Is adding another controller gives any performance improvements?

MS SQL SERVER

    Sponsored Links

    Next

  • 1. Package Installation Error
    I'm trying to install the MSDN SQL 2005 Enterprise Edition software on a fresh Windows Server 2003 SP1 box. A few seconds after it starts the installation after the wizard questions I get "Could not find a package to install on the installation media.". An excerpt of the log is below: Loaded DLL:C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\90\Setup Bootstrap\sqlsval.dll Version:2005.90.1399.0 <EndFunc Name='DwLaunchMsiExec' Return='0' GetLastError='0'> Complete: InvokeSqlSetupDllAction at: 2005/10/7 12:49:17, returned true Running: SetPackageInstallStateAction at: 2005/10/7 12:49:17 Complete: SetPackageInstallStateAction at: 2005/10/7 12:49:17, returned true Running: DeterminePackageTransformsAction at: 2005/10/7 12:49:17 Error: Action "DeterminePackageTransformsAction" threw an exception during execution. Failed to open package to determine installing product code : 110 Message displayed to user Could not find a package to install on the installation media. Any ideas? Derek
  • 2. 2000 vs 2005
    Hi all, I just installed version 2005(named instance), and it is co-existing with an instance of 2000 (default Instance). I am trying to test a remote connection from an ASP .Net page which works fine already in 2000. However it does not work in 2005. In 2005, I went to configuration Manager/Protocols/TCP IP, and entered 7994 as the port for the IP2 (my test box). Then, in my connection string I just changed the databasename to point to 'AdventureWorks' instead of the DB that I used for 2K. The connection could not be openned. I also configured the user id, and password the same way as I have in 2K, and re-started the engine. The connection strings are : //connection string for SQLSrvr2000 //this.sqlConnection1.ConnectionString = "Server=xxx.xx.xx.xx;Database=myDB;User ID=myUID;Password=myPWD;Trusted_Connection=False"; //connection string for SQLSrvr2005 this.sqlConnection1.ConnectionString = "Server=xxx.xx.xx.xx\\<myNamedServerInstance>,7994;Database=AdventureWorks;User ID=myUID;Password=myPWD;Trusted_Connection=True"; Thanks in advance for any help. Carlos. At this point I do not know what else should I do. Any help will be appreciated. Thanks in advance, Carlos
  • 3. Developer setup
    Hi I have a developer workstation with Visualstudio 2005 pro and Exchange 2003. Should it work OK to install SQL Server 2005 developer edt. on the same machine? /A.
  • 4. SQL 2005 Developer Edition detecting previous versions
    I can not install SQL Server because it detects "incompatible components from beta versions of Visual Studion, .Net Framwork or SQL Server 2005". However I have removed all beta products and still get this error message. I had installed the final release version of Visual Studio 2005 which ran the beta uninstall utiltiy but have since uninstalled both VS 2005 and .Net 2.0. I have also cleaned the registry using RegClean and the installer database using MsiZap but this has made no difference. I think the problem may be due to the installation of Team System during the beta program which left protions of the Analysis and Reporting services behind on uninstall. Is there any way of finding out what components the SQL Server 2005 install is detecting or fully cleaning my machine of traces of the beta program.
  • 5. sql 2005 port
    how can i configure the sql 2005 port on a server that has a sql 2000sp3 already running inot 2 separates instances in the server network utulity i see the sql2005 instance but the options are disabled

Re: Is adding another controller gives any performance improvements?

Postby Andrew J. Kelly » Wed, 04 Aug 2004 01:20:43 GMT

Adding another controller will only help if you have issues now with the
current configuration.  Do you have disk queues on H: or I: now?  Are you
exceeding the bandwidth or 3 I/O's per second on the current controller?  If
not then adding another controller will do little if anything for you.  If
so then yes it probably will as long as it's the controller and not the
disks that are the bottleneck.

-- 
Andrew J. Kelly  SQL MVP






on SQL Server 2000 enterprise edition (sp3a) on IBM X 445 server with
following configuration
(I),
busy channel (3) on a separate controller. Do we really get any performance
advantage?
900 users. I too agree definitely number disks and faster disks make major
impact on performance but my only concern is that for the present scenario
adding another disk controller and split the load across the controllers
will give any performance advantage or not.
know.



