locked
SQL2k 32-bits installed on 64-bits W2003? RRS feed

  • Question

  • There are plans to install SQL2K EE 32-bits on a 64-bits (non-Itanium) W2003 EE server. I would think this will not increase performance of SQL2K very much. I can only think of increased performance for the OS: larger memory, faster performance sometimes.

    Would this have a possitive influence on the 32-bits SQL2K installation?

    Friday, July 25, 2008 8:06 AM

Answers

  •  

    Been ages since I have looked into SQL Server 2000 hardware specs. So it sounds like you are married to SQL Server 2000 for the time being.  Yes if you have memory issues and you want to run SQL Server 2000 64 bit, then the processors supported is Intel® Itanium™ and Itanium II processors with 64-bit CPU.

     

    I have enclosed SQL Server 2000 Hardware and Software Requirements for (64-bit)

     

    http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa274602.aspx

    Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:42 PM

All replies

  •  

    I really don't see the value proposition.   I would leverage the 64 bit version of SQL Server, therefore, it can truly leverage the RAW memory in the server without the need to use the /PAE switch or virtual memory swapping.  This is based on the assumption that there is more than 4 GB of RAM in the system to begin with.

    Other than that...I don't see the value.
    Saturday, July 26, 2008 4:49 AM
  • Tnx for answering.

    The problem is: the hardware is non-Itanium. This hardware is available, Itanium hardware needs to be bought and costs money...

    My question is: does this benefit a 64-bit SQL2K in any way? I don't think so, but would like to be sure. Are you saying, that SQL2K 64-bit could benefit from this non-Itanum hardware, or do I misunderstand you?

    Saturday, July 26, 2008 7:58 AM
  • If using 64 Bit SQL Server then yes you will see benefits provided that your system is a heavy workload, resource hungry and requires more than 4 GB of RAM. 

     

    The first main advantage 64-bit provides for SQL Server is the ability to directly deal with larger amounts of memory. The 32-bit system can directly address 4 GB of memory at the most; the only way to get to more memory than that in a 32-bit system is by using techniques like Address Windowing Extensions. Though it will allow you to use anywhere from 32 GB to 64 GB of RAM, it will cost you in performance. It's not possible to use much of this memory in a truly contiguous fashion -- it's often only useful for the sake of caching data pages, not performing actual work.

     

    A 64-bit system, on the other hand, can directly address 1,024 gigabytes of physical memory, so the amount of data SQL Server can cache, hold directly in memory and perform live operations on, is larger by whole orders of magnitude. Operations that might take a long time or would require a lot of work in temporary tables in a 32-bit system can be done in-memory and much faster on a 64-bit system, since there's a lot less paging or blocking going on.

     

    My question, why go Itanum and SQL 2000 64 Bit.  Why not SQL Server 2005 64 Bit on Windows Server 2003\2008 64bit? 

     

    If you system does note require more than 4 GB of RAM then stick with what got and put the pennies back in the wallet for something else, like a new system.

     

     

    Saturday, July 26, 2008 8:11 AM
  • The reason I ask is, the 64-bits Edition of SQL2K EE specifically mentions Itanium-based hardware as a prerequisite for taking advantage of the 64 architecture. See this article, about halfway the page you find a table indicating this:

    http://www.informit.com/guides/content.aspx?g=sqlserver&seqNum=249

     

    For SQL2005 this is not specifically mentioned. If this table is in error, and I have yet to find something which does this, I would really like to hear.

     

    On your last remarks: there is a project on the way to migrate to SQL2005, this will take at least another 6 months to finish. We have problems now, mainly memory related, and these problems occur with an ascending frequency. We are not going to put the heart of a complex system untested on a SQL2005 platform; I'm sure you can appreciate that.

     

    Tnx again

    Saturday, July 26, 2008 9:27 AM
  •  

    Been ages since I have looked into SQL Server 2000 hardware specs. So it sounds like you are married to SQL Server 2000 for the time being.  Yes if you have memory issues and you want to run SQL Server 2000 64 bit, then the processors supported is Intel® Itanium™ and Itanium II processors with 64-bit CPU.

     

    I have enclosed SQL Server 2000 Hardware and Software Requirements for (64-bit)

     

    http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa274602.aspx

    Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:42 PM
  • (The reason I ask is, the 64-bits Edition of SQL2K EE specifically mentions Itanium-based hardware as a prerequisite for taking advantage of the 64 architecture.)

     

     

    That is correct because the SQL Server 2000 64bits project was a partnership between Intel and Microsoft I was a beta tester.  And to your answer you should be able to install x86 that is 32bits SQL Server 2000 in Win2003 x64 just make sure it is SP2 and install in the WOW64 directory.  And yes you could get some memory advantage but to the whole but you have to run some tests to get the answer to that.

     

     

    Saturday, July 26, 2008 4:12 PM
  • Tnx for answering all. This was very helpfull.

     

    Sunday, July 27, 2008 5:46 AM