Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Server Specifications for database hosting


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 daredavel

daredavel

  • Members
  • 25 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:05:37 AM

Posted 11 May 2016 - 11:17 AM

I would like to ask for your comments/suggestion regarding the two server units I'm currently setting up. I'm planing to host 30+ users simultaneously in each server. Will the two servers be able to handle it?

 

Server 1:

CPU: Intel Xeon E5520 (QuadCore)
MoBo: IBM 49Y6715
Ram: 8GB

OS - Windows server 2003r2 standard x64
Application - SQL server 2005

=================================

Server 2:

CPU: Intel Xeon E3110 (DualCore)
MoBo: IBM 4367
Ram: 4GB

OS - Windows server 2008 standard x64
Application - SQL server 2005



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 Wand3r3r

Wand3r3r

  • Members
  • 2,027 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:37 PM

Posted 12 May 2016 - 12:20 PM

You don't have enough ram in either to be running server and sql imo.  Sure they meet the min requirement but that only means sql will run.  I would also have more processors as well as running 2008/12 on both not a mix of 03 and 08

 

reason for running sql on each?


Edited by Wand3r3r, 12 May 2016 - 12:21 PM.


#3 daredavel

daredavel
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 25 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:05:37 AM

Posted 13 May 2016 - 06:12 AM

You don't have enough ram in either to be running server and sql imo.  Sure they meet the min requirement but that only means sql will run.  I would also have more processors as well as running 2008/12 on both not a mix of 03 and 08

 

reason for running sql on each?

 

Thank you for that response. Each server will handle different databases for a 3rd party application.



#4 Wand3r3r

Wand3r3r

  • Members
  • 2,027 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:37 PM

Posted 13 May 2016 - 11:24 AM

usually for fault tolerance you would have all databases on both servers with a  push pull replication so if one server fails the other is still up.



#5 daredavel

daredavel
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 25 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:05:37 AM

Posted 13 May 2016 - 11:26 AM

usually for fault tolerance you would have all databases on both servers with a  push pull replication so if one server fails the other is still up.

 

I agree. But I guess I need to upgrade my hardware first for both servers.



#6 Wand3r3r

Wand3r3r

  • Members
  • 2,027 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:37 PM

Posted 13 May 2016 - 11:30 AM

That would be a good plan.  With servers I always max out the ram and cpus as much as possible.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users