Have dual processors / need SQL (1 or 2) license?

Need to install MS-SQL on a WIN2K Server box - Looking at
getting MS-SQL for 1 processor product = 228-01079. I'm
confused because I want to be legal and have 2 processors
in this box therefore - Do I need 2 copies of this
software to run or would one be enought?
ThanksOne question is do you really need a processor license. The links below
outline most of this stuff:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/serverproc.asp Licensing
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/sqlserverlicensing.asp
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/default.asp
Andrew J. Kelly
SQL Server MVP
"Dave" <Razar44140@.aol.com> wrote in message
news:00b001c37c72$f35cff60$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Need to install MS-SQL on a WIN2K Server box - Looking at
> getting MS-SQL for 1 processor product = 228-01079. I'm
> confused because I want to be legal and have 2 processors
> in this box therefore - Do I need 2 copies of this
> software to run or would one be enought?
> Thanks|||Maybe yes, maybe no!
We are about to acquire a software package which specs
out that the server must have dual processors in the box
and rather large amount of RAM. Additionally it requires
that we install WIN2K Server and MS-SQL. We will have
about 75 users running this DB application therefore I
think that a processor license would be appropiate (cost
wise at discount house) over a CAL. Original question...
Do I need two copies for on machine utilizing two
processors? or Is there another avenue to take here?
Thanks
PS - I looked at the How to Buy and it didn't answer my
question. I
>--Original Message--
>One question is do you really need a processor license.
The links below
>outline most of this stuff:
>
>http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/serverproc.asp
Licensing
>http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/sqlserverlicensing.
asp
>http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/default.asp
>
>--
>Andrew J. Kelly
>SQL Server MVP
>
>"Dave" <Razar44140@.aol.com> wrote in message
>news:00b001c37c72$f35cff60$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Need to install MS-SQL on a WIN2K Server box - Looking
at
>> getting MS-SQL for 1 processor product = 228-01079. I'm
>> confused because I want to be legal and have 2
processors
>> in this box therefore - Do I need 2 copies of this
>> software to run or would one be enought?
>> Thanks
>
>.
>

Hardware general question about sql

Dear folks,
Nowadays, we have got an Active-Active cluster for to attend our business as
usual. Each node own the following main features:
-8 processors xeon 700 Mhz
-8 Gb RAM
-RAID 5 (up to 400 gb ) 12 disks approx.
-OS 32 bit (Advanced Server)
-Sql2000k with sp3
-Quorum disk have 36,6 GB
-Our growing per w is almost 50 gb.
-Databases are forty.
The above configuration was bough five years ago, so that, which could be a
good migration of this hardware?
We are thinking over to buy Itanium but we don't know if TCO is good with
such growing of data.
Maybe a good solution will be buy 64-bit hardware and by the moment to
install our sql2000k and within six months or so (when SP1 for sql server
2005 is released) move the data to that version.
Any input will be greatly.
Regards,Enric wrote:
> Dear folks,
> Nowadays, we have got an Active-Active cluster for to attend our
> business as usual. Each node own the following main features:
> -8 processors xeon 700 Mhz
> -8 Gb RAM
> -RAID 5 (up to 400 gb ) 12 disks approx.
> -OS 32 bit (Advanced Server)
> -Sql2000k with sp3
> -Quorum disk have 36,6 GB
> -Our growing per w is almost 50 gb.
> -Databases are forty.
> The above configuration was bough five years ago, so that, which
> could be a good migration of this hardware?
> We are thinking over to buy Itanium but we don't know if TCO is good
> with such growing of data.
> Maybe a good solution will be buy 64-bit hardware and by the moment to
> install our sql2000k and within six months or so (when SP1 for sql
> server 2005 is released) move the data to that version.
> Any input will be greatly.
> Regards,
What hardware issues, if any, are you currently having? Assuming your
queries are performance tuned (which should always be the first order of
business when it comes to performance), you need to determine where the
hardware is failing you. Are you CPU bound? Disk bound? Memory bound?
50GB of growth per w is significant. Could you have meant 50MB /
w? Given that you only have 400GB of disk, 50GB / w doesn't leave
you much time.
You have a powerful, but older server. You could probably get better
performance out of a modern 4-way Xeon server. Since SQL 2005 will run
on 64-bit AMD and x86 boxes, I might consider waiting for that version
and skip Itanium.
If you determine that you are disk bound, you may want to consider using
a SAN or a different RAID implementation. It sounds like you have RAID 5
for everything (data, logs, temdb). You will normally get much better
performance using a RAID 1+0 array for data, and RAID 1+0 or RAID 1
arrays for log files and tempdb. Unless activity is low during log
backups and full backups, you may want to consider backing up to an
array that's different than the data array.
David Gugick
Quest Software
www.imceda.com
www.quest.com|||If you're not experiencing any problems with your current set-up, and the SW
side is fully optimized, then IMHO you don't really have to change anything.
ML