Question!

We are in the process of planning a implementation of SMS server, Project
server and SharePoint Portal Server. Can one SQL Server 2000 SP3a handle the
database requirements and traffic for these applications? We have
approximately 400 users and operate on a WAN. I would appreciate any real
world input. Thanks!Yes. SQL can easily handle thousands.
"Stacy Springer" <Stacy Springer@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F7B4E072-D97C-4D88-B1FF-082190559FD7@.microsoft.com...
> We are in the process of planning a implementation of SMS server, Project
> server and SharePoint Portal Server. Can one SQL Server 2000 SP3a handle
the
> database requirements and traffic for these applications? We have
> approximately 400 users and operate on a WAN. I would appreciate any real
> world input. Thanks!

Question!

We are in the process of planning a implementation of SMS server, Project
server and SharePoint Portal Server. Can one SQL Server 2000 SP3a handle th
e
database requirements and traffic for these applications? We have
approximately 400 users and operate on a WAN. I would appreciate any real
world input. Thanks!Yes. SQL can easily handle thousands.
"Stacy Springer" <Stacy Springer@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F7B4E072-D97C-4D88-B1FF-082190559FD7@.microsoft.com...
> We are in the process of planning a implementation of SMS server, Project
> server and SharePoint Portal Server. Can one SQL Server 2000 SP3a handle
the
> database requirements and traffic for these applications? We have
> approximately 400 users and operate on a WAN. I would appreciate any real
> world input. Thanks!

Question!

We are in the process of planning a implementation of SMS server, Project
server and SharePoint Portal Server. Can one SQL Server 2000 SP3a handle the
database requirements and traffic for these applications? We have
approximately 400 users and operate on a WAN. I would appreciate any real
world input. Thanks!
Yes. SQL can easily handle thousands.
"Stacy Springer" <Stacy Springer@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F7B4E072-D97C-4D88-B1FF-082190559FD7@.microsoft.com...
> We are in the process of planning a implementation of SMS server, Project
> server and SharePoint Portal Server. Can one SQL Server 2000 SP3a handle
the
> database requirements and traffic for these applications? We have
> approximately 400 users and operate on a WAN. I would appreciate any real
> world input. Thanks!

Question on SQL Server 2000 - 2005

I am a DB2 DBA that has been asked to become familiar enough with SQL
Server in order to become actively involved in its installation,
implementation, and to review database backup/recovery procedures. SQL
Server will be used by a vendor packaged application.

The problem is that we are awaiting word on whether it will be SQL
Server 2000 or 2005 we will be working with. I have been told that
there are considerable differences between the two versions.

There is an upcoming local 5 day class on Administering SQL Server 2000
that I would like to take. (outline below)

Question is, are the differences between the two versions so drastic as
to render this class less than useful, especially in terms of
installation and basic db maintenance functions?

Many thanks in advance.
Gerry

Course Outline: 2072 Administering a Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Database

Lesson 1: SQL Server Overview

What Is SQL Server
SQL Server Integration
SQL Server Databases
SQL Server Security
Working with SQL Server

Top

Lesson 2: Planning to Install SQL Server

Hardware Installation Considerations
SQL Server 2000 Editions
Software Installation Considerations
Methods of Installing SQL Server
Verifying the Installation
Configuring SQL Server Enterprise Manager
Troubleshooting

Lesson 3: Managing Database Files

Introduction to Data Structures
Creating Databases
Managing Databases
Placing Database Files and Logs
Optimizing the Database Using Hardware-based RAID
Optimizing the Database Using Filegroups
Optimizing the Database Using Filegroups with Hardware-based
RAID
Capacity Planning
Performance Considerations

Lesson 4: Managing Security

Implementing an Authentication Mode
Assigning Logins to Users and Roles
Assigning Permissions to Users and Roles
Managing Security Within SQL Server
Managing Application Security
Managing SQL Server Security in the Enterprise

