Yes. Every storage platform no matter what vendor makes it needs to be correctly aligned. If the disks aren’t correctly aligned then you are doing twice as much work for every read and write operation than you need to be doing.
Fortunately new volumes created on a Windows 2008 or higher server (or Vista or higher client OS) will be correctly aligned. They will be aligned at the 1024kb mark instead of the 64kb mark, but as long as the place they are aligned to is evenly divisible by 64k then it’ll be fine.
OK, now that I have your attention pretty much nothing has changed in Denali’s Master Data Services. The install procedure is a bit different now but that is about it. To install the Denali version of MDS just run through the normal SQL Server installer. When you get to the service list page scroll to the bottom to find “Master Data Services” listed down there. Check it and move through the installer. After installation open
/* Style Definitions */
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
Start > Program Files > Microsoft SQL Server Denali CTP 1 > Master Data Services > Configuration Manager. This will allow you to configure the database and website to configure MDS, which looks identical to the SQL Server 2008 R2 Configuration Manager. The website to configure MDS is also identical to the SQL Server 2008 R2 website as well.
When it comes to loading and processing data within MDS, nothing has changed.
In other words, good luck with the damn thing.
Will separation of data file and log file of SQL sever help if all are on the SAN? From performance perspective not management.
Most likely yes, but it really depends on the storage array and the storage array configuration. If the array is a shared everything array like an IBM XIV then their may not be any benefit to breaking everything onto separate disks as each LUN is spread over every spindle in the device. However if you are using an EMC array where you manually configure which LUNs are created on which disks then it will definitely matter.
One thing to remember which I can’t stress enough if that if you are writing directly to disk in a SAN environment then there is probably something wrong, as the array has a ton of cache which would be accepting all the writes, which are then destaged to the disk later on.
Now even when using a system like an IBM XIV array having multiple LUNs can give you some benefits as Windows will now have multiple disks queues and multiple paths over which to send the data.
Basically like everything else, you’ll need to test what works best in your environment, and test the other options occasionally to ensure that what you are using is still the best configuration later on.
If you wanted to go to my pre-con at the SQL PASS Summit, but you couldn’t make it, or you couldn’t get the boss to approve the $400 price tag that PASS was charging do I have a deal for you. I’ll be presenting the same pre-con (hopefully better after integrating feedback from the PASS summit) as a pre-con at the Tampa, FL SQL Saturday. The cost for the pre-con is $99 (plus a $3.46 processing fee for Event Bright). Talk about a hell of a deal, a $400 session for just $99. The full abstract for the session is shown here.
This session will be a two part session in which we will be focusing on two of the biggest topics in the DBA field. How to properly design your SAN storage solution and how to properly design your virtualization solution.
The storage portion of this session will focus on SAN storage, but most of the material will apply to direct attached storage as well.
In the first half of the session we’ll be focusing on the storage array. Storage can be one of the biggest bottlenecks when it comes to database performance. It’s also one of the hardest places to troubleshoot performance issues because storage engineers and database administrators often do not speak the same language. In this session, we’ll be looking at storage from both the database and storage perspectives. We’ll be digging into LUNs, HBAs, the fabric, as well as the storage configuration.
After going over the components we’ll dig into some advanced storage configurations. This includes RAID groups, multi-pathing software, and proper redundant storage network design. We will also be digging into some advanced storage array backup techniques including taking storage level clones and snapshots. After going over these advanced techniques we will dig into how these can best be used to backup the SQL Server environment to provide maximum redundancy with no recurring tape costs.
In the second half of the day we’ll be looking into the pros and cons of moving SQL Servers into a virtual server environment. Specifically we’ll be looking into when it’s a good idea and when it’s probably not a good idea. Like everything in the database world there are no hard set answers as to if virtualization is a good idea or not, but there are some times when virtualizing a SQL Server is a good idea, and can save you some money. There are some other times when you will be shooting yourself in the foot and virtualization isn’t a good idea. We’ll be focusing on when how to make this decision, and how to gather the metrics that you need in order to come to this decision.
We’ll look into how tie the virtual platforms to the storage array so that you can maximize the storage performance for your SQL Servers and the virtual environment.
You can sign up for the normal SQL Saturday event (I’ve got several slide decks submitted including one brand new one) at the SQL Saturday webpage. The pre-con has a separate sign up page as there is the fee that has to be paid. There are only 45 seats available for the pre-con (as well as another 45 seats in the BI pre-con which Stacia Misner is presenting). I haven’t been told that I can’t being goodies to give away, so I’ll see what sort of goodies I can get my hands on between now and then.
Hopefully I’ll see you on Friday at the pre-con session, but if not I’ll hopefully see you on Saturday at the SQL Saturday event.
What are the best counters or KPIs to identify what dirves woudl benefit from EFD’s and can be used to reflect before and after performance metrics?
