Showing posts with label sizing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sizing. Show all posts

Monday, March 19, 2012

Hardware sizing documentation?

I am running an SAP system with approximately 250 users (150-170
concurrent). The database is currently around 200Gb in size, running on SQL
2000 standard edition and Windows 2000 standard server. The server is a quad
500Mhz Xeon with 4Gb of ram, 1.7Gb assigned to SQL, SAP and OS having whats
left. What I am looking for is a rough guide to how much memory the server
should have in relation to the database size. Anybody know of any good
guides to sizing the server hardware? (I realise that to use over 2Gb I need
different versions of SQL and OS)
thanks
GavGav
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
[url]http://www.sql-server-performance.com/performance_monitor_counters_memory.asp[/url
]
"Gav" <gavin.metcalfe@.nospam.portakabin.com> wrote in message
news:cl80ka$m3s$1@.sparta.btinternet.com...
> I am running an SAP system with approximately 250 users (150-170
> concurrent). The database is currently around 200Gb in size, running on
SQL
> 2000 standard edition and Windows 2000 standard server. The server is a
quad
> 500Mhz Xeon with 4Gb of ram, 1.7Gb assigned to SQL, SAP and OS having
whats
> left. What I am looking for is a rough guide to how much memory the server
> should have in relation to the database size. Anybody know of any good
> guides to sizing the server hardware? (I realise that to use over 2Gb I
need
> different versions of SQL and OS)
> thanks
> Gav
>|||You can also go to HP and IBM websites. They both have sizing tools. You
type in SQL Server, transaction load, write %, size, etc. It recommends a
machine. It's generally pretty accurate, if you're not running anything
wacky.
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:uJ#ccP1tEHA.904@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Gav
> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
>
http://www.sql-server-performance.c...ters_memory.asp">
> "Gav" <gavin.metcalfe@.nospam.portakabin.com> wrote in message
> news:cl80ka$m3s$1@.sparta.btinternet.com...
> SQL
> quad
> whats
server[vbcol=seagreen]
> need
>

Hardware sizing documentation?

I am running an SAP system with approximately 250 users (150-170
concurrent). The database is currently around 200Gb in size, running on SQL
2000 standard edition and Windows 2000 standard server. The server is a quad
500Mhz Xeon with 4Gb of ram, 1.7Gb assigned to SQL, SAP and OS having whats
left. What I am looking for is a rough guide to how much memory the server
should have in relation to the database size. Anybody know of any good
guides to sizing the server hardware? (I realise that to use over 2Gb I need
different versions of SQL and OS)
thanks
Gav
Gav
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
http://www.sql-server-performance.co...ers_memory.asp
"Gav" <gavin.metcalfe@.nospam.portakabin.com> wrote in message
news:cl80ka$m3s$1@.sparta.btinternet.com...
> I am running an SAP system with approximately 250 users (150-170
> concurrent). The database is currently around 200Gb in size, running on
SQL
> 2000 standard edition and Windows 2000 standard server. The server is a
quad
> 500Mhz Xeon with 4Gb of ram, 1.7Gb assigned to SQL, SAP and OS having
whats
> left. What I am looking for is a rough guide to how much memory the server
> should have in relation to the database size. Anybody know of any good
> guides to sizing the server hardware? (I realise that to use over 2Gb I
need
> different versions of SQL and OS)
> thanks
> Gav
>
|||You can also go to HP and IBM websites. They both have sizing tools. You
type in SQL Server, transaction load, write %, size, etc. It recommends a
machine. It's generally pretty accurate, if you're not running anything
wacky.
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:uJ#ccP1tEHA.904@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Gav
> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
>
http://www.sql-server-performance.co...ers_memory.asp[vbcol=seagreen]
> "Gav" <gavin.metcalfe@.nospam.portakabin.com> wrote in message
> news:cl80ka$m3s$1@.sparta.btinternet.com...
> SQL
> quad
> whats
server
> need
>

Hardware sizing documentation?

I am running an SAP system with approximately 250 users (150-170
concurrent). The database is currently around 200Gb in size, running on SQL
2000 standard edition and Windows 2000 standard server. The server is a quad
500Mhz Xeon with 4Gb of ram, 1.7Gb assigned to SQL, SAP and OS having whats
left. What I am looking for is a rough guide to how much memory the server
should have in relation to the database size. Anybody know of any good
guides to sizing the server hardware? (I realise that to use over 2Gb I need
different versions of SQL and OS)
thanks
GavGav
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/performance_monitor_counters_memory.asp
"Gav" <gavin.metcalfe@.nospam.portakabin.com> wrote in message
news:cl80ka$m3s$1@.sparta.btinternet.com...
> I am running an SAP system with approximately 250 users (150-170
> concurrent). The database is currently around 200Gb in size, running on
SQL
> 2000 standard edition and Windows 2000 standard server. The server is a
quad
> 500Mhz Xeon with 4Gb of ram, 1.7Gb assigned to SQL, SAP and OS having
whats
> left. What I am looking for is a rough guide to how much memory the server
> should have in relation to the database size. Anybody know of any good
> guides to sizing the server hardware? (I realise that to use over 2Gb I
need
> different versions of SQL and OS)
> thanks
> Gav
>|||You can also go to HP and IBM websites. They both have sizing tools. You
type in SQL Server, transaction load, write %, size, etc. It recommends a
machine. It's generally pretty accurate, if you're not running anything
wacky.
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:uJ#ccP1tEHA.904@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Gav
> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
>
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/performance_monitor_counters_memory.asp
> "Gav" <gavin.metcalfe@.nospam.portakabin.com> wrote in message
> news:cl80ka$m3s$1@.sparta.btinternet.com...
> > I am running an SAP system with approximately 250 users (150-170
> > concurrent). The database is currently around 200Gb in size, running on
> SQL
> > 2000 standard edition and Windows 2000 standard server. The server is a
> quad
> > 500Mhz Xeon with 4Gb of ram, 1.7Gb assigned to SQL, SAP and OS having
> whats
> > left. What I am looking for is a rough guide to how much memory the
server
> > should have in relation to the database size. Anybody know of any good
> > guides to sizing the server hardware? (I realise that to use over 2Gb I
> need
> > different versions of SQL and OS)
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > Gav
> >
> >
>

hardware sizing

Hi,
We are running SQL Server 7.0 Standard Edition and
planning to upgrade to SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition
in a new hardware. Present hardware is having 2.4GB RAM
with 4 processor of 199MHZ . We are planning buy new
hardware with 3GB with 4 Processor of 1.4GHZ. According
to SQL Server documentation if its more than 2GB we have
to get Enterprise edition.
Here is my question:
Can we just allocate 2GB for SQL Server and just use
Standare edition and leave the extra 1GB for other
applications?
Your answers will be greately appriciated.
Thanks,
Mani.Yes, that will work just fine. Actually, SQL will top out at around 1.7GB
with standard edition, leaving 1.3 for OS and other application components,
should you have them
"Mani" <mani@.macdermid.com> wrote in message
news:014e01c34e3a$2be2a810$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> We are running SQL Server 7.0 Standard Edition and
> planning to upgrade to SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition
> in a new hardware. Present hardware is having 2.4GB RAM
> with 4 processor of 199MHZ . We are planning buy new
> hardware with 3GB with 4 Processor of 1.4GHZ. According
> to SQL Server documentation if its more than 2GB we have
> to get Enterprise edition.
> Here is my question:
> Can we just allocate 2GB for SQL Server and just use
> Standare edition and leave the extra 1GB for other
> applications?
>
> Your answers will be greately appriciated.
> Thanks,
> Mani.
>