Currently, I have both the SQL and Archive on the same server. Would there be any significant performance gain in having each on it's own server? We are using a VM environment.
If the active user is less than 25, it is OK to use a single server to host both the Database and the Archive server.
Without knowing the specifics, if you are saying that you have the SQL Server database running on the same machine as the archive server then yes. SQL Server is a beast when it comes to system resources.
I'm not sure I 100% agree with that. (90% maybe)
SQL wants RAM and CPU. It doesn't care as much about disk speed.
Archive servers want disk speed, RAM and CPU aren't as important.
As a result, the two services can live together -to a point because they primarily use different parts of a computer.
The answer is to look at how the machine's resources are being utilized, the solution COULD be to simply add RAM or I/O....or it could be to split the two services to two different machines.
Hopefully, our new server that is being proposed will have SSD drives,that should help the archive server. It's also being specc'd with 128 GB RAM
This is one good reason to have separate machines. As Jeff points out, demands for the archive server and SQL Server server are different. Adding RAM to an archive server or SSDs to a SQL Server server is not that beneficial.
So the easiest would be to keep my archive server on the current server name, and then move the SQL to a new server name? I'm not sure how hard it will be to convert over to two servers and not mess up clients and such
I would think so if you want to separate them. In the customer portal there are knowledge-base articles on how to do this. Probably also in the Installation guide.
SQL Express is limited to 1GB of RAM so a faster machine with more RAM won't make any different here, right?
We are under the 25 active users.
So you don't need to separate the server.
But it is a good practice to put the archive folder in a different physical hard disk ( 10k / 15k Server grade hard disk ).
Will that be easy to do when we migrate to a new server? Currently, they are on the same drive
I think it is not an issue if migrate to a new server.
There's a Relocate tool built into the Archive Server Configuration that's great for moving vaults from one drive to another. RMB on the vault and you'll Relocate. I agree that having the database and archives on different logical drives is a good practice, but a small enough user base is fine on a single server.
I'm just wondering why you need 250 GB for SQL database?
The key concept is put different files into different physical drive to improve the performance.
And can you buy any hard drive smaller than 250GB nowadays ?
True ! I thought you had some reason to set it up to 250 GB
Same question for SQL Express as it's limited to 1GB of RAM and 10GB of database - is it a waste for a min. size of 250 gb?
For SQL Express, you can put all in one hard drive.
LIN SHAODUN, where did that graphic come from?
I am also very curious as to where this graphic came from. Can you please provide it, SolidWorks minimum requirement is only 8GB. Thank You.
Retrieving data ...