Other apps are specifically our Core Business App (CUBE from Fiserv).
It doesn't take a lot of RAM or processor but I wanted it separate from
SQL and the OS so that is why it is segregated.

 

My only issue with the Reporting database is that it is created
dynamically throughout the day so extra network IO may not be nice for
all the users.  However, I do know of one of my sister companies, that
use CUBE, has this dual setup thing with their IBM's.  They complain
about throughput issues as much as I do.

 

Thanks for the input.

Mostly this is a SQL server with a transactional database.

 

 

________________________________

From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:[email protected]] 
Posted At: Friday, August 20, 2010 10:44 AM
Posted To: [email protected]
Conversation: Let's have some fun and configure a brand new server.
Subject: Re: Let's have some fun and configure a brand new server.
  

What is this server supposed to be doing?  (What are the ALL OTHER APPS
you expect to put on E:)

 

If this is supposed to be the latest and greatest, here are some things
I would change or attempt to change.

*       Use 64-bit Windows (preferably 2008 R2, but even 2003 R2 would
be acceptable for all this RAM)
*       Use dual i7 CPU, preferably quad-core.  Two of them.
*       RAID10 requires an even # of disks  (3x60GB won't work unless
you mean RAID1 with a local hotspare)
*       I wouldn't put reporting databases on the same server as the
primary databases, but perhaps capacity is not a problem.
*       You don't seem to need a separate volume for Indexing, but that
is an option.
*       Use disk space more efficiently.

        *       C: 2ea x 146GB RAID1 for OS
        *       D: 2ea x 146GB RAID1 for SQL and other applications
        *       J: 4ea x 72GB (or 146GB) RAID10 for SQL databases
        *       L: 2ea x 72GB (or 146GB) RAID1 for Database Logs
        *       R: 2ea x 72GB (or 146GB) RAID1 for Reporting Databases
(really should be on different servers, but...)
        *       S: 4ea x 146GB (or 300GB) RAID5 for Database Backups
(I'd put on a NAS or some other less costly storage ideally, or make a
smaller partition for the local backup copy that is copied off
regularly)

 

Overall, it seems like a whole lot of complexity at the disk level for
no clear benefit.    Did you obtain any metrics from perfmon to
establish the I/O needs?  Or is this just a "if you build it, they will
come" exercise?

 

That reminds me -- I need to update the following:
http://KB.UltraTech-llc.com/Docs/?File=ServerSpecs.PDF
<http://kb.ultratech-llc.com/Docs/?File=ServerSpecs.PDF> 

 

5 years is a long time.  (It's actually 3 years, but I never published
those other updates)

 


ASB (My XeeSM Profile) <http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker>  
Exploiting Technology for Business Advantage...
 

Signature powered by WiseStamp <http://www.wisestamp.com/email-install>


 

On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 10:13 AM, [email protected] <[email protected]>
wrote:

This is what I have:
Production Server Specifications


Purchased date  01/01/2008
Make    HP
Model   HP ProLiant DL580 G5
Processor       2.40 Gigahertz Intel Xeon (4 installed)
Memory  64 Gigabytes of RAM
Hard Drive Space        3596 Gigabytes of Hard Drive Capacity
Type of Drives  SAS 15k
Storage Controllers
       LSI Adapter, Ultra320 SCSI controller
       Smart Array P400 Controller X2
       Smart Array P800 Controller X2
External Storage        StorageWorks70 Modular Smart Array x2

What I am looking for from any Make is the latest, greatest, and maximum
of everything in all areas.
Dual power supplies, Dual nics, etc...
This machine is currently configured:
C: Server 2003 Advanced Mirrored 1+1 (On the server )Bus0
D: SQL 2005 Enterprise Mirrored 1+1 (On the server) Bus0
E: All other Apps Raid 5 (On the server) Bus1
J: Production Database File 60GB Raid 10 (1st StorageWorks Array)
L: All Database Log Files size varies Raid 10 (2nd StorageWorks Arrary)
R: Reporting Databases Files 3 x 60GB each Raid 10 (2nd StorageWorks
Array)
S: All Database Backup Files size varies Raid 10 (2nd StorageWorks
Array)





~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

Reply via email to