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 |
|
TRV
Starting Member
1 Post |
 Posted - 2004-11-10 : 05:11:45
|
My client has the folowing setup:WebServer / Front End:2 X P4 3.2ghz(1mb Extreme), 1.5gb PC3200, SCSI 3 10k RPMSQL 2000 Server Box:1 X Quad Xeon 3.2Ghz(1mb), 4gb DDR, SCSI320 RAID 5 (6 drives)Database:4 Tables, 3 store no data with a length over 200chars, most are 8-25, the 4th Table is all data columns ranging from 50chars to 60,000 charsIam cleaning up heavily used currently server crippling ASP / SQL application for a client. In hopes of boosting performance and trying to balance it out, as it has alot of redundant coding and uses lots and lots of small strings stored in lots of tables and columns for variables. The applications already makes some use of Stored Procedures, would it be more cost effective for performance to:1) Use less table columns and store the data delimted (with say | or whatever) in less fields and have the stored procedure cut appart the data before sending it to the webserver as seperate data fields.2) Send the Stored Condensed data (XXXX|#######|$$$$$$$|!!!!!!!|%%%%%%%|) strings to the Webserver to be broken up and used as variables.3) Leave the tables as is and just move more of the data processing to Stored Procedures.Any comments or other ideas are very welcome.-Tom |
|
|
dsdeming
479 Posts |
Posted - 2004-11-10 : 08:33:39
|
| At the risk of sounding like Rain Man, 3, definitely 3. There's a lot of unnecessary overhead involved in building those delimited strings and then tearing them apart again. There's also the problem of efficiently searching for a piece of data that's buried in the middle of one of those strings instead of in its own column. Not to mention the fact that if any single piece of the delimited data is NULL, you can't build the string without an ISNULL... Too many hassles, too little payoff.Dennis |
 |
|
|
MichaelP
Jedi Yak
2489 Posts |
Posted - 2004-11-10 : 20:56:07
|
| #1 and #2 are not a good idea.#3 definitely 3Wait a sec. FOUR tables???Sounds like you could probably use a bit or norlization in there as well.The Single RAID 5 set might be hurting you as well. Is your database read or write heavy? If it's read heavy, RAID 5 is great. For Write heavy apps, you need to move TX Logs to a RAID 1 set and move your data to a RAID 1/0 set.Michael<Yoda>Use the Search page you must. Find the answer you will.</Yoda> |
|
|
|
robvolk
Most Valuable Yak
15732 Posts |
Posted - 2004-11-10 : 21:03:38
|
| I suggest posting your table structures, at least the 4th table with "data columns ranging from 50chars to 60,000 chars", cause that one sounds like it needs a redesign. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Data storage / Usage method - help