Dual processors?

One of my customers just plugged in a second processor on a sql server 2000
running on a dell (dual Xeon at 2G). Does the simple fact of plugging in a
second processor increase the speed of sql server standard on that machine?
I'm not sure its that simple.
Any insight would be appreciated.
BobSQL will use the second processor, provided the OS accepts and uses it.
Whether that speeds up SQL depends on what resource is limiting SQL
performance. If the system was running over 80% CPU usage, he will likely
see some noticable speed improvement. As has been said before in this
forum, you first have to identify the performance limiting factor(s) I.E.
the bottlenecks, in your system before you can determine whether adding
resource X will make it faster. This applies whether X is memory, RAM, disk
capacity/speed, CPU speed/count, or network bandwidth.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Bob" <bdufour@.sgiims.com> wrote in message
news:OASJaP0BGHA.1288@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> One of my customers just plugged in a second processor on a sql server
> 2000 running on a dell (dual Xeon at 2G). Does the simple fact of plugging
> in a second processor increase the speed of sql server standard on that
> machine? I'm not sure its that simple.
> Any insight would be appreciated.
> Bob
>|||On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 17:05:40 -0500, "Bob" <bdufour@.sgiims.com> wrote:
>One of my customers just plugged in a second processor on a sql server 2000
>running on a dell (dual Xeon at 2G). Does the simple fact of plugging in a
>second processor increase the speed of sql server standard on that machine?
>I'm not sure its that simple.
Did you say on the other thread that you are running Windows 2000?
Windows Server 2003 supports threads better and is probably better
overall for multiprocessor systems.
Josh|||Bob wrote:
> One of my customers just plugged in a second processor on a sql
> server 2000 running on a dell (dual Xeon at 2G). Does the simple fact
> of plugging in a second processor increase the speed of sql server
> standard on that machine? I'm not sure its that simple.
> Any insight would be appreciated.
> Bob
Not only should it increase speed, but it will require you puchase
another CPU license if you are using the CPU licensing model.
To be sure, check to make sure SQL Server is using both processors. You
can do this from the server properties in SQL EM.
David Gugick
Quest Software
www.imceda.com
www.quest.com

Dual processors?

One of my customers just plugged in a second processor on a sql server 2000
running on a dell (dual Xeon at 2G). Does the simple fact of plugging in a
second processor increase the speed of sql server standard on that machine?
I'm not sure its that simple.
Any insight would be appreciated.
Bob
SQL will use the second processor, provided the OS accepts and uses it.
Whether that speeds up SQL depends on what resource is limiting SQL
performance. If the system was running over 80% CPU usage, he will likely
see some noticable speed improvement. As has been said before in this
forum, you first have to identify the performance limiting factor(s) I.E.
the bottlenecks, in your system before you can determine whether adding
resource X will make it faster. This applies whether X is memory, RAM, disk
capacity/speed, CPU speed/count, or network bandwidth.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Bob" <bdufour@.sgiims.com> wrote in message
news:OASJaP0BGHA.1288@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> One of my customers just plugged in a second processor on a sql server
> 2000 running on a dell (dual Xeon at 2G). Does the simple fact of plugging
> in a second processor increase the speed of sql server standard on that
> machine? I'm not sure its that simple.
> Any insight would be appreciated.
> Bob
>
|||On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 17:05:40 -0500, "Bob" <bdufour@.sgiims.com> wrote:
>One of my customers just plugged in a second processor on a sql server 2000
>running on a dell (dual Xeon at 2G). Does the simple fact of plugging in a
>second processor increase the speed of sql server standard on that machine?
>I'm not sure its that simple.
Did you say on the other thread that you are running Windows 2000?
Windows Server 2003 supports threads better and is probably better
overall for multiprocessor systems.
Josh
|||Bob wrote:
> One of my customers just plugged in a second processor on a sql
> server 2000 running on a dell (dual Xeon at 2G). Does the simple fact
> of plugging in a second processor increase the speed of sql server
> standard on that machine? I'm not sure its that simple.
> Any insight would be appreciated.
> Bob
Not only should it increase speed, but it will require you puchase
another CPU license if you are using the CPU licensing model.
To be sure, check to make sure SQL Server is using both processors. You
can do this from the server properties in SQL EM.
David Gugick
Quest Software
www.imceda.com
www.quest.com

Dual processors?

One of my customers just plugged in a second processor on a sql server 2000
running on a dell (dual Xeon at 2G). Does the simple fact of plugging in a
second processor increase the speed of sql server standard on that machine?
I'm not sure its that simple.
Any insight would be appreciated.
BobSQL will use the second processor, provided the OS accepts and uses it.
Whether that speeds up SQL depends on what resource is limiting SQL
performance. If the system was running over 80% CPU usage, he will likely
see some noticable speed improvement. As has been said before in this
forum, you first have to identify the performance limiting factor(s) I.E.
the bottlenecks, in your system before you can determine whether adding
resource X will make it faster. This applies whether X is memory, RAM, disk
capacity/speed, CPU speed/count, or network bandwidth.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Bob" <bdufour@.sgiims.com> wrote in message
news:OASJaP0BGHA.1288@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> One of my customers just plugged in a second processor on a sql server
> 2000 running on a dell (dual Xeon at 2G). Does the simple fact of plugging
> in a second processor increase the speed of sql server standard on that
> machine? I'm not sure its that simple.
> Any insight would be appreciated.
> Bob
>|||On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 17:05:40 -0500, "Bob" <bdufour@.sgiims.com> wrote:
>One of my customers just plugged in a second processor on a sql server 2000
>running on a dell (dual Xeon at 2G). Does the simple fact of plugging in a
>second processor increase the speed of sql server standard on that machine?
>I'm not sure its that simple.
Did you say on the other thread that you are running Windows 2000?
Windows Server 2003 supports threads better and is probably better
overall for multiprocessor systems.
Josh|||Bob wrote:
> One of my customers just plugged in a second processor on a sql
> server 2000 running on a dell (dual Xeon at 2G). Does the simple fact
> of plugging in a second processor increase the speed of sql server
> standard on that machine? I'm not sure its that simple.
> Any insight would be appreciated.
> Bob
Not only should it increase speed, but it will require you puchase
another CPU license if you are using the CPU licensing model.
To be sure, check to make sure SQL Server is using both processors. You
can do this from the server properties in SQL EM.
David Gugick
Quest Software
www.imceda.com
www.quest.com

