| Author |
Topic |
|
Michael Valentine Jones
Yak DBA Kernel (pronounced Colonel)
7020 Posts |
 Posted - 2006-03-26 : 19:52:11
|
| Has anyone implemented SQL Server 2005 x64 edition in a production environment yet?I have been thinking about doing some server consolidations. We have a number of older 4U servers with quad 700 or 900 Mhz processors running SQL Server 2000. Most of the storage we use is on EMC SAN, so I am considering 1U dual core Xeon servers with Windows Server 2003 x64 and SQL Server 2005 x64 to consolidate two or more servers into a single server. I believe we can save a substantial amount of rack space while upgrading CPU power, memory speed and amount of memory.The current servers have adequate performance, and I am not really looking to do this to increase performance. I am interested in how many servers I could expect to be able to consolidate into one, and still have equal or greater performance.I was just wondering if your implementations of SQL Server 2005 x64 edition have actually met you expectations and if you have had any problems or gotchas. How much improvement did you see compared to a 32 bit version?CODO ERGO SUM |
|
|
eyechart
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
3575 Posts |
Posted - 2006-03-26 : 21:26:28
|
| we are just now starting to work with 2K5 on our x64 systems. We have HP DL385 and 585 boxes that we have run SQL 2K (32bit) without problems. We are in the process of installing some 64bit SQL2K5 instances on our DEV/TEST machines and then we will look to install on our PROD boxes.btw, we are running clustered environments with 5 or 6 SQL instances per cluster. -ec |
 |
|
|
Michael Valentine Jones
Yak DBA Kernel (pronounced Colonel)
7020 Posts |
Posted - 2006-03-27 : 17:06:16
|
| Anyone else doing SQL 2005 x64 implementations?CODO ERGO SUM |
|
|
|
maxima
Starting Member
2 Posts |
Posted - 2006-03-30 : 04:57:18
|
| Hi, we are going to be live on 4 x 64x boxes + SAN in the April. Cluster has to be installed and setup for test in days. Will let u know if get any problem..Could you please explain what did u mean by : "SQL Server 2005 x64 to consolidate two or more servers into a single server.".SQL Cluster does not support application load balancing. So you can not consolidate SQL server across a cluster to work as a single SQL server. You can have multiple instances but at that case your SQL applications must jungle with connection strings and have balance load to each instance. But they are still separate SQLs. Plus you have to preserve/allocate some vital resources on each box in case of failover. If one SQL box will fail you have to have reserverd resources to run it on box #2 and so on.. Are you sure those resources wont slow your solution down more in compare to single server with pumped up to sky hardware? Considering cost of developing, maintenance and support of sofisticated application to balance the load by yourself...Are we talking about same thing? |
|
|
|
Michael Valentine Jones
Yak DBA Kernel (pronounced Colonel)
7020 Posts |
Posted - 2006-03-30 : 07:14:22
|
| maxima,Thanks for the reply.For "consolidate two or more servers into a single server" I mean just setting up a new server with a single instance, and moving the databases from older servers, and re-pointing the applications at the new server. It would not use multiple instances, or clustering.CODO ERGO SUM |
|
|
|
maxima
Starting Member
2 Posts |
Posted - 2006-03-30 : 07:26:41
|
| Ah just got it :)U meant - use single SQL 2005 power for several SQL 2000 databases at once and save on licenses and possibly hardware... |
|
|
|
mr_mist
Grunnio
1870 Posts |
Posted - 2006-03-30 : 07:36:50
|
quote:
I mean just setting up a new server with a single instance, and moving the databases from older servers
So is everyone happy to take an outage at the same time?We're just starting to look at 64 bit at the moment, although previous tests have only shown around 30% improvement. From what I understand, the Itanium processor is more suited to database processing than the Xeon.-------Moo. :) |
|
|
|
Michael Valentine Jones
Yak DBA Kernel (pronounced Colonel)
7020 Posts |
Posted - 2006-03-30 : 07:56:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by mr_mist
quote:
I mean just setting up a new server with a single instance, and moving the databases from older servers
So is everyone happy to take an outage at the same time?We're just starting to look at 64 bit at the moment, although previous tests have only shown around 30% improvement. From what I understand, the Itanium processor is more suited to database processing than the Xeon.-------Moo. :)
Maintenance windows are obviously a consideration when considering a server consolidation.I am considering x64 only, since it appears to be more likely to be a mainstream processor with the dual core systems. The number of systems with Itanium processors seems very low.CODO ERGO SUM |
|
|
|
Michael Valentine Jones
Yak DBA Kernel (pronounced Colonel)
7020 Posts |
Posted - 2006-03-30 : 08:04:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by maxima
Ah just got it :)U meant - use single SQL 2005 power for several SQL 2000 databases at once and save on licenses and possibly hardware...
Actually, rack space is a big consideration for us. Since we use SAN storage, we don't need much internal disk. If I could replace 3 or 4 servers that use 4U or 7U of rack space with a single 1U server, that would be a big help.As our servers get older, the cost of keeping them on maintenance goes up, so it would halp that way.And, of course, faster is always better.CODO ERGO SUM |
|
|
|
|
SQL 2005 x64 Edition in Production