|
Home > Archive > microsoft.public.sqlserver.server > December 2002 > SQL 2000 Database Size
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
SQL 2000 Database Size
|
|
| Pete Kriegel 2002-12-20, 10:23 am |
| I am currently running SQL 2000 standard server on a Dell
Poweredge 2550. It has a p3 1.1 GB processor and 2 GB of
ram. The database we are running has reached 143 GB in
size. We are begining to notice very sluggish
performance. My development staff thinks the problems are
being caused by slow network access(We use 100MB linksys
switches). I however believe they have allowed the
database to grow beyond what the server could possibly
handle. Any speculation woudl be greatly
appreciated....
| |
| Allan Mitchell 2002-12-20, 11:23 am |
| 143 GB is a fair size and the box you mention is by today's standards quite
small.
Have you looked at Perfmon counters during a typical day's activity?
Have you looked at the Query plans of the data access ?
How many users ?
What type of activity?
--
Allan Mitchell (Microsoft SQL Server MVP)
MCSE,MCDBA
www.SQLDTS.com
I support PASS - the definitive, global community
for SQL Server professionals - http://www.sqlpass.org
"Pete Kriegel" <pete.kriegel@f-m-h.com> wrote in message
news:07ff01c2a841$d2571c20$d5f
82ecf@TK2MSFTNGXA12...
> I am currently running SQL 2000 standard server on a Dell
> Poweredge 2550. It has a p3 1.1 GB processor and 2 GB of
> ram. The database we are running has reached 143 GB in
> size. We are begining to notice very sluggish
> performance. My development staff thinks the problems are
> being caused by slow network access(We use 100MB linksys
> switches). I however believe they have allowed the
> database to grow beyond what the server could possibly
> handle. Any speculation woudl be greatly
> appreciated....
| |
| Peter Feakins 2002-12-20, 11:23 am |
| You can use performance monitor to monitor counters for processor, memory
and disk. There's a good Ebook out by Brian Kelley called the Start to
Finish Guide to SQL Server Performance Monitoring, which can guide you
regarding counters and important threshholds.
"Pete Kriegel" <pete.kriegel@f-m-h.com> wrote in message
news:07ff01c2a841$d2571c20$d5f
82ecf@TK2MSFTNGXA12...
> I am currently running SQL 2000 standard server on a Dell
> Poweredge 2550. It has a p3 1.1 GB processor and 2 GB of
> ram. The database we are running has reached 143 GB in
> size. We are begining to notice very sluggish
> performance. My development staff thinks the problems are
> being caused by slow network access(We use 100MB linksys
> switches). I however believe they have allowed the
> database to grow beyond what the server could possibly
> handle. Any speculation woudl be greatly
> appreciated....
| |
| Mike Kruchten 2002-12-20, 5:23 pm |
| I'd consider a dual-processor to be minimum for a multi-user server. Most
likely your disk system is a bottleneck if you're processing large portions
of the DB in individual queries, and you should review your queries for
proper indexes being available.
2GB of RAM should be good, upgrading to 3 is relatively cheap nowadays but
you may not see much improvement. Additional processors would be useful if
you have a lot of users or queries that would benefit from parallelism.
It also really depends on what you're doing with it. We have a system with
a DB > 100GB and response time for most things is very good, however some
queries that attempt to summarize large amounts of data are slow due to the
volume.
I doubt that the 100Mb link is what's slowing you down, unless you're
bringing enormous resultsets back to the client, in which case you should
rethink how the app is written.
Mike
"Pete Kriegel" <pete.kriegel@f-m-h.com> wrote in message
news:07ff01c2a841$d2571c20$d5f
82ecf@TK2MSFTNGXA12...
> I am currently running SQL 2000 standard server on a Dell
> Poweredge 2550. It has a p3 1.1 GB processor and 2 GB of
> ram. The database we are running has reached 143 GB in
> size. We are begining to notice very sluggish
> performance. My development staff thinks the problems are
> being caused by slow network access(We use 100MB linksys
> switches). I however believe they have allowed the
> database to grow beyond what the server could possibly
> handle. Any speculation woudl be greatly
> appreciated....
| |
|
| on average, that is a pretty low hardware to data ratio, but I'd recommend
you start with the kb articles on support.microsoft.com in relation to
performance tuning, blocking, etc.
"Pete Kriegel" <pete.kriegel@f-m-h.com> wrote in message
news:07ff01c2a841$d2571c20$d5f
82ecf@TK2MSFTNGXA12...
> I am currently running SQL 2000 standard server on a Dell
> Poweredge 2550. It has a p3 1.1 GB processor and 2 GB of
> ram. The database we are running has reached 143 GB in
> size. We are begining to notice very sluggish
> performance. My development staff thinks the problems are
> being caused by slow network access(We use 100MB linksys
> switches). I however believe they have allowed the
> database to grow beyond what the server could possibly
> handle. Any speculation woudl be greatly
> appreciated....
|
|
|
|
|