Running SQL Server 2005 EE on Dual-Core CPU

Hello!
We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
16 GB RAM
4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
Intel or AMD?
Thank you in advance,
Igor
Hi
We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
happy with the performance.
Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
Regards--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>
|||I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
worth waiting for or not.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>
|||Mike,
Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005 on
our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL 2005/Dual
core CPU is stable enough configuration.
Igor
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:u$js9ES$FHA.3804@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
> happy with the performance.
> Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
> Regards--
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/ Dual
core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
Igor
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
>core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
>units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
>worth waiting for or not.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
|||"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ekH$VRb$FHA.328@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005
> on our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL
> 2005/Dual core CPU is stable enough configuration.
>
IMO Multi-Core x64 with 2 or 4 sockets is the basic hardware platform for
SQL Server 2005.
Talk to Dell or HP. The Dell PowerEdge 6850 and the HP DL580 or DL585 meet
your specs, and either one of them can help put your mind at ease about
running 64-bit Windows and 64-bit SQL Server 2005 in production.
David
|||I have seen both with no problems on either that I know of.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23xldESb$FHA.1288@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/
> Dual core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
>
> Igor
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>

Running SQL Server 2005 EE on Dual-Core CPU

Hello!
We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
16 GB RAM
4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
Intel or AMD?
Thank you in advance,
IgorHi
We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
happy with the performance.
Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
Regards--
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>|||I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
worth waiting for or not.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>|||Mike,
Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005 on
our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL 2005/Dual
core CPU is stable enough configuration.
Igor
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:u$js9ES$FHA.3804@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
> happy with the performance.
> Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
> Regards--
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Hello!
>> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
>> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
>> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
>> 16 GB RAM
>> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
>> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
>> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to
>> with Intel or AMD?
>> Thank you in advance,
>> Igor
>|||Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/ Dual
core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
Igor
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
>core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
>units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
>worth waiting for or not.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Hello!
>> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
>> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
>> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
>> 16 GB RAM
>> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
>> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
>> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to
>> with Intel or AMD?
>> Thank you in advance,
>> Igor
>|||"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ekH$VRb$FHA.328@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005
> on our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL
> 2005/Dual core CPU is stable enough configuration.
>
IMO Multi-Core x64 with 2 or 4 sockets is the basic hardware platform for
SQL Server 2005.
Talk to Dell or HP. The Dell PowerEdge 6850 and the HP DL580 or DL585 meet
your specs, and either one of them can help put your mind at ease about
running 64-bit Windows and 64-bit SQL Server 2005 in production.
David|||I have seen both with no problems on either that I know of.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23xldESb$FHA.1288@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/
> Dual core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
>
> Igor
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
>>core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
>>units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
>>worth waiting for or not.
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>>
>> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Hello!
>> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
>> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
>> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
>> 16 GB RAM
>> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
>> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
>> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to
>> with Intel or AMD?
>> Thank you in advance,
>> Igor
>>
>

Running SQL Server 2005 EE on Dual-Core CPU

Hello!
We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
16 GB RAM
4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
Intel or AMD?
Thank you in advance,
IgorHi
We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
happy with the performance.
Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
Regards--
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>|||I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
worth waiting for or not.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>|||Mike,
Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005 on
our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL 2005/Dual
core CPU is stable enough configuration.
Igor
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:u$js9ES$FHA.3804@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
> happy with the performance.
> Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
> Regards--
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>|||Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/ Dual
core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
Igor
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
>core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
>units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
>worth waiting for or not.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>|||"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ekH$VRb$FHA.328@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005
> on our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL
> 2005/Dual core CPU is stable enough configuration.
>
IMO Multi-Core x64 with 2 or 4 sockets is the basic hardware platform for
SQL Server 2005.
Talk to Dell or HP. The Dell PowerEdge 6850 and the HP DL580 or DL585 meet
your specs, and either one of them can help put your mind at ease about
running 64-bit Windows and 64-bit SQL Server 2005 in production.
David|||I have seen both with no problems on either that I know of.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23xldESb$FHA.1288@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/
> Dual core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
>
> Igor
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>

Running SQL query in HUGE database

hi All, I am currently dealing with a number of tables each with over 40,000 records. I have these tables in Access and i'm planning to do some SQL query on them.

The problem is that due to then large table size, the query is running extremely slow and I'm not sure if using Access SQL is the most viable option.

I have something like:
there are three tables, T1 , T2 and T3.

T1: T2 T3

ID Value ID Value ID Value
1 100 2 5 3 1
2 200 3 5 4 1
3 300 4 5
4 400

My job is to add up all the corresponding values in the three tables and come out with something like this :

Results
ID Value
1 100
2 205
3 306
4 406

So you see the three tables have different number of records and If a record in T1 is not found in T2 or T3, I still want to keep the original value in T1. And for each table there are some 10,000 records!!!

Any advice on how to go about doing this? Some other alternatives I cuold think of is to copy the three tables to Excel and use formula, but in reality I have large number of such files so doing it manually is very time consuming.

Thanks!Your query would be:

select id, sum(value)
from
( select id, value from t1
union all
select id, value from t2
union all
select id, value from t3
)
group by id
order by id;

Whether this is too much data for Access to handle, I don't know. It is certainly a pretty small amount of data for a DBMS such as SQL Server or Oracle.|||thanks I just tried it and it works very well.

however I forgot to add a point that T2 and T3 might contain records that do not exist in T1 (say Id=5)
but I ONLY want records that exist in T1.

What should I do?
Thanks!|||In that case, perhaps an outer join is more appropriate?

select t1.id, t1.value+coalesce(t2.value,0)+coalesce(t3.value,0)
from t1
left outer join t2 on t2.id = t1.id
left outer join t3 on t3.id = t1.id;