Dual Processors Xeon Support

Dear SQL Server Users,
How do I configure Sql Server 2000 to supports dual cpu (Xeon)?
Kind Regards
Charles
By default, the installation chooses all the CPUs. You can change it to use
only 1 CPU later.
Gopi
"Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:67E77C3C-899A-47E9-AE60-EE98D32C48BC@.microsoft.com...
> Dear SQL Server Users,
> How do I configure Sql Server 2000 to supports dual cpu (Xeon)?
> Kind Regards
> Charles
|||a related question: if you have two instances and one dual cpu xeon,
can you set the processor affinity to use one processor per instance?
if so, does this buy you as much as setting the processor affinity for
two (separate) processors?
thanks,
arthur
|||Hi Rgn,
Could you point me to further information on Sql Server for DUAL CPU
environment?
Kind Regards
Charles
"rgn" wrote:

> By default, the installation chooses all the CPUs. You can change it to use
> only 1 CPU later.
> Gopi
> "Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:67E77C3C-899A-47E9-AE60-EE98D32C48BC@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||What kind of information? Standard edition or above will use multiple
processors by default. You don't have to do anything.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2594534E-DF3A-448A-98DA-5D8325AEBC0C@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Rgn,
> Could you point me to further information on Sql Server for DUAL CPU
> environment?
> Kind Regards
> Charles
> "rgn" wrote:
|||Arthur,
Check the Microsoft website for a whitepaper on HT processors. These were
first introduced on Xeon Server processors
and the OS (MicroSoft) does treat them as two logical CPUs even though it is
one Physical CPU.
Microsoft itself mentions that the performance gain is not that significant
(as of WIN2K/SQL2K) as the performance gain
is only about 30% when compared to two Physical CPUs and this is because
WIN2K/SQL2K is not designed to make
use of the Hyper Threading features.
Please check the Microsoft website. I cant recollect the URL as I had read
this 2 years before.
Gopi
"arthur" <alangham@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1108394471.350245.286640@.f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>a related question: if you have two instances and one dual cpu xeon,
> can you set the processor affinity to use one processor per instance?
> if so, does this buy you as much as setting the processor affinity for
> two (separate) processors?
> thanks,
> arthur
>
|||Hi Andrew
I'm looking for documentation on how to tune-up SQL Server Standard Edition
on Dual CPU Xeon.
Kind Regards
Charles
"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:

> What kind of information? Standard edition or above will use multiple
> processors by default. You don't have to do anything.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:2594534E-DF3A-448A-98DA-5D8325AEBC0C@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||There isn't much regarding the dual cpu part. The tuning is mostly the same
as it pertains more to I/O and poor queries or schemas. Have a look at
these:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...perftuning.asp
Performance WP's
http://www.swynk.com/friends/vandenberg/perfmonitor.asp Perfmon counters
http://www.sql-server-performance.co...ance_audit.asp
Hardware Performance CheckList
http://www.sql-server-performance.co...mance_tips.asp
SQL 2000 Performance tuning tips
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=q224587 Troubleshooting App
Performance
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...rfmon_24u1.asp
Disk Monitoring
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B77F9EBF-ACD1-4D20-8AE6-72B80469BC62@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Andrew
> I'm looking for documentation on how to tune-up SQL Server Standard
> Edition
> on Dual CPU Xeon.
> Kind Regards
> Charles
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:

Dual Processors Xeon Support

Dear SQL Server Users,
How do I configure Sql Server 2000 to supports dual cpu (Xeon)?
Kind Regards
CharlesBy default, the installation chooses all the CPUs. You can change it to use
only 1 CPU later.
Gopi
"Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:67E77C3C-899A-47E9-AE60-EE98D32C48BC@.microsoft.com...
> Dear SQL Server Users,
> How do I configure Sql Server 2000 to supports dual cpu (Xeon)?
> Kind Regards
> Charles|||a related question: if you have two instances and one dual cpu xeon,
can you set the processor affinity to use one processor per instance?
if so, does this buy you as much as setting the processor affinity for
two (separate) processors?
thanks,
arthur|||Hi Rgn,
Could you point me to further information on Sql Server for DUAL CPU
environment?
Kind Regards
Charles
"rgn" wrote:

