vich
07-19-2007, 08:41 PM
I'll be purchasing a new "main database server" soon, once some System Load info is collected. We're implementing a new inventory system that's expected to double or triple our processing needs.
I'm reluctant to upgrade now because I'm a little afraid I'll under-purchase, but I don't want to over-purchase because of upgrade issues.
This is for a SQL Server database server only. We currently run SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2000 Server. All with the latest service packs. It runs on an IBM X235 Intel server with dual Xeon 2.0 processors and two HDD volumes (one mirrored, one RAID 5 with 3 volumes, all IBM 10,000 RPM SCSI internal hot-swap drives). So; a fairly high-entry level 4 year old server, but decent. We currently see about 30% CPU utilization most times, but many lags down to 2%. So; it's plenty fast for now but showing signs of reaching capacity.
My budget is about $25K but it's really "whatever is needed" since the new software cost $200K already so no since in chincing out on the hardware.
I'm afraid of the 64 bit versions of OS and SQL Server. I'm not sure why since it's surely tried and true by now. However; I'm really afraid of SQL 2005 since we use an old version of Crystal Reports (version 8) and it has known problems with SQL 2005.
Sure you say, upgrade to Crystal XI, problems solved. I'm just under the gun on this project and I'll have more time for fooling around next year.
So my question:
How many processors will Windows 2000 Standard support? (read: how many dual core or quad core processors).
Same question for SQL Server 2000 Standard?
(I figure I can mess with upgrades to OS and SQL next year if needed, to take advantage of large memory configurations of probably 16GB).
My alternative is to by a somewhat minimal server now (Dual Xeon 3.0 + 4GB Ram + Dual RAID volumes with 15,000 RPM SCSI drives), knowing I may have to upgrade both server and OS/SQL later. I mainly just want to know if it's worth it buying the 4-CPU chassis now. Further; if adding the final 2 CPUs or going with quad processors will be an option without software (OS/SQL) changes. I do realize that this much server running on 32 bit Windows is a crying shame.
Anyone?
I'm reluctant to upgrade now because I'm a little afraid I'll under-purchase, but I don't want to over-purchase because of upgrade issues.
This is for a SQL Server database server only. We currently run SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2000 Server. All with the latest service packs. It runs on an IBM X235 Intel server with dual Xeon 2.0 processors and two HDD volumes (one mirrored, one RAID 5 with 3 volumes, all IBM 10,000 RPM SCSI internal hot-swap drives). So; a fairly high-entry level 4 year old server, but decent. We currently see about 30% CPU utilization most times, but many lags down to 2%. So; it's plenty fast for now but showing signs of reaching capacity.
My budget is about $25K but it's really "whatever is needed" since the new software cost $200K already so no since in chincing out on the hardware.
I'm afraid of the 64 bit versions of OS and SQL Server. I'm not sure why since it's surely tried and true by now. However; I'm really afraid of SQL 2005 since we use an old version of Crystal Reports (version 8) and it has known problems with SQL 2005.
Sure you say, upgrade to Crystal XI, problems solved. I'm just under the gun on this project and I'll have more time for fooling around next year.
So my question:
How many processors will Windows 2000 Standard support? (read: how many dual core or quad core processors).
Same question for SQL Server 2000 Standard?
(I figure I can mess with upgrades to OS and SQL next year if needed, to take advantage of large memory configurations of probably 16GB).
My alternative is to by a somewhat minimal server now (Dual Xeon 3.0 + 4GB Ram + Dual RAID volumes with 15,000 RPM SCSI drives), knowing I may have to upgrade both server and OS/SQL later. I mainly just want to know if it's worth it buying the 4-CPU chassis now. Further; if adding the final 2 CPUs or going with quad processors will be an option without software (OS/SQL) changes. I do realize that this much server running on 32 bit Windows is a crying shame.
Anyone?