Lesson 5: Performing Administrative Tasks

Configuration Tasks
Routine SQL Server Administrative Tasks
Automating Routine Maintenance Tasks
Creating Alerts
Troubleshooting SQL Server Automation
Automating Multiserver Jobs

Top

Lesson 6: Backing Up Databases

Preventing Data Loss
Setting and Changing a Database Recovery Model
SQL Server Backup
When to Back Up Databases
Performing Backups
Types of Backup Methods
Planning a Backup Strategy
Performance Considerations

Lesson 7: Restoring Databases

SQL Server Recovery Process
Preparing to Restore a Database
Restoring Backups
Restoring Databases from Different Backup Types
Restoring Damaged System Databases

Lesson 8: Monitoring SQL Server for Performance

Why to Monitor SQL Server
Performance Monitoring and Tuning
Tools for Monitoring SQL Server
Common Monitoring and Tuning Tasks

Lesson 9: Transferring Data

Introduction to Transferring Data
Tools for Importing and Exporting Data in SQL Server
Introduction to DTS
Transforming Data with DTS

Top

Lesson 10: Maintaining High Availability

Introduction to Availability
Increasing Availability Using Failover Clustering
Standby Servers and Log Shipping

Lesson 11: Introducing Replication

Introduction to Distributed Data
Introduction to SQL Server Replication
SQL Server Replication Agents
SQL Server Replication Types
Physical Replication ModelsIn my humble opinion you better get training on SQL 2005. But knowledge
of SQL 2000 will add on to SQL 2005|||(datapro01@.yahoo.com) writes:
> Question is, are the differences between the two versions so drastic as
> to render this class less than useful, especially in terms of
> installation and basic db maintenance functions?

Everything that works in SQL 2000 works in SQL 2005, at least almost. But
SQL 2005 may offer new and better ways that what you learn on the SQL 2000
class.

The one area where the SQL 2000 class may be more confusing than helpful
if you settle on SQL 2005, is installation. The setup program is different,
there are different configuration issues etc.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodin...ions/books.mspx|||Thanks for the replies and the info. New Horizons is telling me that
the training materials for 2005 have not yet been released. At least to
them.

I will certainly do my best to understand the installation differences
between the versions.

Question on initial aggregation design

Hi, all experts here,

I have questions for the initial aggregation design and these questions are really important as part of the implementation of the cubes.

1. Before we launch the aggregation design wizard, we create user-hierarchies, after we process the cube, these user-hierarchies are then as the first initial aggregations? How can we evaluate the benefits and cost of these aggregations based on user-hierachies?

2. When we create initial aggregations with 'Aggregation design wizard', setting up the value for 'performance increase', how this fits into (work together with user_hierarchies?). Say, we set up the value for 'performance increase' as 30%, the initial user-hierarchies aggregations may not meet this goal, in this case, how the system works to meet this goal? Will it create other aggregations together with the user-hierarchies based aggregations? And where can we see these information? And how can we evaluate the aggregations after its design?

Thanks a lot and I think they are very very necessary for me to get these information and I think they are very very helpful. And I am looking forward to hearing from you shortly.

With best regards,

Yours sincerely,

Hi,

I am not to sure if I get the what you are asking, but the idea of aggregations is to help performance when querying the cube. So you should be able to test the benefits of any aggregation in the time it takes to retrieve the data. You are going to have to clear the cache as well when doing this, as the cache will probably play an adverse effect on your results if you don't.

If the performance is not met with the wizard i would suggest using the aggregation design tool and create your own that help specific queries you have. One aggregation may help improve one query but not others, and the wizard may not always get it right. It is a matter of trial and error, I would suggest using the profiler and see whether the queries you are running actually hit the aggregation or the partition. You can normally tell from the profiler where to start with the aggregations or even the queries themselves.

Hope that was some help, may have missed what you were asking

Cheers

Matt

|||

Hi, Matt,

Thanks a lot for the very helpful advices.

With best regards,

Yours sincerely,