-1

I have an OLD HP proliant ML350 used as HYBERv Host (win server 2012 - 16 GB RAM , 3x146 GB SAS , one processor).

i have a VM (win-server 2003 32bit + sql server 2000) , every thing is working fine with no complains from the users.

I decided to purchase a new Hybherv HOST , so i bought DELL poweredge R720 (2xE5620 , 4X600 GB SAS , 4*2TB SATA , RAID H710P , 64 GB RAM , Broadcom 5720 ) with win server 2012 R2

the specs seems very high and the expected performance is for sure is very high

i just moved the VM from the old host to the new host , users stated that the databases are very very slow

i switched back to the old host and everything is working fine

so I am wondering where is the problem.

Anan Zitawi
  • 3
  • 1
  • 3
  • Is your database located on the SATA or SAS disks? That could potentially give you a significant performance hit. Have you checked performance metrics for your SQL server and/or operating system? See if you can find anything abnormal. E.g. high disk I/O or SQL queries that are taking too long to execute. – blacklight Jan 14 '14 at 04:20
  • Thank you for your reply sir for sure the VMs & databases are on SAS HDDs , SATA HHDs only for backup & utility. also the slow of performance not only in the queries , it is very slow when your moving between records. – Anan Zitawi Jan 14 '14 at 04:23
  • 1
    Well, lets start with SAS being dead slow for databases and people moving to SSD because of the better price anyway - what about you actually sit down and do what was asked for, i.e. some measurements? We won't be able to help someone who does not even know how to check how fast his discs are. – TomTom Jan 14 '14 at 07:37

1 Answers1

1

the specs seems very high and the expected performance is for sure is very high

Which specs? The likely SIGNIFICANTLY slower hard discs?

users stated that the databases are very very slow

How did you configure the storage? Old and new, volume by volume comparison please. And full drive specs. And the result of an IO test. I wuold day something there was done bad. Like extremely bad. I seriously fail to see any of those servers as something to run a real database on (i.e. one that has signficiant activity).

I would start doing baseline admin testing - CPU utilization, disc utilization and comparing rad volume IOPS capacity (as measured by a testing tool). THe stuff yhou should have presented in the question. I strongly assume there is a serious issue with the IO side - database live and die by the IO budgets they have.

TomTom
  • 51,649
  • 7
  • 54
  • 136
  • Dear the new HDDs Specs as follows : part number is ST3600057SS , speed is 15k , interface is SAS 6Gb/s , size is 600GB. the old HDDs were 10k speed , SAS 3Gb/s , 146GB Size so i assume the new should be better. the old storage was raid 1 , the new is raid 5 – Anan Zitawi Jan 14 '14 at 07:06
  • WHich part of measurements did you not understand? Sit down, run a performance measurement software and get hard numbers, not "I think". – TomTom Jan 14 '14 at 07:38