Hi,
I'm running SQL2k sp3 on a dual Xeon w/four drives/arrays
(SCSI)(OS on C:, Logs on E:, tempdb on F:, Data on G:
(500GB)). I have a large DTS package for processing text
files for billing and reporting purposes. The input file
averages 400,000 rows per day and ends up creating a
dozen tables that average 300k rows per file. Various
data is exported and zipped to disk with WinRAR. The
package is either executed manually on the server or
scheduled to run from the server

My problem is that the DTS package runs about 20% more
slowly on the server above than it does on my desktop
workstation (executed locally or as a job), which is a
plain old 1.8 P4 with a standard drive. When I check the
process both processors are running around 80%.

Another example is a single column update on a 1 million
row table (again executed on the server) with a single
join to an indexed table with 8,000 rows. This update
took over 2 1/2 hours.

I'm looking for advice and hints about how to start
researching theslowness problems.

Thanks,

I generally have

1. As many tasks executing in Parallel as I do processors (No More)
2. I configure memory to roughly 300 MB less than MAX

--


Allan Mitchell (Microsoft SQL Server MVP)
MCSE,MCDBA
www.SQLDTS.com
I support PASS - the definitive, global community
for SQL Server professionals - http://www.sqlpass.org

"Fred Jones" <fredjonze (AT) nospam (DOT) hotmail.com> wrote

Hi Allan,
In SQL properties I enabled processor 1 and disabled
processor 2. I also set the dropdown to use only 1
processor. I also tried disabling 1 and enabling 2. In
each case the processing times increased from 42 minutes
(with 2 processors) to almost 50 minutes with 1
processor. If I manually execute the package on my
development workstation (single 1.8 P4) it takes about 36
minutes to run.

On the server (with only processor 2 for SQL) I noticed
that processor 1 was running about 90% and processor 2
was running about 20%. Is this because of the VBScript in
the datapump? If so, any ideas why it runs faster on my
desktop that has a cheap drive and only 512 RAM? I guess
this doesn't explain the slow SQL updates using query
analyzer.

Thanks for your time,

Hi Allan,
I don't know if I'm going crazy. I thought that both
processor we're enabled when I unchecked one...but now
I'm unable to enable other than processor two. Should I
be able to have both processors checked a the same time?

Thanks,

You should be able to enable both processors

--


Allan Mitchell (Microsoft SQL Server MVP)
MCSE,MCDBA
www.SQLDTS.com
I support PASS - the definitive, global community
for SQL Server professionals - http://www.sqlpass.org

"Fred Jones" <fredjonze (AT) nospam (DOT) hotmail.com> wrote

have you look at your performance counters ?
First you must identify the problem:
* CPU
* HD (Avg disk queue length)
* Memory

I've the same type of problem with a "big" server, but I've no time to find
the source of the problem.
I suspect the RAID 5 and the drives to be the problem in my case.

What is the result if you export your data to another computer instead-of
the local drive?
Where is your export folder actually?

"Fred Jones" <fredjonze (AT) nospam (DOT) hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:012d01c3449b$1dc168a0$a101280a (AT) phx (DOT) gbl...

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 2003-07-04