Recommendations for install SQL 2005

Recommendations for install SQL 2005 - Please Help

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Capt_Ron - 28 Nov 2006 13:26 GMT

We are setting up a SQL 2005 environment in which to migrate all our existing
databases to.

Below is the hardware configuration we have:

2 servers each with:
4 dual core x64 processors
32GB ram
Mirrored 73GB drives for OS
Fiber Channel to a SAN
No volumes set up on SAN yet
Windows 2003 R2 x64
SQL 2005 Enterprise x64 (enough licenses for all processors)

We also have a quad processor 4GB ram stand alone server that I was thinking
of using for Database mirroring.

Here is what I was thinking of doing:
Server A:
OS on local Mirrored HD (Done)
Pagefile on 50GB volume on SAN
SQL 2005 install with Notification Services, Integration Services,
Management Tools on 50GB volume on SAN
Database files on 300GB volume on SAN (as many drives as possible for I/O)
Log files on 100GB volume on SAN

Server B:
Same as A except include Reporting Services.

Standalone Server:
Used exclusively for Database mirroring.

Each server is fully backed up for DR.

Any thoughts?
Thank you very much
Ron.

Reply to this Message

lucm - 28 Nov 2006 14:18 GMT

> 2 servers each with:
> 4 dual core x64 processors
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
>
> Each server is fully backed up for DR.

I see no point to store software on the SAN. Keep the valuable space
for the data, including logs and backups.

As for the SAN layout, I think you have a good scenario. If you can
afford to put the critical items on dedicated LUNs (transaction logs,
databases, possibly pagefile) it would be optimal. Use RAID-1 for logs
and pagefile, and RAID-10 for the database.

You are also correct to use as much disks as you can for the database
storage.

One thing you must think about is to align your partitions offset since
you are likely to use NTFS on your SAN drives. This can be done either
from Windows with Diskpart or from you SAN management tool (like
Navisphere for EMC).

Regards,
lucm

Reply to this Message

Capt_Ron - 28 Nov 2006 15:20 GMT

Thank you.

Should I put the system databases on the SAN or leave them on the OS drives?

Also should I take Reporting Services off of server B and put it on the
stand alone with the mirrors?

Thanks again
Ron

> > 2 servers each with:
> > 4 dual core x64 processors
[quoted text clipped - 43 lines]
> Regards,
> lucm

Reply to this Message

lucm - 28 Nov 2006 15:40 GMT

> Should I put the system databases on the SAN or leave them on the OS drives?

I would put them on the SAN, especially tempdb. Actually, if you can
afford it, a dedicated LUN for tempdb would offer an excellent
performance. I would suggest a RAID-10 array, but if you don't have
enough disks left a RAID-1 would be great also.

If you don't have enough disks to do so, you could put the pagefile and
the transaction logs on the same array, which would leave some disks
for tempdb. In any case, if you can, don't put your databases and
tempdb on the same array.

Find the whitepaper "Working with tempdb in SQL Server 2005" on the
Microsoft website, it contains a lot of interesting information.

> Also should I take Reporting Services off of server B and put it on the
> stand alone with the mirrors?

Reporting Services is not a big concern as long as you have enough RAM.
It could be a good idea to put it on the stand alone server if you have
at some point the requirement to give access to your reports to some
external customer, but it would be a matter of security, not
performance.

Regards,
lucm

Reply to this Message