> By default, the installation chooses all the CPUs. You can change it to us
e
> only 1 CPU later.
> Gopi
> "Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:67E77C3C-899A-47E9-AE60-EE98D32C48BC@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||What kind of information? Standard edition or above will use multiple
processors by default. You don't have to do anything.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2594534E-DF3A-448A-98DA-5D8325AEBC0C@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Rgn,
> Could you point me to further information on Sql Server for DUAL CPU
> environment?
> Kind Regards
> Charles
> "rgn" wrote:
>|||Arthur,
Check the Microsoft website for a whitepaper on HT processors. These were
first introduced on Xeon Server processors
and the OS (MicroSoft) does treat them as two logical CPUs even though it is
one Physical CPU.
Microsoft itself mentions that the performance gain is not that significant
(as of WIN2K/SQL2K) as the performance gain
is only about 30% when compared to two Physical CPUs and this is because
WIN2K/SQL2K is not designed to make
use of the Hyper Threading features.
Please check the Microsoft website. I cant recollect the URL as I had read
this 2 years before.
Gopi
"arthur" <alangham@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1108394471.350245.286640@.f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>a related question: if you have two instances and one dual cpu xeon,
> can you set the processor affinity to use one processor per instance?
> if so, does this buy you as much as setting the processor affinity for
> two (separate) processors?
> thanks,
> arthur
>|||Hi Andrew
I'm looking for documentation on how to tune-up SQL Server Standard Edition
on Dual CPU Xeon.
Kind Regards
Charles
"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:

> What kind of information? Standard edition or above will use multiple
> processors by default. You don't have to do anything.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:2594534E-DF3A-448A-98DA-5D8325AEBC0C@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||There isn't much regarding the dual cpu part. The tuning is mostly the same
as it pertains more to I/O and poor queries or schemas. Have a look at
these:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../perftuning.asp
Performance WP's
http://www.swynk.com/friends/vandenberg/perfmonitor.asp Perfmon counters
http://www.sql-server-performance.c...mance_audit.asp
Hardware Performance CheckList
http://www.sql-server-performance.c...rmance_tips.asp
SQL 2000 Performance tuning tips
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=q224587 Troubleshooting App
Performance
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d.../>
on_24u1.asp
Disk Monitoring
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B77F9EBF-ACD1-4D20-8AE6-72B80469BC62@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Andrew
> I'm looking for documentation on how to tune-up SQL Server Standard
> Edition
> on Dual CPU Xeon.
> Kind Regards
> Charles
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
>

Dual Processors Xeon Support

Dear SQL Server Users,
How do I configure Sql Server 2000 to supports dual cpu (Xeon)?
Kind Regards
CharlesBy default, the installation chooses all the CPUs. You can change it to use
only 1 CPU later.
Gopi
"Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:67E77C3C-899A-47E9-AE60-EE98D32C48BC@.microsoft.com...
> Dear SQL Server Users,
> How do I configure Sql Server 2000 to supports dual cpu (Xeon)?
> Kind Regards
> Charles|||a related question: if you have two instances and one dual cpu xeon,
can you set the processor affinity to use one processor per instance?
if so, does this buy you as much as setting the processor affinity for
two (separate) processors?
thanks,
arthur|||Hi Rgn,
Could you point me to further information on Sql Server for DUAL CPU
environment?
Kind Regards
Charles
"rgn" wrote:
> By default, the installation chooses all the CPUs. You can change it to use
> only 1 CPU later.
> Gopi
> "Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:67E77C3C-899A-47E9-AE60-EE98D32C48BC@.microsoft.com...
> > Dear SQL Server Users,
> >
> > How do I configure Sql Server 2000 to supports dual cpu (Xeon)?
> >
> > Kind Regards
> > Charles
>
>|||What kind of information? Standard edition or above will use multiple
processors by default. You don't have to do anything.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2594534E-DF3A-448A-98DA-5D8325AEBC0C@.microsoft.com...
> Hi Rgn,
> Could you point me to further information on Sql Server for DUAL CPU
> environment?
> Kind Regards
> Charles
> "rgn" wrote:
>> By default, the installation chooses all the CPUs. You can change it to
>> use
>> only 1 CPU later.
>> Gopi
>> "Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:67E77C3C-899A-47E9-AE60-EE98D32C48BC@.microsoft.com...
>> > Dear SQL Server Users,
>> >
>> > How do I configure Sql Server 2000 to supports dual cpu (Xeon)?
>> >
>> > Kind Regards
>> > Charles
>>|||Arthur,
Check the Microsoft website for a whitepaper on HT processors. These were
first introduced on Xeon Server processors
and the OS (MicroSoft) does treat them as two logical CPUs even though it is
one Physical CPU.
Microsoft itself mentions that the performance gain is not that significant
(as of WIN2K/SQL2K) as the performance gain
is only about 30% when compared to two Physical CPUs and this is because
WIN2K/SQL2K is not designed to make
use of the Hyper Threading features.
Please check the Microsoft website. I cant recollect the URL as I had read
this 2 years before.
Gopi
"arthur" <alangham@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1108394471.350245.286640@.f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>a related question: if you have two instances and one dual cpu xeon,
> can you set the processor affinity to use one processor per instance?
> if so, does this buy you as much as setting the processor affinity for
> two (separate) processors?
> thanks,
> arthur
>|||Hi Andrew
I'm looking for documentation on how to tune-up SQL Server Standard Edition
on Dual CPU Xeon.
Kind Regards
Charles
"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> What kind of information? Standard edition or above will use multiple
> processors by default. You don't have to do anything.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:2594534E-DF3A-448A-98DA-5D8325AEBC0C@.microsoft.com...
> > Hi Rgn,
> >
> > Could you point me to further information on Sql Server for DUAL CPU
> > environment?
> >
> > Kind Regards
> > Charles
> >
> > "rgn" wrote:
> >
> >> By default, the installation chooses all the CPUs. You can change it to
> >> use
> >> only 1 CPU later.
> >>
> >> Gopi
> >>
> >> "Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:67E77C3C-899A-47E9-AE60-EE98D32C48BC@.microsoft.com...
> >> > Dear SQL Server Users,
> >> >
> >> > How do I configure Sql Server 2000 to supports dual cpu (Xeon)?
> >> >
> >> > Kind Regards
> >> > Charles
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>|||There isn't much regarding the dual cpu part. The tuning is mostly the same
as it pertains more to I/O and poor queries or schemas. Have a look at
these:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/administration/2000/perftuning.asp
Performance WP's
http://www.swynk.com/friends/vandenberg/perfmonitor.asp Perfmon counters
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/sql_server_performance_audit.asp
Hardware Performance CheckList
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/best_sql_server_performance_tips.asp
SQL 2000 Performance tuning tips
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=q224587 Troubleshooting App
Performance
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/adminsql/ad_perfmon_24u1.asp
Disk Monitoring
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B77F9EBF-ACD1-4D20-8AE6-72B80469BC62@.microsoft.com...
> Hi Andrew
> I'm looking for documentation on how to tune-up SQL Server Standard
> Edition
> on Dual CPU Xeon.
> Kind Regards
> Charles
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
>> What kind of information? Standard edition or above will use multiple
>> processors by default. You don't have to do anything.
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>>
>> "Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:2594534E-DF3A-448A-98DA-5D8325AEBC0C@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hi Rgn,
>> >
>> > Could you point me to further information on Sql Server for DUAL CPU
>> > environment?
>> >
>> > Kind Regards
>> > Charles
>> >
>> > "rgn" wrote:
>> >
>> >> By default, the installation chooses all the CPUs. You can change it
>> >> to
>> >> use
>> >> only 1 CPU later.
>> >>
>> >> Gopi
>> >>
>> >> "Charles Tam" <CharlesTam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:67E77C3C-899A-47E9-AE60-EE98D32C48BC@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > Dear SQL Server Users,
>> >> >
>> >> > How do I configure Sql Server 2000 to supports dual cpu (Xeon)?
>> >> >
>> >> > Kind Regards
>> >> > Charles
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>

