house 3 DBs of that size on one tier 1
> server? As far as sizing, using the requirements of each application do we
> double up or is there some basic formula we can reference to help with
sizing
> a server for this type of deployment.
> Are there any other sources you think I should reference that would help?
> Thanks again.
> Rwbeck
>
Those databases are relatively small and if you are simply doing contact
management and case management, then I would say that those systems are very
lightweight. The billing application may see some activity if it is
performing calculations, or doing heavy reporting, but with so few users on
the system, I would not worry about this impacting performance much.
As far as sizing your server etc. there are many different books of SQL
Server Administration. Pick one that you like and read through it. Once
you have a good understanding of what SQL Server does behind the scenes you
will be able to make better choices. This website is a gold-mine of great
information http://www.sql-server-performance.com/ Check it out.
HTH
Rick Sawtell|||Really appreciate your help!
"Rick Sawtell" wrote:
> "rwbeck" <rwbeck@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:9067FEAF-604C-41A8-83C4-33967AD48CD9@.microsoft.com...
> > Thank you for the input. I'm providing answers to the questions you
> posted.
> >
> > Each of the 3 DB's are 2-3GB. Two of the three are core apps, all 40 users
> > are in one all day(Case management/contact management). The second is
> > accessed concurrently by no more than 10 users. The third is time and
> billing
> > which is accessed sporadically throughout the day. The hardware will
> > definitely be tier 1.
> >
> > Do you think it is feasible to house 3 DBs of that size on one tier 1
> > server? As far as sizing, using the requirements of each application do we
> > double up or is there some basic formula we can reference to help with
> sizing
> > a server for this type of deployment.
> >
> > Are there any other sources you think I should reference that would help?
> >
> > Thanks again.
> > Rwbeck
> >
> Those databases are relatively small and if you are simply doing contact
> management and case management, then I would say that those systems are very
> lightweight. The billing application may see some activity if it is
> performing calculations, or doing heavy reporting, but with so few users on
> the system, I would not worry about this impacting performance much.
> As far as sizing your server etc. there are many different books of SQL
> Server Administration. Pick one that you like and read through it. Once
> you have a good understanding of what SQL Server does behind the scenes you
> will be able to make better choices. This website is a gold-mine of great
> information http://www.sql-server-performance.com/ Check it out.
> HTH
> Rick Sawtell
>
>
No comments:
Post a Comment