His account is applicable to either a co-located or a remote SQL server though – everything he’s said below can absolutely be done (and arguably should be done) on a co-located SQL instance.
J From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Stuart Watret Sent: Friday, September 9, 2016 5:18 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [mssms] Configuration Manager Local SQL Best Practice Documentation a fascinating account, first time I’ve seen a pro account for separating them; thanks. On 8 Sep 2016, at 16:12, Lindenfeld, Ivan <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Adding a couple of things I haven’t read in this thread… We have 25,000 clients. SCCM is virtualized, as I imagine most sites are. Clients are spread across 1,200 locations in the US. When the SQL team asked us to put the SQL database in their cluster I was allergic. Not just hesitant. Loss of ownership gave me hives. Yes, I had to worry about firewalls. Yes, there is a bit more complexity in service accounts. Here are some pros that we have seen using a separate, clustered SQL database (2012, then CB) 1. Experts tuned performance, indexing and backups. It works great. We had full participation in the process. 2. The database(s) are monitored as production and therefore for lots more than up/down. Performance changes are responded to and addressed. Disk space issue for tempDB? Proactively handled. Architecture-wise, the SCCM Primary and multiple role servers and the SQL databases are either on the same switch in the same datacenter or are in the same datacenter. I might get those hives back if someone wanted me to put the SQL data remote to SCCM. As an aside, we’re going to try that anyway. We’re piloting SCCM in Azure, but while we’re going to try it, we think SCCM database on SQL in Azure is going to be cost preventative. Too expensive for the performance we need. So we may end up with SQL over the Express Route on Prem. Fun times. Hope this helps. Ivan Lindenfeld From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Olsson Mats (4004) Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2016 9:55 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [mssms] RE: Configuration Manager Local SQL Best Practice Documentation I had the same discussion with “my” database admins who wanted to have the database in their cluster to keep the number of DB servers down. After we installed a SP or CU to SCCM that restarted the database instance without prior warning (it probably was in the documentation) the DB admins rather quickly changed their minds about having SCCM together with line of business apps in the same DB instance… Another thing to be aware of is that SCCM has it’s own list of supported SQL versions and SP:s. It might be an issue if the DB admins wants to upgrade and SCCM doesn’t support that version We installed a dedicated SQL on the primary site system instead and it has been working well for 4-5 years now. From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Garth Jones Sent: den 8 september 2016 14:19 To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [mssms] RE: Configuration Manager Local SQL Best Practice Documentation Let put it this way, for 400,000 computer Microsoft will NOT say if SQL should be local or remote. Which BTW, SQL is hosted locally on a site with 400,000 computers too. The Admins of that site are on this list too. ☺ Like John said no MVP will say that you should put SQL remote, Heck if I’m doing the install and SQL is remote, I add 15 days to the project due to all the headache that arise from remote SQL. Garth Jones Chief Architect www.Enhansoft.com<http://www.enhansoft.com/> <image007.jpg><http://www.enhansoft.com/> Enhancing Your Business <image009.png><http://www.enhansoft.com/blog><image011.png><https://twitter.com/enhansoft><image013.jpg><http://www.facebook.com/EnhansoftInc><image015.png><http://www.youtube.com/user/Enhansoft/videos><image017.png><http://myitforum.com/myitforumwp/community/groups/enhansoft/> Subscribe to Enhansoft’s Newsletter!<http://www.enhansoft.com/register> From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Johns, Damon (DoJ) Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2016 11:27 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [mssms] Configuration Manager Local SQL Best Practice Documentation Hi Everyone, Can anyone point me to the Microsoft TechNet documentation where they recommend that SQL be installed locally where a Primary Site has 50,000 clients or less? I’ve found a couple of blogs where people mentioned this but nothing specific from Microsoft. I’ve also found a number of blogs where MVP’s strongly recommend this, but again nothing from Microsoft directly or the Configuration Manager team. There must be something out there!? Cheers Damon ________________________________ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER The information in this transmission may be confidential and/or protected by legal professional privilege, and is intended only for the person or persons to whom it is addressed. If you are not such a person, you are warned that any disclosure, copying or dissemination of the information is unauthorised. If you have received the transmission in error, please immediately contact this office by telephone, fax or email, to inform us of the error and to enable arrangements to be made for the destruction of the transmission, or its return at our cost. No liability is accepted for any unauthorised use of the information contained in this transmission. ________________________________ NOTICE: The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, you are hereby notified to: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately.
