| Author |
Topic |
|
sb2007
Starting Member
6 Posts |
 Posted - 2007-02-02 : 10:42:12
|
| I am putting up a website this month, its pretty complex in terms of the data being stored. We expect to have 1000 users in our first month and grow exponentially from there. In addition, users will be uploading content to the site (mostly jepgs and PDFs). We currently have a dedicated server and need to decide whether to go with Microsoft SQL Server Workgroup or Standard. Any advice on this? If we went with workgroup, what is the threshold for the number of users before we would have to switch to standard? Also...are there any huge limitations that would make our site fail if we went with workgroup?thanks,sb |
|
|
snSQL
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
1837 Posts |
Posted - 2007-02-02 : 11:16:06
|
| Here's the specifics of what you get and don't get in each editionhttp://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/compare-features.mspxIn terms of performance, they will be exactly the same until you start hitting up against the Workgroup limits of 2 CPUs and 3GB of RAM (does your server have more than that right now?). SQL Server counts physical CPUs, so if you're using dual core processors Workgroup will be able to use 2 dual core CPUs and therefore effectively have 4 CPUs (again assuming your server can run two physical CPUs).There is no "threshold" for the number of users for either edition, your application and the hardware you run SQL Server on will determine the maximum performance and concurrent usage you can get. You'll have to test to find that out. Also when you say 1000 users that is pretty meaningless, is that 1000 people concurrently pounding the server, or 1000 users in an application each accessing your site for 5 min a day (and therefore never more than a few at a time)? |
 |
|
|
sb2007
Starting Member
6 Posts |
Posted - 2007-02-02 : 11:31:13
|
| Thanks so much for the response. Really appreciate the help. In answer to your questions..Right now here are our specs on our dedicated box:Intel Core 2 Duo 1.86Ghz 1GB RAM, 2 x 320GB IDE, Mirroring 1500GB Traffic Our SQL Server is on a dedicated server. 1GB RAM.Sorry for not being clear about the number of users. Yes, what i meant is that we will have 1000-2000 users at one time (months 1-6), and 5000-10000 from months 6-12. We will also be running a batch job overnight to update user information based on how they interact on the site daily. I'm pretty sure workgroup has a feature to do schedule batch jobs.I know its hard to give a good answer to this...but based on the above info...should we be okay to go with SQL Workgroup in our first year?thanks,sb |
|
|
|
snSQL
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
1837 Posts |
Posted - 2007-02-02 : 11:52:41
|
| Yes, Workgroup fully supports scheduling jobs, so no problem there.Based on your the hardware you have in the server, Workgroup and Standard will perform exactly the same because your hardware is well below the maximum for Workgroup (2 CPUs and 3GB of RAM) - until you have more than 2 CPUs and 3GB of RAM Standard and Workgroup will perform the same.I would recommend adding more RAM sooner rather later, 1GB is not a lot for a server, and will be the first hardware related cause of performance problems. A much more likely cause of performance problems when you get started is poor indexing. Make sure that you understand how SQL Server indexes work and that you tune the indexes in your database because good performance during low user testing will become bad in a hurry under load if your indexes are not right. |
|
|
|
sb2007
Starting Member
6 Posts |
Posted - 2007-02-02 : 12:08:11
|
| Great. This helps alot. Again, really appreciate the advice.We do have the option to upgrade to 2GB for an extra $25. So we may go ahead and do that.Now, if we go with workgroup at the beginning and switch to standard or enterprise in a year, what would be the associated fees to set everything up on the new DB (including transferring all the data). Assume there are 10,000 users registered on our site after year 1.Also...right now we have 2x320GB HDD's. Do you recommend going with RAID 0 or RAID 1 ? We want to ensure all our data is backed up properly incase anything happens to our primary drive. Is there anything else we can do to ensure that our data is safe and recoverable?again...thanks so much for the advice and prompt replies..sb |
|
|
|
snSQL
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
1837 Posts |
Posted - 2007-02-02 : 12:25:17
|
| Is that $25 once off or per month? 1GB or RAM costs about $100 to purchase.RAID 0 (striping) will improve performance but on two disks will actually make reliability worse (if one drive fails then all your data is useless).RAID 1 (mirroring) will greatly improve reliability - a complete single drive failure will result in no data loss, but means that you duplicate all your data, effectively meaning that your two 320GB drives are just one usable 320GB drive.Best way to ensure recoverability is to learn about SQL Server backup and restore - use full recovery mode with regular full backups (daily or weekly) and very regular log backups (possibly as often as every 15 or 30 minutes). To simplify restore you can combine that with differential backups at medium regularity between the full backups (so perhaps full once a week and differential every day). If you have reliable backups (making SQL Server backups to disk and then taking tape backups of the disk backups is common) then you should be able to recover from just about anything. Do not try to make tape backups of the SQL Server database files. |
|
|
|
sb2007
Starting Member
6 Posts |
Posted - 2007-02-02 : 12:41:05
|
| Great...and one last question which i also included in my last reply..How much would you estimate the cost AND level of effort to upgrade to SQL Standard after one year (with say, 10,000-12,000 users registered on the site)?thanks,sb |
|
|
|
snSQL
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
1837 Posts |
Posted - 2007-02-02 : 13:01:23
|
| Effort, very little because it is a completely compatible simple upgrade. Cost, the price of the upgrade from Workgroup to Standard. |
|
|
|
sb2007
Starting Member
6 Posts |
Posted - 2007-02-02 : 13:14:36
|
| Thanks so much for all your help! This will definitely lead us down the right path.We're getting ready to set up our site on the host server right now...from your past experience, what is the level of effort (i.e. how long would it take) to setup a website on a dedicated server I described? Our host would provide you with remote access and everything you need to get it going.Our website has the following components:-Registeration-User Voting System (which require batch updates)-User Upload Page (to upload content)-Content Viewing page (video and image files). Videos will be streamed from another video host which is integrated into our site.-Migration of 200 registered user data from our previous sitethanks,sb |
|
|
|
|
Microsoft SQL Server Workgroup vs. Standard Editio