dbTalk Databases Forums  

SQL 2005 Cluster performance

microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering


Discuss SQL 2005 Cluster performance in the microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering forum.



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old   
John
 
Posts: n/a

Default SQL 2005 Cluster performance - 02-01-2010 , 02:13 PM






I am looking to implement SQL Clustering on a SAN with SATA drives. While I know that clustering is not a "performance" solution, however performance is a consideration when looking for read/write times.

The solution I am exploring has fibre DAE's and FC switches with FC HBAs in each server connecting to the SAN. Theoretically, the FC will achieve a better throughput with FC drives...however, the costs associated are too high.

The question is whether there is a noticeable difference in performance between a SAN with SATA and a SAN with SAS with regards to SQL 2005 clustering.

All servers in the environment are using Windows Server 2008 R2 x64, SQL 2005 Enterprise x64 (or SQL 2008 x64), and at least 64Gb of RAM.

From http://www.developmentnow.com/g/99_0...clustering.htm

Posted via DevelopmentNow.com Groups
http://www.developmentnow.com/g/

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old   
Andrew J. Kelly
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: SQL 2005 Cluster performance - 02-01-2010 , 06:57 PM






The performance of the I/O has absolutely nothing to do with clustering as
it will be the same if you had the same storage subsystem with a single
host. There is a difference in performance between SATA and SAS and that
will not be affected by clustering. How much difference depends on what you
have configured and how.

--

Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors

"John" <nospam (AT) developmentnow (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
I am looking to implement SQL Clustering on a SAN with SATA drives. While
I know that clustering is not a "performance" solution, however
performance is a consideration when looking for read/write times.

The solution I am exploring has fibre DAE's and FC switches with FC HBAs
in each server connecting to the SAN. Theoretically, the FC will achieve
a better throughput with FC drives...however, the costs associated are too
high.

The question is whether there is a noticeable difference in performance
between a SAN with SATA and a SAN with SAS with regards to SQL 2005
clustering.

All servers in the environment are using Windows Server 2008 R2 x64, SQL
2005 Enterprise x64 (or SQL 2008 x64), and at least 64Gb of RAM.

From
http://www.developmentnow.com/g/99_0...clustering.htm

Posted via DevelopmentNow.com Groups
http://www.developmentnow.com/g/

Reply With Quote
Reply




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.