Ms Sql 2005

[shaithis]

Management rarely actually know what they need. Why do you need to be able to do a point in time restore of the Onepoint Database ?

Because "thats what they want"

Those of us that do the work, don't get a huge say in the way its done unfortunately..........and if you decide to take any "initiative" you have to be 101% sure of yourself or it can come back to bite you.

Hence, its not worth the effort to make a song and dance about it......I'd rather just push for more SAN storage instead whilst advising that performance could be better.

I've learnt the hard way to play it safe.....something I hate about large companies

[Moby-Dick]

But you don't run the reporting DB the same way ? ( as the daily DTS job that runs gets very transactiony )

I guess it depends on how you use your initiative - it shouldn't be hard to get in trouble if you follow your change management guidelines.

I also assume that the 200gb isn't the Onepoint Db ? It shouldn't be larger than 30gb.


nb. I work for really quite a big company so I know how you feel about large firm politics at times.

[TiG]

But you don't run the reporting DB the same way ? ( as the daily DTS job that runs gets very transactiony )

I guess it depends on how you use your initiative - it shouldn't be hard to get in trouble if you follow your change management guidelines.

I also assume that the 200gb isn't the Onepoint Db ? It shouldn't be larger than 30gb.


nb. I work for really quite a big company so I know how you feel about large firm politics at times.

Speaking from recent experience, Management can be totally unqualified, have no idea of what change management is, how things can be done the right way and still lose the plot.

They are management after all, changing them is the fight we all have to play sadly.

TiG

[Lucio]

Just to caveat....Tuning your database can make performance go up and down. "DYOR" - Do your own research.

TiG

Aye, we're in testing at the moment so this is a perfect time for me to try and experiment with this stuff, I'm definately not getting anywhere with the vendor support because of the bad situation we're in (ordered 6 months ago, original install went tits up, so we didn't pay the completition fee). As far as they're concerned, as soon as we have a system that works kinda, they'll want their money and I bet they'll be putting a LOT less man hours our way.

Thus far, I've had to learn their system, figure out why the hell it wouldn't install (they didn't add it to the domain properly), figure out why no other computer couldn't connect to the server (they didn't turn on any connection protocol) and so on. Given my knowledge of SQL comes from maintaining a MySQL web based application, I think I've done damned well in the circumstances. Thus far, I worked out if I billed them at their hourly rates, it'd come to about £6,500



Thanks for the link Moby, I'll see how much I can figure out, it's all good practice for if I can ever get a start in IT for real...

[stytagm]

Still, on the plus side, I found why the query wasn't working at all! The date/time setting seems to have been Americanised and therefore wanted 12/13/2007 to be put in DESPITE the table showing UK dates...

Can't you get a teeny snifter of a performance increase by supplying the date in the "SQL server happy format"

SELECT * FROM itran WHERE it_date = '2007-12-13 00:00:00.000'

I assume that you're really naming all your columns (rather than select *) as that also slows things down.

Lastly, I've never been quite as cautious as some people here when it comes to indexes (mind you, I'm a developer not a DBA, and I've always had a DBA looking over my shoulder to stop me being an idiot). So if you haven't got any (or many) indexes already, and that column is highly variable (it's a date it should be) and its used in a lot of where clauses, (what other queries run against this table, and what where clauses do they use) then I'd say that it was a prime candidate for an index and a no brainer.

*"SQL server happy format" may not be the correct technical term

[TiG]

SQL Server happy format is now added to the TiG SQL dictionary

May not be right but it put a smile on my face hehe.

TiG

[Lucio]

Wow, this application is pure genius! I found the option to change things to British English, and after setting it, the query worked fine. However when I tried to do anything in the application it returned a "Date is out of range" error

Still, working through the profiler option Moby-Dick pointed me at has at least shown up the the *main* delays are client side rather than server side, though some of the requests come back as malformed due to the table name (not 100% sure why as they're the right table name)

At least now I can go to my boss on Monday and ask we get our Celeron 2Ghz systems replaced at long last!

[TheAnimus]

if your writing queries, please for the love of god always do 14-dec-07. That way everyones happy.

Your server has two drives, do you have the transaction log on a different drive to the data? (drive, physical drive, not partition).

Also if an insert is taking that long have a look at your clustered index, but also page fragmentation. google should be able to find some howto's.

Also get some of the bibles on 2k5, Amazon.co.uk: low prices in Electronics, Books, Music, DVDs & more reviews should help (mine are more developer rather than dba so won't recomend em).

[d3fiant]

wait till u move from MOM to SCOM, bloody headache that thing is giving me at the moment

[Moby-Dick]

I can hardly wait our MOM team give me enough grief as it is !