1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. You are viewing our forum as a guest. For full access please Register. WindowsBBS.com is completely free, paid for by advertisers and donations.

Resolved Deadicated versus Virtual Servers

Discussion in 'Windows Server System' started by Steve R Jones, 2015/07/09.

  1. 2015/07/09
    Steve R Jones

    Steve R Jones SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2001/12/30
    Messages:
    11,848
    Likes Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    843
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Computer Experience:
    Experienced
    We currently lease 7 servers through a large datacenter to host SQL and Sybase databases for our clients. (we make two different accounting softwares)

    Current we are using XEON (1) Quad Core 3.4GHz
    4 GB of ram
    150 GB SAS 15K rpm drives
    Win Server 2003 32bit

    The machines do a great job and performance is above average to very good. But, due to the 2003 version we need to upgrade.

    We can get newer machines with 8 GB of ram and a larger SAS drive for $300 a month. (server 2008 64bit)


    I just received my first quote on a Virtual Server.
    4 x 2.0 GHz Cores
    8 GB ram
    100 GB First Disk
    $165 per month

    While the half price looks nice, I can't help but think that the performance will also be about half which won't work.

    A few months ago as this process started, I visited a couple of the machines throughout the day. With 15 to 20 users hitting a machine, the cpu didn't go over 10% and there appeared to be unused ram... So maybe I have more machine than I need.

    My developers are going to install a performance monitor...but I thought I post here and get feedback. Thanks
     
  2. 2015/07/10
    TonyT

    TonyT SuperGeek Staff

    Joined:
    2002/01/18
    Messages:
    8,714
    Likes Received:
    365
    Trophy Points:
    1,093
    Location:
    Fairfax, VA
    Computer Experience:
    echo $experienced;
    15-20 users at the same time is minimal. Heck, this windowsbbs site often has way more than that at the same time. You could probably get by with a machine that has half the specs of the current one in use! On the new systems you'll likely never see the full 8 GB ram close to being fully used.

    I would go with the less expensive virtual servers, monitor them for a month or so, keep 'em or upgrade. (if need to upgrade, find out if you can upgrade to dedicated servers for an adjusted cost)
     

  3. to hide this advert.

  4. 2015/07/10
    Steve R Jones

    Steve R Jones SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2001/12/30
    Messages:
    11,848
    Likes Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    843
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Computer Experience:
    Experienced
    Thanks as always Tony.

    Arie happens to use the same DC that I've been using forever. I just looked it up and I can rent a virtual server for about 50 cents an hour which includes SQL Server. When done testing I just click the cancel button. Might have to give that a try.

    My biggest client has 90 users. 70 hit an 8 Core Term Serv and 20 have our software installed locally which in turn access the same db server that has 16 cores. Both machines have tons and tons of ram... But late in the afternoon, connecting to them is borderline painful. Their db server is also their domain controller.

    One of my smaller clients is using a beat up old Win Server 2003 machine and I dread having to connect to it due to the horrible performance.

    So finding the ol sweet spot between having real nice performance and having too much power and not needing all of it isn't a fun task.

    The good news is that we pass on the cost of these servers with a markup and are running in the black.
     
  5. 2015/07/10
    TonyT

    TonyT SuperGeek Staff

    Joined:
    2002/01/18
    Messages:
    8,714
    Likes Received:
    365
    Trophy Points:
    1,093
    Location:
    Fairfax, VA
    Computer Experience:
    echo $experienced;
    That right there answers your question!
     
  6. 2015/07/11
    Arie

    Arie Administrator Administrator Staff

    Joined:
    2001/12/27
    Messages:
    14,916
    Likes Received:
    379
    Trophy Points:
    1,093
    I'm not sure how much resources SQL server uses, as I use MySQL, but 70 users online shouldn't be a problem.

    I would go for some SSD drives over SAS though. Slap them in a RAID 0 array for best performance.
     
    Arie,
    #5
  7. 2015/07/12
    Steve R Jones

    Steve R Jones SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2001/12/30
    Messages:
    11,848
    Likes Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    843
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Computer Experience:
    Experienced
    70 users on line hitting a large high dollar accounting software slash running large reports with built in Crystal report writer is bound to use a more resources that your typical web site.

    Thanks for all the feedback.
     
  8. 2015/07/13
    Admin.

    Admin. Administrator Administrator Staff

    Joined:
    2001/12/30
    Messages:
    6,570
    Likes Received:
    82
    Trophy Points:
    743
    Location:
    Birkirkara, Malta
    Computer Experience:
    ***
    That's why I suggest SSD drives. You will benefit from the added write speed.
     

Share This Page