Dual Processors

Hi,
I've been recommended a server spec by an application vendor. I plan to buy
and start using this app, and it runs on SQL Server.
The server spec is for a single processor model. There will be a core of
about 25 users on the system with a maximum of 40. How can I decide if I
should buy a dual-processor server? Are there any rules to apply?
Thanks in advance
Steve"Steve W" <antispamsteveW@.=No-Spam=.org> wrote in message
news:uOZCyIhXEHA.376@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I've been recommended a server spec by an application vendor. I plan to
buy
> and start using this app, and it runs on SQL Server.
> The server spec is for a single processor model. There will be a core of
> about 25 users on the system with a maximum of 40. How can I decide if I
> should buy a dual-processor server? Are there any rules to apply?
>
No. Too much depends on how the application is coded and what it does. You
should rely on your vendor to recommend the hardware.
-new servers are incredibilly fast
-single processor servers are incredibilly cheap
-most applications require more IO than CPU
-If you plan on using this server for other applications too you might
want increased capacity.
For small general purpose Intel 32bit SQL Servers I would buy like this:
CPU SCSI disks disk config RAID logical disk config
----
1 2 RAID 1 mirror 10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables, indexes and logs
1 2 RAID 1 (mirror) (10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables and indexes)
2 RAID 1 (mirror) (e: sql logs and backups)
2 2 RAID 1 (mirror) (10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables and indexes)
2 RAID 1 (mirror) (e: sql logs and backups)
2 2 RAID 1 (mirror) (10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables and indexes)
4 RAID 10 (mirror/stripe) (e: sql logs and backups)
And buy have as at least as much ram as you have data in your databases, up
to 2g.
David

Dual Processors

Hi,
I've been recommended a server spec by an application vendor. I plan to buy
and start using this app, and it runs on SQL Server.
The server spec is for a single processor model. There will be a core of
about 25 users on the system with a maximum of 40. How can I decide if I
should buy a dual-processor server? Are there any rules to apply?
Thanks in advance
Steve
"Steve W" <antispamsteveW@.=No-Spam=.org> wrote in message
news:uOZCyIhXEHA.376@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I've been recommended a server spec by an application vendor. I plan to
buy
> and start using this app, and it runs on SQL Server.
> The server spec is for a single processor model. There will be a core of
> about 25 users on the system with a maximum of 40. How can I decide if I
> should buy a dual-processor server? Are there any rules to apply?
>
No. Too much depends on how the application is coded and what it does. You
should rely on your vendor to recommend the hardware.
-new servers are incredibilly fast
-single processor servers are incredibilly cheap
-most applications require more IO than CPU
-If you plan on using this server for other applications too you might
want increased capacity.
For small general purpose Intel 32bit SQL Servers I would buy like this:
CPU SCSI disks disk config RAID logical disk config
1 2 RAID 1 mirror 10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables, indexes and logs
1 2 RAID 1 (mirror) (10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables and indexes)
2 RAID 1 (mirror) (e: sql logs and backups)
2 2 RAID 1 (mirror) (10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables and indexes)
2 RAID 1 (mirror) (e: sql logs and backups)
2 2 RAID 1 (mirror) (10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables and indexes)
4 RAID 10 (mirror/stripe) (e: sql logs and backups)
And buy have as at least as much ram as you have data in your databases, up
to 2g.
David

