Wednesday, March 28, 2012

load balancing & sql ?

can you use load balancing with a server running SQL server 2000 standard
edition ?
i.e is traffic balanced correctly ?
(sorry if its a silly question - i just need to be sure).
ScottIn the context of SQL Server, the question just doesn't make sense.
What are you 'load balancing'?
Load balancing is normally intended to direct traffic to one of multiple
servers -typically web servers. I would think that having a database in
multiple servers would create problems with data consistency, etc.
Perhaps if you told us a little more about what you are attempting to
accomplish, we can help direct you to the correct information.
--
Arnie Rowland
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"scott" <aintnowspamhere@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ePoYZryrGHA.4884@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> can you use load balancing with a server running SQL server 2000 standard
> edition ?
> i.e is traffic balanced correctly ?
> (sorry if its a silly question - i just need to be sure).
> Scott
>|||thanks for reply.
I should have explained more sorry. I simply meant in the context of two
gigabit network cards in a server running sbs 2003 and sql standard edition
for 30 users.
Scott|||This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--050204090900090208000009
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
scott wrote:
> thanks for reply.
> I should have explained more sorry. I simply meant in the context of two
> gigabit network cards in a server running sbs 2003 and sql standard edition
> for 30 users.
> Scott
>
>
There shouldn't be any problems in having 2 network cards in the server,
but I doubt it will make any difference. In terms of load and
performance, it's in my opinion never the network cards that causes any
bottleneck. It's your disk system and your CPU/Memory that affects
performance.
Regards
Steen Schlüter Persson
Databaseadministrator / Systemadministrator
--050204090900090208000009
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
scott wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid%23N1GXG8rGHA.4004@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">thanks for reply.
I should have explained more sorry. I simply meant in the context of two
gigabit network cards in a server running sbs 2003 and sql standard edition
for 30 users.
Scott
</pre>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1"><font face="Arial">There shouldn't be any problems in
having 2 network cards in the server, but I doubt it will make any
difference. In terms of load and performance, it's in my opinion never
the network cards that causes any bottleneck. It's your disk system and
your CPU/Memory that affects performance. <br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Regards<br>
Steen Schlüter Persson<br>
Databaseadministrator / Systemadministrator<br>
</font></font>
</body>
</html>
--050204090900090208000009--|||...and bad SQL(locking/blocking) :-)
"Steen Persson (DK)" wrote:
> scott wrote:
> > thanks for reply.
> >
> > I should have explained more sorry. I simply meant in the context of two
> > gigabit network cards in a server running sbs 2003 and sql standard edition
> > for 30 users.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
> >
> There shouldn't be any problems in having 2 network cards in the server,
> but I doubt it will make any difference. In terms of load and
> performance, it's in my opinion never the network cards that causes any
> bottleneck. It's your disk system and your CPU/Memory that affects
> performance.
>
> --
> Regards
> Steen Schlüter Persson
> Databaseadministrator / Systemadministrator
>|||I can't imagine that you have a server for 30 users where a single GB NIC
will be 'overloaded', so the second one is mostly providing a 'safety net'.
--
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"scott" <aintnowspamhere@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%23N1GXG8rGHA.4004@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> thanks for reply.
> I should have explained more sorry. I simply meant in the context of two
> gigabit network cards in a server running sbs 2003 and sql standard
> edition for 30 users.
> Scott
>|||excellent thanks for the replies
Scott

No comments:

Post a Comment