none
記憶體大小配置問題 與 raid的選擇 RRS feed

  • 問題

  • 以下是小弟的問題:
    單就效能面來看,當然是記憶體越大效能越好(或到記憶體能提升的最大限度),
    最近聽到朋友上專業課時,講師說至少記憶體要是備份檔的一半才夠用???
    但我自己是依照測試環境時,觀察一下訊息(如下)
    SQL Server: Buffer Manager: Buffer Cache Hit Ratio
    SQL Server: Buffer Manager: Database Pages
    SQL Server: Memory Manager: Total Server Memory (KB)
    Memory: Available Bytes
    Memory: Pages/sec....
    來決定記憶體夠不夠用處理日常交易與事務.

    況且一般來說Database總是會不斷的增大,那麼也要不斷加大記憶體??

    我想知道記憶體至少要一半的備份檔大小原因何在??

    另外請問一下, 一般SQL Server在效能 > 備份的考量,  會選擇raid01  raid10  還是 raid5?
    (我印象是 01 > 10 > 5,  但也有人說5才是最高CP效益的)

    感謝各位大大.

    2015年5月28日 上午 03:11

解答

  • Not sure where this memory and back files relationship came from. We have a 25tb db and compressed backup file is over 2tb, total backup files of all dbs on that server is about 4tb. We have to get server with at least 2tb memory? Don't make sense. Regarding storage, we never use raid1 for sql server. Based on our experience, raid10 is better for write process and raid5 is better for read process in general. But you should do some baseline testing for your environment. 
    2015年5月28日 上午 03:42

所有回覆

  • Not sure where this memory and back files relationship came from. We have a 25tb db and compressed backup file is over 2tb, total backup files of all dbs on that server is about 4tb. We have to get server with at least 2tb memory? Don't make sense. Regarding storage, we never use raid1 for sql server. Based on our experience, raid10 is better for write process and raid5 is better for read process in general. But you should do some baseline testing for your environment. 
    2015年5月28日 上午 03:42
  • 感謝,rmiao 版大的解惑
    2015年5月28日 上午 05:49