Dual Processors

Hi,
I've been recommended a server spec by an application vendor. I plan to buy
and start using this app, and it runs on SQL Server.
The server spec is for a single processor model. There will be a core of
about 25 users on the system with a maximum of 40. How can I decide if I
should buy a dual-processor server? Are there any rules to apply?
Thanks in advance
Steve
"Steve W" <antispamsteveW@.=No-Spam=.org> wrote in message
news:uOZCyIhXEHA.376@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I've been recommended a server spec by an application vendor. I plan to
buy
> and start using this app, and it runs on SQL Server.
> The server spec is for a single processor model. There will be a core of
> about 25 users on the system with a maximum of 40. How can I decide if I
> should buy a dual-processor server? Are there any rules to apply?
>
No. Too much depends on how the application is coded and what it does. You
should rely on your vendor to recommend the hardware.
-new servers are incredibilly fast
-single processor servers are incredibilly cheap
-most applications require more IO than CPU
-If you plan on using this server for other applications too you might
want increased capacity.
For small general purpose Intel 32bit SQL Servers I would buy like this:
CPU SCSI disks disk config RAID logical disk config
1 2 RAID 1 mirror 10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables, indexes and logs
1 2 RAID 1 (mirror) (10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables and indexes)
2 RAID 1 (mirror) (e: sql logs and backups)
2 2 RAID 1 (mirror) (10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables and indexes)
2 RAID 1 (mirror) (e: sql logs and backups)
2 2 RAID 1 (mirror) (10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables and indexes)
4 RAID 10 (mirror/stripe) (e: sql logs and backups)
And buy have as at least as much ram as you have data in your databases, up
to 2g.
David

Dual Processors

Hi,
I've been recommended a server spec by an application vendor. I plan to buy
and start using this app, and it runs on SQL Server.
The server spec is for a single processor model. There will be a core of
about 25 users on the system with a maximum of 40. How can I decide if I
should buy a dual-processor server? Are there any rules to apply?
Thanks in advance
Steve"Steve W" <antispamsteveW@.=No-Spam=.org> wrote in message
news:uOZCyIhXEHA.376@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I've been recommended a server spec by an application vendor. I plan to
buy
> and start using this app, and it runs on SQL Server.
> The server spec is for a single processor model. There will be a core of
> about 25 users on the system with a maximum of 40. How can I decide if I
> should buy a dual-processor server? Are there any rules to apply?
>
No. Too much depends on how the application is coded and what it does. You
should rely on your vendor to recommend the hardware.
-new servers are incredibilly fast
-single processor servers are incredibilly cheap
-most applications require more IO than CPU
-If you plan on using this server for other applications too you might
want increased capacity.
For small general purpose Intel 32bit SQL Servers I would buy like this:
CPU SCSI disks disk config RAID logical disk config
----
1 2 RAID 1 mirror 10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables, indexes and logs
1 2 RAID 1 (mirror) (10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables and indexes)
2 RAID 1 (mirror) (e: sql logs and backups)
2 2 RAID 1 (mirror) (10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables and indexes)
2 RAID 1 (mirror) (e: sql logs and backups)
2 2 RAID 1 (mirror) (10g C: for OS, rest D: for SQL
tables and indexes)
4 RAID 10 (mirror/stripe) (e: sql logs and backups)
And buy have as at least as much ram as you have data in your databases, up
to 2g.
David

Dual Core CPUs and Parallelism

Hi,
In some articles, it is mentioned that Hyperthreaded processors might have
negative impact on query performance and the SQL Server must be configured
to use actual number of CPUs for parallelism. Even once I encountered this
situation and problem eliminated by using MAXDOP option for the query.
Is it true for Dual Core processors as well?
Thanks in advance,
Leila
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 00:40:14 +0330, "Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote:

>In some articles, it is mentioned that Hyperthreaded processors might have
>negative impact on query performance and the SQL Server must be configured
>to use actual number of CPUs for parallelism. Even once I encountered this
>situation and problem eliminated by using MAXDOP option for the query.
>Is it true for Dual Core processors as well?
No, it is not true for multi-core processors. Multi-core processors
have an actual CPU for each core. Hyperthreading occurred on a single
CPU and didn't really do much.
Roy Harvey
Beacon Falls, CT
|||Leila,
This article only mentions hyperthreading:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/322385 I understand that
dual-core is not the same as hyperthreading. This article applies the
principle to multi-core. Be sure to read the comments that follow for a
fuller picture:
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqltips/archive/2005/09/14/466387.aspx
So, they appear to be saying multi-core is not the same as hyperthreading,
but a little modesty in the parallelism is a good idea. (In other posts (if
you google around) you can find people who feel strongly that OLTP should
never use parallelism.)
This article http://www.sqlmag.com/Articles/ArticleID/97044/97044.html?Ad=1
by Andrew Kelly says, in part, "Typically, online transaction processing
(OLTP) systems benefit more from a lower degree of parallelism, and
reporting systems benefit more from higher ..."
FWIW,
RLF
"Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:etHHemjJIHA.4272@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> In some articles, it is mentioned that Hyperthreaded processors might have
> negative impact on query performance and the SQL Server must be configured
> to use actual number of CPUs for parallelism. Even once I encountered this
> situation and problem eliminated by using MAXDOP option for the query.
> Is it true for Dual Core processors as well?
> Thanks in advance,
> Leila
>
|||Hyperthreading is not the same multi-core technology. Hyperthreading fakes
multi-processors, is a dated technology, and wasn't (still isn't) good for an
inherently multi-threaded app such as SQL Server.
But when it comes to query parallelism, hyperthreading and multi-core will
pretty much give you the same since SQL Server operates on logical
processors. So if there is a need for you to restrict MAXDOP under
hyperthreading, you need to restrict MAXDOP with multi-cores.
Linchi
"Leila" wrote:

