SIMS server spec

[localzuk]

Really? I though you would make more reads then writes, so RAID-5 would be better. I do like RAID-10 (RAID 1+0) tho, still a split backplate with a RAID-1 (OS) and a RAID-5\10 (DATA) would be best.

Not really, as most reads are actually handled in memory for an SQL database - especially ones the size we're talking about. So, write performance is the main issue.

True, in a full enterprise database you may have your main DB file on a RAID 5 array, and your SQL transaction logs on a RAID 1 array, but as we're not quite that rich, a RAID 1 is the better all round choice for SIMS.net. (Ideally a log file should have it's own dedicated 1 array, the data on a 1 or 5 array and the system on it's own 1 array too).

[matt40k]

Not really, as most reads are actually handled in memory for an SQL database - especially ones the size we're talking about. So, write performance is the main issue.

True, in a full enterprise database you may have your main DB file on a RAID 5 array, and your SQL transaction logs on a RAID 1 array, but as we're not quite that rich, a RAID 1 is the better all round choice for SIMS.net. (Ideally a log file should have it's own dedicated 1 array, the data on a 1 or 5 array and the system on it's own 1 array too).

Assuming you have enough RAM! You'll need full SQL (ie standard\enterprise ed) and x64 bit OS (and MSSQL) with AWE enabled and shed loads of RAM.

I didn't think Dell charged that much for a split RAID, you just need RAID-1 for the Windows, then install MSSQL\SIMS to the RAID-10

[localzuk]

Assuming you have enough RAM! You'll need full SQL (ie standard\enterprise ed) and x64 bit OS (and MSSQL) with AWE enabled and shed loads of RAM.

I didn't think Dell charged that much for a split RAID, you just need RAID-1 for the Windows, then install MSSQL\SIMS to the RAID-10

Shed loads of RAM? Huh? SIMS databases only reach a few GB in size from what I've seen. So, say, a maximum of 4GB in size. If you're running 32bit enterprise with full SQL server that will easily sit in memory on 8GB.

But anyway, whatever the case, you're not going to end up going down the route which RAID 5 would suit with SQL server in a school, so RAID 10 is the best solution all round.

[matt40k]

IMO typical secondary schools is 2.5GB, most lesson monitor schools are starting to reach 4-5GB now. I've see [myself] about 3 so far.

32bit Enterprise is just a lie IMO, it's such a hack job. The 32bit architure addresses 4GB ram, fact. Plus you get a nice performance increase over the 32bit.

I would still say RAID-5 for secondarys with ~4GB ram, look at RAID-10 for 8GB ram. Still I would say a R200 with 8GB would be the min for secondarys.

[Theblacksheep]

The amount SQL is used for SIMS is really minimal...

We have 1700 students and 250 staff.

3.5 GB DB with SIMS and FMS
32bit Windows Server 2008 DataCenter
2vCpu (2.66)
4GB ram
VM disks on ISCSI SAN Raid5.

No queuing, no waiting or performance issues.

[Butuz]

Will be setting up a new sims virtual machine here later on in the year.

Planned spec will be:
Win2003 Std
4GB vRAM
2 vCPU 3.16ghz
iSCSI SAN storage

Though in light of above I may well swap to Win2003 Enterprise with 8GB vRAM instead.

Reason I am saying 2003 is LEA dont support 2008 yet. My upgrade may end up co-enciding with the LEA upgrading to 2008 though. Have to wait and see.

Whatever I end up doing - it's gonna be a hell of a lot better than the 5 year old Single Xeon 2.4, 4GB Ram IBM thing thats running it at the mo!

Butuz

[FN-GM]

32bit Enterprise is just a lie IMO, it's such a hack job. The 32bit architure addresses 4GB ram, fact. Plus you get a nice performance increase over the 32bit.

I thinl that is aload of rubbish to be hoenst. They wouldn't get away with selling the enterprise version like that if it was true.

[IanT]

Looks like a great specced server, but a little overkill imo

[matt40k]

I thinl that is aload of rubbish to be hoenst. They wouldn't get away with selling the enterprise version like that if it was true.

Why do you think everyone is moving to 64bit if 32bit could truely support more then 4GB ram?! People got enterprise because there hasn't been any good* 64bit cpu until just a few years ago.

Read:
32-bit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Then read about PAE (the work around to get more then 4GB ram):
[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension]Physical Address Extension - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]


* I use good as is loose term to describe AMD64 (not the CPU but the techology, Intel's rip of it is EM64T), which supports Virtual address space, which allows 32bit software to run on a 64bit CPU. There have been 64bit CPU before AMD64's, look up Intel Itanium (IA-64) and\or Sun UltraSPARC.

[localzuk]

Why do you think everyone is moving to 64bit if 32bit could truely support more then 4GB ram?! People got enterprise because there hasn't been any good* 64bit cpu until just a few years ago.

Read:
32-bit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Then read about PAE (the work around to get more then 4GB ram):
Physical Address Extension - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


* I use good as is loose term to describe AMD64 (not the CPU but the techology, Intel's rip of it is EM64T), which supports Virtual address space, which allows 32bit software to run on a 64bit CPU. There have been 64bit CPU before AMD64's, look up Intel Itanium (IA-64) and\or Sun UltraSPARC.

Your argument doesn't show how PAE/AWE is terrible though, or doesn't work...

[matt40k]

Your argument doesn't show how PAE/AWE is terrible though, or doesn't work...

Did I bring AWE into this? Lol

Use it as a starting point, move on Intel\AMD technical CPU architecture document, failing that, benchmark your system, then reinstall with the 64bit edition, re-benchmark. Click the little thank button.

It's hard to explain in simple terms but here goes:

In a 4GB setup and PAE, you will see a 3/1 split where three GB are accessible and one GB is used by the kernel to do the mapping. So, if you have 6GB you really have 5, since PAE needs the first GB for addressing to the higher registers. To accomplish this, you will notice a slight performance loss (around 2 to 5 percent overall) to handle it, since 64bit addressing requires a few extra operations in a 32bit CPU versus a native 64bit chip.

I wish people who just believe me!

[localzuk]

Did I bring AWE into this? Lol

By saying "32bit Enterprise is just a lie IMO, it's such a hack job. The 32bit architure addresses 4GB ram, fact. Plus you get a nice performance increase over the 32bit." yes, you did bring it into this...

Use it as a starting point, move on Intel\AMD technical CPU architecture document, failing that, benchmark your system, then reinstall with the 64bit edition, re-benchmark. Click the little thank button.

It's hard to explain in simple terms but here goes:

I wish people who just believe me!

No-one has said the system would lead to a system exactly the same performance, however, as 64bit is in an odd state of semi having 64bit support (ie. system manager, FMS etc... not being supported), 32bit with 8GB even with a little performance hit is better than 4GB memory.

I won't be moving to 64bit for SIMS.net on the server until it is 100% 64bit supported...

[matt40k]

Fair enough about AWE.

I'm saying running SQL 64bit (and the rest of the server side), not the client. You should have any users using SIMS server. If you use terminal server, it should be on a separate server, which, should be 32bit.

PS: FMS etc are 32bit applications, so they will work, however Nova is still 16bit, and you still use it to print timetables

My point is, if you have a dedicated SIMS server with more then 4GB ram (and full MSSQL), like a lot of secondary's now, you should be looking at 64bit. There isn't any cost difference, and it seems pointless paying the extra to get Enterprise with no benefit other then reduced speed.

That point again, DON'T USE 64BIT for clients (just yet anyway)

Note Capita support 64bit servers.

[Oops_my_bad]

Nice to see Capita actually having luck in obtaining Dell hardware