SQL Server Performance Forum – Threads Archive

Multiple Instances vs Single / Memory thoughts

[foreword: I’ve just been in this new role for a month now so I am working in with a current infrastructure design and trying to adjust box configs to obtain better performance. All of the servers have C:- & D:- drives that are partitioned off the one visible drive (which is actually a 3x-drive Raid-5 setup). System DBs, Application DBs & backups are on SAN drives attached to the box – tempdb is on D:-drive on the Raid-5.] Only have access to Windows Server 2003 Standard (no Enterprise licences) and MSSQL 2000 Standard (no Enterprise licences) – no use of AWE either (being Std Ed). Q1. Microsoft says that the physical memory limit when using WS2003 standard is 4Gb. So, if I put 8Gb in the box, will it only register the 4Gb and ignore the rest? Q2. *If* I can put 8Gb physically in the box and have it accepted, is there any chance that it could be used against multiple instances of MSSQL2000? Like: 2Gb for O/S; 2Gb for 1st instance; 2Gb for next instance, etc? This question is a long shot seeing that if the O/S won’t use the memory then it won’t recognised for MSSQL to use. -or- Q2. *If* I am only limited to that 4Gb, is there a chance that using the /3GB switch in the boot.ini will allow multiple (2) SQL instances to play nicely together and use all the remaining memory? Q3. I’m trying to convince the network people to give me another drive in the box that is Raid-0 (maybe Raid-1?) so that I can get the Windows swapfile and Tempdb off somewhere on their own so that they can do what they need to do without the Raid-5 performance overhead on files that really don’t need to be backed-up. Is this a good option? Q4. Looking at upgrading a couple of servers (3yr+) running Windows 2000 Server (std) and thinking that if I get a spec’d up machine in and run WS2003 Enterprise, run maybe 16Gb RAM + activate PAE, and run multiple (3? 4?) MSSQL2005 instances in order to consolidate a couple of smaller boxes. Any thoughts? The really hard part is getting Enterprise *anything* as the hand controlling the budget is not saying how much the maintenance costs are so that I can work out which is the better option. All he sees is lowest $’s and then we’re left tearing hair out to obtain performance. Any suggestions greatly appreciated. Feel free to ask for more info if you’ve stopped laughing at me by now…. <img src=’/community/emoticons/emotion-1.gif’ alt=’

‘ /> ** A lack of planning on your part does not constitute and emergency on mine. **

Please do not duplicate your post. delete the other one —————————————-
Contributing Editor, Writer & Forums Moderator
http://www.SQL-Server-Performance.Com Visit my Blog at
http://dineshasanka.spaces.live.com/

Uh, yeah…. you had me really confused for a little while there. I didn’t realise that I had duplicated the post (I posted it last night right before going home) Sorry about that. Duplicate post deleted. ** A lack of planning on your part does not constitute and emergency on mine. **

]]>