> Hi,
> In some articles, it is mentioned that Hyperthreaded processors might have
> negative impact on query performance and the SQL Server must be configured
> to use actual number of CPUs for parallelism. Even once I encountered this
> situation and problem eliminated by using MAXDOP option for the query.
> Is it true for Dual Core processors as well?
> Thanks in advance,
> Leila
>
>
|||To add to Russell's comment about OLTP systems take a look at section 2 of
this link saying "Given the high volumes of OLTP, parallel queries usually
reduce OLTP throughput and should be avoided"
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/bestpractice/oltp-performance-issues.mspx
Hope this helps,
Ben Nevarez
Senior Database Administrator
AIG SunAmerica
"Russell Fields" wrote:

> Leila,
> This article only mentions hyperthreading:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/322385 I understand that
> dual-core is not the same as hyperthreading. This article applies the
> principle to multi-core. Be sure to read the comments that follow for a
> fuller picture:
> http://blogs.msdn.com/sqltips/archive/2005/09/14/466387.aspx
> So, they appear to be saying multi-core is not the same as hyperthreading,
> but a little modesty in the parallelism is a good idea. (In other posts (if
> you google around) you can find people who feel strongly that OLTP should
> never use parallelism.)
> This article http://www.sqlmag.com/Articles/ArticleID/97044/97044.html?Ad=1
> by Andrew Kelly says, in part, "Typically, online transaction processing
> (OLTP) systems benefit more from a lower degree of parallelism, and
> reporting systems benefit more from higher ..."
> FWIW,
> RLF
> "Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:etHHemjJIHA.4272@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
>
|||Roy Harvey (SQL Server MVP) wrote:

> No, it is not true for multi-core processors. Multi-core processors
> have an actual CPU for each core. Hyperthreading occurred on a single
> CPU and didn't really do much.
>
But in multi-core processors cores share caches and I/O -ports. In
arithmetic tasks this does not matter, but what about DBMS servers, that
use both memory and I/O quite a lot? I guess dual processor is better
than dual core, for example.
Arto Viitanen
|||Paul Randall has a very good post about 2 dual-core chips vs. 4 single-core
chips. You can find his blog at www.sqlskills.com. The ultimate answer is
"It Depends", but he delves into several scanrios during his post.
Rick Heiges
SQL Server MVP
"Arto V Viitanen" <arto.viitanen@.pp4.inet.fi> wrote in message
news:6yH_i.242$Ru3.9@.read3.inet.fi...
> Roy Harvey (SQL Server MVP) wrote:
>
> But in multi-core processors cores share caches and I/O -ports. In
> arithmetic tasks this does not matter, but what about DBMS servers, that
> use both memory and I/O quite a lot? I guess dual processor is better
> than dual core, for example.
> --
> Arto Viitanen
|||On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:57:06 GMT, Arto V Viitanen
<arto.viitanen@.pp4.inet.fi> wrote:

>But in multi-core processors cores share caches and I/O -ports. In
>arithmetic tasks this does not matter, but what about DBMS servers, that
>use both memory and I/O quite a lot? I guess dual processor is better
>than dual core, for example.
No question that multi-core processors are a compromise, but the
original question compared a dual core to a single core with
hyperthreading - and they really are not comparable.
Roy Harvey
Beacon Falls, CT

Dual Core CPUs and Parallelism

Hi,
In some articles, it is mentioned that Hyperthreaded processors might have
negative impact on query performance and the SQL Server must be configured
to use actual number of CPUs for parallelism. Even once I encountered this
situation and problem eliminated by using MAXDOP option for the query.
Is it true for Dual Core processors as well?
Thanks in advance,
LeilaOn Wed, 14 Nov 2007 00:40:14 +0330, "Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote:

