multiple instances of SQL Server

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Loren Z - 22 Jul 2008 22:58 GMT

We are considering installing an instance of SQL Server which would serve as
a back-end to Sharepoint. There is alrready a default instance of SQL Server
2005 on this server but the collation is case sensitive and Sharepoint
requires case insenstive.

It is for this reason that we are considering setting up the second
instance. What are the issues involved in terms of resources? Memory would
be an issue but more memory could be added. The other issues are network,
disk, and CPU. Does setting up a second instance strain these resources? I
believe Sharepoint database would be smaller and would not strain resources.
Does adding the second instance put a significant amount of pressure on CPU,
network and disk then if Sharepoint (if it worked on case sensitive
collation) was installed on the default instance? Any advice or reference to
helpful documents would be appreciated.

Reply to this Message

Denny Cherry - 23 Jul 2008 01:35 GMT

Adding a second instance doesn't put any more strain on the disk,
network, CPU than having the same database hosted in the original
instance. The big difference in the memory as you said. With
everything in a single instance the instance is aware of both
databases and can flush data from cache from either database as
needed. With two instances you'll end up with memory dedicated to one
instance or another after a while as one instance can't tell another
instance to flush its data from cache.

Denny

>We are considering installing an instance of SQL Server which would serve as
>a back-end to Sharepoint. There is alrready a default instance of SQL Server
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>collation) was installed on the default instance? Any advice or reference to
>helpful documents would be appreciated.

Reply to this Message

Uri Dimant - 23 Jul 2008 06:22 GMT

Loren
In addtion to Denny's answer, I'd say that Sharepoint does strain resources.
In our company it leads to lost of deadlocks and you can only rebuild
indexes and not change the structure.
http://dimantdatabasesolutions.blogspot.com/2008/06/how-do-you-maintain-sharepoi
nt.html

> We are considering installing an instance of SQL Server which would serve
> as a back-end to Sharepoint. There is alrready a default instance of SQL
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> sensitive collation) was installed on the default instance? Any advice or
> reference to helpful documents would be appreciated.

Reply to this Message

Loren Z - 23 Jul 2008 22:54 GMT

Thank you for your help. Another quick question. Microsoft states that the
shared database collation must be SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS. This
Microsoft article specifies that this must be the collation.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc288970(TechNet.10).aspx#section1

The reason we want to install the second instance of SQL Server is that the
default instance has Latin1_General_BIN for the collation. It is Case
Senstive.

The applications analysts are considering installing the Sharepoint database
on the default instance to test it out but the server collation will be not
what is recommended by Microsoft. Will Sharepoint work under this
configuration? What are the possible problems and performance issues?

> Loren
> In addtion to Denny's answer, I'd say that Sharepoint does strain
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>> instance? Any advice or reference to helpful documents would be
>> appreciated.

Reply to this Message

Todd Klindt [WSS MVP] - 25 Jul 2008 02:24 GMT

Don't fool with the collation. SharePoint will do all kinds of
unpredictable things if the collation is wrong. You don't want to go down
that road.

tk

> Thank you for your help. Another quick question. Microsoft states that the
> shared database collation must be SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS. This
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
>>> instance? Any advice or reference to helpful documents would be
>>> appreciated.

Reply to this Message