I normally don't say much on the list but I have to add comments here as it
relates to SQL. We were having many problems over a year ago with Co-Lo
customers who insisted on running SQL on their own servers since we did not
have dedicated SQL support. This fact almost cost us a couple of major
customers because they were getting billed for tech calls when one of us
here had to go in to reboot their NT server because of BS. We convinced the
customers to hang around for a bit and allow us to do a bit of expansion in
an attempt to solve these extra incurred costs they were seeing and they
agreed to give us 60 days (which we discounted them 50% on their bill for
that time). We also warned them that if the solution worked then we would
be increasing their billing to handle costs associated with the expansion.
They agreed since their concern was performance.
We built a decent SQL server (Dual P3 550's running 1GB of Memory on a
quality ASUS MB). Set everything up so that it was a distributed SQL
environment and uninstalled SQL from their servers and made changes as
required to ref an external SQL server and then monitored everything after
the changes (including the customers giving us daily feedback on
performance). I must add that the expansion costs a total of $1,900.00 US.
The customers were highly pleased and we raised their Co-Lo price an
additional $150.00 per month for the SQL access and the expansion paid for
itself shortly, and in addition to expanding our then current capabilities
also garnered us good reviews for those customers we assisted and brought in
a couple more good contracts.
Try to ensure you have dedicated machines for the tasks which are performed
within your ISP/Hosting facility. With costs of hardware nowadays, one can
build some pretty good machines at a reasonable price. The extra money will
be paid back very quickly since you will have above level performance and
capabilities.
TKS for the tirade and soapbox....
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry L Fritts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Well you have a Quad and 2Gb so maybe that's okay. I really don't know.
>
> I know for sure that Sql7 will take as much memory as you give it and take
> as many processors and cycles as it can find. Every connection will take
at
> least 24Kb + base. But a single Imail connection can generate several
sql7
> connections. I know from experience that you have to make sure that Imail
> has at least 128Mb of ram so you have to set your Sql accordingly. I
think
> Sql would take 2Gigs of memory if you let it. I've seen it take 1G. If
> Imail gets starved for memory then the spool can definitely build up. On
> Sql you need to data on one disk and the logs on another. MS used to
> recommend Raid 0 or 5 for data and Raid 1 for logs. You are better off
with
> some disk segregation with Imail too - there may be some kb articles on
that
> or you might look in the archives.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> > Can anyone recommend the perfect Imail settings for high volume
> > accessing?
> > Imail and SQL Data are stored on the 53GB.
>
> I can recommend something in this situation: Get rid of SQL! SQL eats up
> all the resources it can find (read: memory), and can cause all sorts of
> problems if you run something else with it. You would think it wouldn't
use
> up a full 2 gigs of memory, but who knows? At the very least, I would
check
> the Task Manager and see what the memory situation is.
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
An Archive of this list is available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
