When to use IDS instead of SE
I'm trying to get a handle on when one should consider finding the cash to switch from SE to IDS. Number of users? Amount of data? Customer in question has a performance problem at the moment but I believe it could probably be resolved within SE - it's a disk bottleneck or so they tell me and I've no reason at the moment to doubt them. Of course IDS should be more robust etc. which is an additional argument in favour of it. But it costs more and is harder & more work to monitor etc. which is against it! All thought welcome. -- Surfer!
Hi! There are people in this newsgroup running hundreds of users on SE, if you throw enough hardware at it. I switched when we discovered, that deletes from a large table (500,000 rows and 5 indexes) took way too long. IDS was much faster. Post more info about the size of the database and hardware. HTH Michael "Surfer!" wrote: > I'm trying to get a handle on when one should consider finding the cash > to switch from SE to IDS. Number of users? Amount of data? > > Customer in question has a performance problem at the moment but I > believe it could probably be resolved within SE - it's a disk bottleneck > or so they tell me and I've no reason at the moment to doubt them. > > Of course IDS should be more robust etc. which is an additional argument > in favour of it. But it costs more and is harder & more work to monitor > etc. which is against it! > > All thought welcome. > > -- > Surfer!
In article <38BF31D0.E3BF92EB@sqlcanada.com>, Michael Krzepkowski <michaelk@sqlcanada.com> writes >Hi! > >There are people in this newsgroup running hundreds of users on SE, if >you throw enough hardware at it. I switched when we discovered, that >deletes from a large table (500,000 rows and 5 indexes) took way too long. >IDS was much faster. Post more info about the size of the database and >hardware. I tried to avoid doing so as I didn't want to prejudice the answers! However you have been helpful - to be able to tell them that there are people running lots more users (400+?) with SE will set their minds at rest on that score. Of course if they want 24x7 running they will have to switch to Online so they can archive whilst people are using the db. Hardware is HP, and they *think* they can't have strips AND mirrors at the same time. IMHO they need a strip to fix their bottleneck! > >HTH > >Michael > > >"Surfer!" wrote: > >> I'm trying to get a handle on when one should consider finding the cash >> to switch from SE to IDS. Number of users? Amount of data? >> >> Customer in question has a performance problem at the moment but I >> believe it could probably be resolved within SE - it's a disk bottleneck >> or so they tell me and I've no reason at the moment to doubt them. >> >> Of course IDS should be more robust etc. which is an additional argument >> in favour of it. But it costs more and is harder & more work to monitor >> etc. which is against it! >> >> All thought welcome. >> >> -- >> Surfer! > -- Surfer!