>In some articles, it is mentioned that Hyperthreaded processors might have
>negative impact on query performance and the SQL Server must be configured
>to use actual number of CPUs for parallelism. Even once I encountered this
>situation and problem eliminated by using MAXDOP option for the query.
>Is it true for Dual Core processors as well?
No, it is not true for multi-core processors. Multi-core processors
have an actual CPU for each core. Hyperthreading occurred on a single
CPU and didn't really do much.
Roy Harvey
Beacon Falls, CT|||Leila,
This article only mentions hyperthreading:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/322385 I understand that
dual-core is not the same as hyperthreading. This article applies the
principle to multi-core. Be sure to read the comments that follow for a
fuller picture:
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqltips/archi.../14/466387.aspx
So, they appear to be saying multi-core is not the same as hyperthreading,
but a little modesty in the parallelism is a good idea. (In other posts (if
you google around) you can find people who feel strongly that OLTP should
never use parallelism.)
This article http://www.sqlmag.com/Articles/Arti...97044.html?Ad=1
by Andrew Kelly says, in part, "Typically, online transaction processing
(OLTP) systems benefit more from a lower degree of parallelism, and
reporting systems benefit more from higher ..."
FWIW,
RLF
"Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:etHHemjJIHA.4272@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> In some articles, it is mentioned that Hyperthreaded processors might have
> negative impact on query performance and the SQL Server must be configured
> to use actual number of CPUs for parallelism. Even once I encountered this
> situation and problem eliminated by using MAXDOP option for the query.
> Is it true for Dual Core processors as well?
> Thanks in advance,
> Leila
>|||Hyperthreading is not the same multi-core technology. Hyperthreading fakes
multi-processors, is a dated technology, and wasn't (still isn't) good for a
n
inherently multi-threaded app such as SQL Server.
But when it comes to query parallelism, hyperthreading and multi-core will
pretty much give you the same since SQL Server operates on logical
processors. So if there is a need for you to restrict MAXDOP under
hyperthreading, you need to restrict MAXDOP with multi-cores.
Linchi
"Leila" wrote:

> Hi,
> In some articles, it is mentioned that Hyperthreaded processors might have
> negative impact on query performance and the SQL Server must be configured
> to use actual number of CPUs for parallelism. Even once I encountered this
> situation and problem eliminated by using MAXDOP option for the query.
> Is it true for Dual Core processors as well?
> Thanks in advance,
> Leila
>
>|||To add to Russell's comment about OLTP systems take a look at section 2 of
this link saying "Given the high volumes of OLTP, parallel queries usually
reduce OLTP throughput and should be avoided"
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...br />
ues.mspx
Hope this helps,
Ben Nevarez
Senior Database Administrator
AIG SunAmerica
"Russell Fields" wrote:

> Leila,
> This article only mentions hyperthreading:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/322385 I understand that
> dual-core is not the same as hyperthreading. This article applies the
> principle to multi-core. Be sure to read the comments that follow for a
> fuller picture:
> http://blogs.msdn.com/sqltips/archi.../14/466387.aspx
> So, they appear to be saying multi-core is not the same as hyperthreading,
> but a little modesty in the parallelism is a good idea. (In other posts (
if
> you google around) you can find people who feel strongly that OLTP should
> never use parallelism.)
> This article [url]http://www.sqlmag.com/Articles/ArticleID/97044/97044.html?Ad=1[/url
]
> by Andrew Kelly says, in part, "Typically, online transaction processing
> (OLTP) systems benefit more from a lower degree of parallelism, and
> reporting systems benefit more from higher ..."
> FWIW,
> RLF
> "Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:etHHemjJIHA.4272@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
>|||Roy Harvey (SQL Server MVP) wrote:

> No, it is not true for multi-core processors. Multi-core processors
> have an actual CPU for each core. Hyperthreading occurred on a single
> CPU and didn't really do much.
>
But in multi-core processors cores share caches and I/O -ports. In
arithmetic tasks this does not matter, but what about DBMS servers, that
use both memory and I/O quite a lot? I guess dual processor is better
than dual core, for example.
Arto Viitanen|||Paul Randall has a very good post about 2 dual-core chips vs. 4 single-core
chips. You can find his blog at www.sqlskills.com. The ultimate answer is
"It Depends", but he delves into several scanrios during his post.
Rick Heiges
SQL Server MVP
"Arto V Viitanen" <arto.viitanen@.pp4.inet.fi> wrote in message
news:6yH_i.242$Ru3.9@.read3.inet.fi...
> Roy Harvey (SQL Server MVP) wrote:
>
> But in multi-core processors cores share caches and I/O -ports. In
> arithmetic tasks this does not matter, but what about DBMS servers, that
> use both memory and I/O quite a lot? I guess dual processor is better
> than dual core, for example.
> --
> Arto Viitanen|||On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:57:06 GMT, Arto V Viitanen
<arto.viitanen@.pp4.inet.fi> wrote:

>But in multi-core processors cores share caches and I/O -ports. In
>arithmetic tasks this does not matter, but what about DBMS servers, that
>use both memory and I/O quite a lot? I guess dual processor is better
>than dual core, for example.
No question that multi-core processors are a compromise, but the
original question compared a dual core to a single core with
hyperthreading - and they really are not comparable.
Roy Harvey
Beacon Falls, CT