Similar Threads:

1.Query Performance (am I in the ms right forum for performance Q's

I get a massive bookmark in the execution plans when I run the below SQL to 
return 23 rows of data...The volumens are as below. If I take out the 
reference to a11.Tr_sub_type_id in (430, 433, 3530), the bookmark disappears 
and I get drastically improved performance. a11 is well indexed. A new index 
was to add the CREATE UNIQUE CLUSTERED INDEX [IX_TRt_lu_Trans_Subtype] ON 
[dbo].[TRt_lu_Trans_Subtype]([Tr_sub_type_id], [Tr_type_id]) ON [PRIMARY] 
GO 
and it has provided many other performance gains on a number of other pieces 
of SQL. How do I begin to think about/code for this lack of performance. 
Don't worry I don't expect you to understand the tables or business but if 
any experiences have been overcome please post. 


select count(*) from fat_bse_po_risk_detail(nolock) -- Rows: 11674571 
select count(*) from POt_lu_policy(nolock)       -- Rows: 2967597 
select count(*) from prt_lu_product(nolock)      -- Rows: 1719900 
select count(*) from TRt_lu_Trans_Subtype(nolock) -- Rows: 9326 
select count(*) from vht_lu_vehicle(nolock)      -- Rows: 3154009 
select count(*) from ITv_lu_day(nolock)       -- Rows: 4831 

SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL READ UNCOMMITTED 
-- Duration: 0:05:02.00 - 23 rows 
select   a14.Vh_VhAll_group_id Vh_VhAll_group_id, 
   a15.ITv_year_id year_id, 
   count(distinct(case when a12.Pr_Group_id = 5 then a11.Vehicle_id else 
a11.Policy_id end)) WJXBFS1 
into #ZZT5J0300BKMD00J 
from   fat_bse_po_risk_detail   a11 
   join   prt_lu_product   a12 
    on    (a11.Product_id = a12.Product_id) 
   join   POt_lu_policy   a13 
    on    (a11.Policy_id = a13.Policy_id) 
   join   vht_lu_vehicle   a14 
    on    (a11.Vehicle_id = a14.Vehicle_id) 
   join   ITv_lu_day   a15 
    on    (a11.Inception_date_id = a15.Inception_date_id) 
where   (a13.Po_corp_unit_id in ('GEI', 'GNI', 'GED') 
and a11.Tr_sub_type_id in (430, 433, 3530) 
and a11.Inception_date_id >= CONVERT(datetime, '2003-04-01 00:00:00', 120) 
and a11.Inception_date_id < CONVERT(datetime, '2005-04-01 00:00:00', 120) 
and a13.Po_corp_unit_id in ('GEI', 'GNI', 'GED') 
and a12.Pr_Group_id in (2, 3) 
and a11.f_Ren_Flag = '4' 
and a11.Po_tr_bus_type_id > 0) 
group by   a14.Vh_VhAll_group_id, 
   a15.ITv_year_id 
 
  



I get a massive bookmark in the execution plans when I run the below SQL to 
return 23 rows of data...The volumens are as below. If I take out the 
reference to a11.Tr_sub_type_id in (430, 433, 3530), the bookmark disappears 
and I get drastically improved performance. a11 is well indexed. A new index 
was to add the CREATE UNIQUE CLUSTERED INDEX [IX_TRt_lu_Trans_Subtype] ON 
[dbo].[TRt_lu_Trans_Subtype]([Tr_sub_type_id], [Tr_type_id]) ON [PRIMARY] 
GO 
and it has provided many other performance gains on a number of other pieces 
of SQL. How do I begin to think about/code for this lack of performance. 
Don't worry I don't expect you to understand the tables or business but if 
any experiences have been overcome please post. 


select count(*) from fat_bse_po_risk_detail(nolock) -- Rows: 11674571 
select count(*) from POt_lu_policy(nolock)       -- Rows: 2967597 
select count(*) from prt_lu_product(nolock)      -- Rows: 1719900 
select count(*) from TRt_lu_Trans_Subtype(nolock) -- Rows: 9326 
select count(*) from vht_lu_vehicle(nolock)      -- Rows: 3154009 
select count(*) from ITv_lu_day(nolock)       -- Rows: 4831 

SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL READ UNCOMMITTED 
-- Duration: 0:05:02.00 - 23 rows 
select   a14.Vh_VhAll_group_id Vh_VhAll_group_id, 
   a15.ITv_year_id year_id, 
   count(distinct(case when a12.Pr_Group_id = 5 then a11.Vehicle_id else 
a11.Policy_id end)) WJXBFS1 
into #ZZT5J0300BKMD00J 
from   fat_bse_po_risk_detail   a11 
   join   prt_lu_product   a12 
    on    (a11.Product_id = a12.Product_id) 
   join   POt_lu_policy   a13 
    on    (a11.Policy_id = a13.Policy_id) 
   join   vht_lu_vehicle   a14 
    on    (a11.Vehicle_id = a14.Vehicle_id) 
   join   ITv_lu_day   a15 
    on    (a11.Inception_date_id = a15.Inception_date_id) 
where   (a13.Po_corp_unit_id in ('GEI', 'GNI', 'GED') 
and a11.Tr_sub_type_id in (430, 433, 3530) 
and a11.Inception_date_id >= CONVERT(datetime, '2003-04-01 00:00:00', 120) 
and a11.Inception_date_id < CONVERT(datetime, '2005-04-01 00:00:00', 120) 
and a13.Po_corp_unit_id in ('GEI', 'GNI', 'GED') 
and a12.Pr_Group_id in (2, 3) 
and a11.f_Ren_Flag = '4' 
and a11.Po_tr_bus_type_id > 0) 
group by   a14.Vh_VhAll_group_id, 
   a15.ITv_year_id 
 

2.press - pr: Wording improvements in `release' Added translation of

3.Index Tuning Wiz recommends negative performance improvements?

Hi,

I've run the (SQL2K) Index Tuning Wizard against our 50GB database and
it has recommended changes that will produce a "-3506%" improvement iin
performance.

The recommendations include a lot of indexes to be dropped and a few
new ones to be created, in the Analysis - Query Cost Report screen all
of the indexes shown have a zero or negative percent improvement (e.g.
-96133%).

Why is it recommending these changes? Are these actual improvements or
is something wrong?

thanks,

Nathan

4.Performance improvement after detach/attach

I've got a SQL Server 2000 database serving a classic ASP web 
application. The performance of the database keeps nosediving and I 
can't figure out why.

When preforming normally, running a known query will return a result set 
in 5 seconds. After time, or more commonly after a big data import (the 
system allows import from CSV files), the query can take more than 20 
seconds to return the same data.

If I go and manually clean out all the data from the import (so the 
tables have the same numbers of rows as before) the query will still run 
at >20secs. I've also tried rebuilding the indexes and defragmenting the 
data disk, and running the maintenance tasks to compact the log files. 
Performance remains in the 'sucks' region.

However, if I detach the database and immediately reattach it, 
everything perks up and the query runs in 5 seconds again.

I'm not entirely sure what happens during the detach/attach process. 
Does anyone here have any ideas as to what might be fixing the issue 
(and therefore any clues to the cause)?

thanks,

drew.

5.Large Dimension Performance Improvement Tips in SSAS 2005

hi Every1,
             Please help me out with this problem.... The scenario is
i have a cube with close to 1.7 million rows in fact table i have ....
about 14 dimensions .. of which two of them have 170,000 and 85,000
members.. The queries that are fired upon are kind of top in top . If
you dont get what i am talking abt heres the MDX construct:
                       generate( { topcount([dim1], measure,10)},
{nonemptycrossjoin([dim1].currentMember ,{topcount([dim2],measure,
10)} )}.. where dim2 is the large dimension

The above query takes typically 1min 30 secs..
Would love to drop the minute and make it 30 secs.
 My hardware for SSAS-2005  machine is 2 - Dual core Cpus of Intel
Xeon , 8 gb Ram , 10k RPM SAS disks.

I tried creating aggregations based on usage but still the performance
hasnt been boosted all i got was a 1 sec difference . Also tried
creating partitions but even that didnt help....
 I remember in AS2000 there was a setting for Very Large Dimensions
which could be set upto 10000.. I had tried that in AS2K and had
gotten good results... Any such things in SSAS-2005


Please help me out over here

6. Fairly Large Cube-Performance Improvement recommendations

7. Cube processing performance improvement

8. Win Server 2003 SP2 - SQL2k5 Performance Improvements



Return to MS SQL SERVER

 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 72 guest