EFDs (Enterprise Flash Disks) or SSDs (Solid State Disks) are all the rage today for systems which have very high IO load requirements. But knowing if your disks would benefit from this technology can be a bit of a problem if you don’t know where to look. After all these disks are not cheap.
Some perfmon settings that you’ll want to look at include the seconds per operation, operations per second, disk queue. Now if you are in a SAN environment you will also want to look at the metrics which the array presents to confirm that the problem is actually on the array side and not just a problem of the server.
However if the server has its own disks on the storage array, and the array numbers match what the server is seeing then it may be time to look at EFDs or SSDs for your disk solution.
What should be done for a Transaction log drive (array) to make sure the log records are ON the disk, even if the power fails?
This is a great question that I got a while back during a web cast that I did during the 24 Hours of PASS. Most storage arrays, at least the better quality ones, have a battery within them which will keep a portion of the array online in the event of a power outage. While the array won’t be available for use, this will give the array enough time to safely take its write cache from memory and write it down to the disk, then gracefully shutdown.
In the case of the transaction log, every write into the log is put down to disk immediately, and then written into the database file. SQL tells Windows to do the write, and Windows tells the disk to do the write. When the write is written to the write cache the disk tells Windows that the write has been completed, and Windows passes that information to SQL which tells SQL that the write to the log is done, and that it can now write to the database files as well. If the power fails in the middle of this, after the transaction has been committed to the log, but before it has been committed to the database the data still has been written to the disk. When the array sees that the power has gone out it’ll write the write cache to the disk, then power down.
When the power comes back up the array will load up the write cache back into memory, and flush the write cache down to where it needs to be written (in the similar way that SQL does a roll forward when it restarts). Once the writes have been completed the array will allow the hosts (the servers) to see the LUNs and the SQL Server can then fire up and do its normal roll back and roll forward of the data within the transaction log.
Hopefully this helps fix some confusion.
P.S. Yes I am well aware that I have greatly over simplified the process of how SQL writes to the log and the database, but that isn’t the point of the article. I’m sure that Paul has some great articles on the internals of how this works over on his blog.
Given that LiveMotion, etc give you high availability in the event of a server failure, why would you put a SQL cluster on VMs?
This question comes up every once and a while when designing a virtualization solution for someone. When building a virtualization solution (either Hyper-V or VMware) you get some great free HA solutions included when you build a cluster so why would you want to go through the pain of creating a Windows cluster under an already clustered solution?
Creating a Windows cluster under the hypervisor gives you some additional protection. If you only have the host HA solution while you can live migration or vMotion from one host to another easily you aren’t protected from a guest OS failure or from a host failure (sort of). If the host fails, yes the platform will restart the VM on another host pretty quickly, but pretty quickly may not be good enough for you. You may need it to restart within seconds of a host failure.
What happens on patch Tuesday when all the security patches are rolled out? The Windows OS within the guest still needs to be rebooted after the patching and the HA solutions of the host won’t do anything for you here.
However if you need to ensure that very high up time of a SQL Server database (or any other cluster-able service) then building a Windows Cluster under the hypervisor of choice is a viable solution for you to use. Just make sure that you use the rules engine of the host to ensure that both nodes of the cluster are never running on the same host server, because if they are then the whole point of the cluster will be lost in the event of a host failure.
P.S. This post and the next bunch of posts are all questions and answers which I have received from online sessions at either SQL PASS Virtual Chapters or the 24 Hours of PASS virtual event.
Every once and a while I run across someone who thinks that the way to correctly restart the SQL Server service is to use the SQL Server Configuration Manager. That’s just not the case. You can restart the services from SSMS (if your account has rights), or from the service applet in Administrative Tools, or Computer Management, or the NET STOP command shell command, or the sc command shell command, or power shell.
These all have the same effect, to tell the Windows API to issue a stop command to the service which the service takes and uses to shutdown. None of them are the correct way, as they all do the same thing.
I am happy to report that on Monday I’ll be starting my new job with Phreesia who are based in New York, NY. I’ll be working from home pretty much full time with occasional trips to the office. When I get a chance I’ll post more info about my new job and company.
This week was the 2010 SQL PASS summit in Seattle. I would have to say that this was the best PASS summit that I have attended (this was my fourth). There were more exhibitors that ever before, there were more attendees than we’ve had in a very long time, and I think that lots more people had a great time.
For the first time I was able to deliver a pre-con session on the day before the first regular conference day. For those that haven’t gone to a pre-con they are typically full day sessions (8:30-4:30) and come with an extra cost to the attendee, $400 per person in this case. My pre-con was a great success as far as I could tell. There were lots of questions (which means that people were listening and wanted deeper information than I had in the slide deck) and we had some great discussions during the session. Another great thing was that the room was pretty full with 82 attendees being the final count. Continued »