Dual Core CPUs and Parallelism

Hi,
In some articles, it is mentioned that Hyperthreaded processors might have
negative impact on query performance and the SQL Server must be configured
to use actual number of CPUs for parallelism. Even once I encountered this
situation and problem eliminated by using MAXDOP option for the query.
Is it true for Dual Core processors as well?
Thanks in advance,
LeilaOn Wed, 14 Nov 2007 00:40:14 +0330, "Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote:
>In some articles, it is mentioned that Hyperthreaded processors might have
>negative impact on query performance and the SQL Server must be configured
>to use actual number of CPUs for parallelism. Even once I encountered this
>situation and problem eliminated by using MAXDOP option for the query.
>Is it true for Dual Core processors as well?
No, it is not true for multi-core processors. Multi-core processors
have an actual CPU for each core. Hyperthreading occurred on a single
CPU and didn't really do much.
Roy Harvey
Beacon Falls, CT|||Leila,
This article only mentions hyperthreading:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/322385 I understand that
dual-core is not the same as hyperthreading. This article applies the
principle to multi-core. Be sure to read the comments that follow for a
fuller picture:
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqltips/archive/2005/09/14/466387.aspx
So, they appear to be saying multi-core is not the same as hyperthreading,
but a little modesty in the parallelism is a good idea. (In other posts (if
you google around) you can find people who feel strongly that OLTP should
never use parallelism.)
This article http://www.sqlmag.com/Articles/ArticleID/97044/97044.html?Ad=1
by Andrew Kelly says, in part, "Typically, online transaction processing
(OLTP) systems benefit more from a lower degree of parallelism, and
reporting systems benefit more from higher ..."
FWIW,
RLF
"Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:etHHemjJIHA.4272@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> In some articles, it is mentioned that Hyperthreaded processors might have
> negative impact on query performance and the SQL Server must be configured
> to use actual number of CPUs for parallelism. Even once I encountered this
> situation and problem eliminated by using MAXDOP option for the query.
> Is it true for Dual Core processors as well?
> Thanks in advance,
> Leila
>|||Hyperthreading is not the same multi-core technology. Hyperthreading fakes
multi-processors, is a dated technology, and wasn't (still isn't) good for an
inherently multi-threaded app such as SQL Server.
But when it comes to query parallelism, hyperthreading and multi-core will
pretty much give you the same since SQL Server operates on logical
processors. So if there is a need for you to restrict MAXDOP under
hyperthreading, you need to restrict MAXDOP with multi-cores.
Linchi
"Leila" wrote:
> Hi,
> In some articles, it is mentioned that Hyperthreaded processors might have
> negative impact on query performance and the SQL Server must be configured
> to use actual number of CPUs for parallelism. Even once I encountered this
> situation and problem eliminated by using MAXDOP option for the query.
> Is it true for Dual Core processors as well?
> Thanks in advance,
> Leila
>
>|||To add to Russell's comment about OLTP systems take a look at section 2 of
this link saying "Given the high volumes of OLTP, parallel queries usually
reduce OLTP throughput and should be avoided"
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/bestpractice/oltp-performance-issues.mspx
Hope this helps,
Ben Nevarez
Senior Database Administrator
AIG SunAmerica
"Russell Fields" wrote:
> Leila,
> This article only mentions hyperthreading:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/322385 I understand that
> dual-core is not the same as hyperthreading. This article applies the
> principle to multi-core. Be sure to read the comments that follow for a
> fuller picture:
> http://blogs.msdn.com/sqltips/archive/2005/09/14/466387.aspx
> So, they appear to be saying multi-core is not the same as hyperthreading,
> but a little modesty in the parallelism is a good idea. (In other posts (if
> you google around) you can find people who feel strongly that OLTP should
> never use parallelism.)
> This article http://www.sqlmag.com/Articles/ArticleID/97044/97044.html?Ad=1
> by Andrew Kelly says, in part, "Typically, online transaction processing
> (OLTP) systems benefit more from a lower degree of parallelism, and
> reporting systems benefit more from higher ..."
> FWIW,
> RLF
> "Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:etHHemjJIHA.4272@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> > Hi,
> > In some articles, it is mentioned that Hyperthreaded processors might have
> > negative impact on query performance and the SQL Server must be configured
> > to use actual number of CPUs for parallelism. Even once I encountered this
> > situation and problem eliminated by using MAXDOP option for the query.
> > Is it true for Dual Core processors as well?
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Leila
> >
>
>|||Roy Harvey (SQL Server MVP) wrote:
> No, it is not true for multi-core processors. Multi-core processors
> have an actual CPU for each core. Hyperthreading occurred on a single
> CPU and didn't really do much.
>
But in multi-core processors cores share caches and I/O -ports. In
arithmetic tasks this does not matter, but what about DBMS servers, that
use both memory and I/O quite a lot? I guess dual processor is better
than dual core, for example.
--
Arto Viitanen|||Paul Randall has a very good post about 2 dual-core chips vs. 4 single-core
chips. You can find his blog at www.sqlskills.com. The ultimate answer is
"It Depends", but he delves into several scanrios during his post.
Rick Heiges
SQL Server MVP
"Arto V Viitanen" <arto.viitanen@.pp4.inet.fi> wrote in message
news:6yH_i.242$Ru3.9@.read3.inet.fi...
> Roy Harvey (SQL Server MVP) wrote:
>> No, it is not true for multi-core processors. Multi-core processors
>> have an actual CPU for each core. Hyperthreading occurred on a single
>> CPU and didn't really do much.
> But in multi-core processors cores share caches and I/O -ports. In
> arithmetic tasks this does not matter, but what about DBMS servers, that
> use both memory and I/O quite a lot? I guess dual processor is better
> than dual core, for example.
> --
> Arto Viitanen|||On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:57:06 GMT, Arto V Viitanen
<arto.viitanen@.pp4.inet.fi> wrote:
>But in multi-core processors cores share caches and I/O -ports. In
>arithmetic tasks this does not matter, but what about DBMS servers, that
>use both memory and I/O quite a lot? I guess dual processor is better
>than dual core, for example.
No question that multi-core processors are a compromise, but the
original question compared a dual core to a single core with
hyperthreading - and they really are not comparable.
Roy Harvey
Beacon Falls, CT