Home Forums Discussions General Discussion SQL Express vs workgroup vs Standard

New IT guy, who seems very familiar with AC strongly suggested that I upgrade to SQL workgroup or Standard (Best). This would be approximately $800.00 to $4400. AC will only use 1 core of the processor and 1 Mb of RAM with SQL express.

I may have missed discussions about this.

Any thought?

SQL Server Express 2005 (packaged with Amazing Charts) is constrained to one processor (not one core) and to 1 gigabyte of RAM. This means if you were to have a quad core processor, it could use all 4 cores. Could you please list the specifications of your server and how many users there are in your office? For 4400 you could get a pretty nice server with SBS 2011 Premium Addon with SQL Server Standard for Small Business. Just for SQL, that price seems pretty hefty.

Here's a comparison chart from MS for SQL Server 2005:
http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2005/en/us/compare-features.aspx


Here's a comparison chart from MS for SQL Server 2008:
http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2008/en/us/editions.aspx

Face 1: SQL Server 2008 Standard Edition does not cost that much money. See at Amazon.com:

http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Ser...mp;ie=UTF8&qid=1307151125&sr=1-6

This boxed edition comes with 10 client user access licenses.

Fact 2: Upon installation of the server, Amazing Charts installs SQL Server 2005 Express Edition. When installing SQL Server 2005 Express, AC removes the Windows Administrator account from the SA group in SQL Server and changes the SQL Server password for the SA account to something only AC knows. Therefore, an end user cannot access the SQL Server instance of Amazing Charts - even if logged on as the local Windows Administrator - using any of the SQL Server management tools. Ergo, I fail to see how someone could safely upgrade the SQL Server instance used by AC without substantial help from tech-support - including tech-support giving out the SA password which I have never known them do to.

I'm afraid your IT person may be giving you bad advice.

Anyone please correct me if I'm wrong.

JamesNT

new problem!!!!!

Will AC 6.0 run on SQL standard 2008 or must we use SQL standard 2005?

I think you linked to the wrong thing.
http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Ser...mp;ie=UTF8&qid=1307151125&sr=1-6




AC 6.0 will probably run on SQL Express (maybe 2008 this time) again. This avoids making the software prohibitively expensive. Imagine everyone having to add 1500 on top of the cost of Amazing Charts.

Could you please answer my previous question regarding the number of users and computers? Depending on your response, you may want to have a word with your IT guy.

Sluthra, thank you.

One dedicated server with 2003 quad core 4 MB rame
two laptops with xp pro
one workstation windows 7
four workstations with xp pro
one computer with xp used for internet access and only accesses the system AC (if we need to and we never had to yet) by rdp

all are hard wired to the server

imcffp,

So at any given time, you will have at most two + one + four + one = EIGHT users hammering your AC database at one time (I assume no one uses the server as a workstation).

Guess what. Even with all eight users entering stuff as hard as they can, SQL Server will still be spending most of its time sitting on its butt bored to death. Consider the following SQL Update statement:


This statement is very similar to what AC would run to update a patient demographic. It takes less than a second to run that statement. In fact, if you have someone change a demographic in AC and hit the save button while you are staring at the blinking hard drive light on your server, you will barely notice the blink.

Upgrading to SQL Server Standard will do nothing for performance for you. The only thing SQL Server Standard will get you is all the Business Intelligence tools (Integration Services, Analysis Services, Reporting Services). But those tools are useless without the SA password to the Amazing Charts database - which I doubt techsupport will let you have.

Please, don't waste your money. And always be certain to question every expense your IT guy wants you to make. Take it from me - an IT guy.

I don't mean to sound harsh with all this - but I utterly despise seeing people waste money on IT and I hate seeing IT guys take advantage of their clients - whether intentionally or not - as it makes all us other IT guys look very bad.
JamesNT

Thank you James.

I prefer my money in my pocket.

Maybe it's time to look at a new server and windows server 2008 rt2??

No prob



Thanks for the info. As JamesNT already pointed out. SQL Server Standard would be of little benefit to you. You may also want to get a new IT guy 4400 for just SQL server is flat out ridiculous for this many workstations.



You might want to check out SBS 2011 Standard instead. It'll be easier for you to manage. You also get Exchange, Remote Web Workplace, and Sharepoint to name a few benefits. Also, you can add a lot more RAM since it's 64 bit. I like to get a new server every five years or so just to stay up to date.

You may have a good reason, but I am not sure I understand the logic behind a single computer dedicated to RDP.

FYI: I think this just may be my inadequacy, but posts with multiple quotes are difficult to follow. But, that just may be I.

All true. But....ummm...by knowing the username and password.

Really? Most forums have rules against double/triple posting. They prefer that you keep it all in one post. I think the quotes help people understand the context of the answer better.

Yes really. Not saying you can't give all your information in one post, and not saying that responding to a quote isn't extremely helpful. I tell people to do that all the time as it can be confusing when they don't.

It took me ten minutes to figure out the post above as it didn't flow. I kept having to see who said what from what post. I haven't done it yet, but I will go back and quote you to show how helpful it is, even in this case where it's not needed.

And, this forum allows from 0 to 100 posts if you like.

Also, the "really" implies that I am taking a hard line against multiple quotes. I think I made at least two inferences that it may be my issue and my inadequacy or stupidity that made it difficult to follow.

Sorry about that. The "Really?" was meant to convey surprise. I'm a member of a few other forums and they really don't like double/triple posting. But they also tend to have pictures in the signatures which is probably why. Imagine 30-50kB per post, that would add up on a popular forum. You're the admin on here, it's your call.

Thanks. Do you mind if I add another comment which is meant to help and not be derogatory?

Go for it.

Once upon a time, forgetting fax, there were two major forms of communication: Phone and letters. With phones, you would say please and thank you during that one conversation. With letters, you would give your sentiments in your next letter. You would likely receive maybe 20 snailmails a month.

I read somewhere that with the onset of email where one may receive 20 to 100 emails a day or more, it is actually counter-productive to reply with a thanks. One is not being impolite, it is just that the recipient has one more email to open and read and, taken to the extreme which actually happens not infrequently, that person emails back a yw.

So, I would go as far to say that this applies as well in forums and threads. While it was polite to quote the thank you of James and reply with "no prob," it did little for your excellent post and just made it more difficult to follow. That was actually the part I was trying to wrap my head around the most.

Please don't take this post wrong. It is actually quite silly and probably only I would even write it. It may be picky, but I only state it because there would be fewer "formal" quotes and more substantive information. I think it is obvious that James and you know infinitely more about SQL on here, and I must always rely on my friend Raja who, because he lives in India, can be hard to communicate with in real time at times.

Bert,

We have never used the "single" machine for AC.

We use it for a testing program that accesses the internet.

The RDP access would only be used as a last ditch.

Thanks.

Gotcha. Thanks for the explanation.

Would I get any benefit (performance) by upgrading to windows server 2008 R2?

No. Unless you take Sluthra up on the idea of going Small Business Server, you should upgrade to Server 2008 R2 during your next planned upgrade cycle.

JamesNT

Bert and Sluthra,

Thanks for the laugh! I enjoyed the "old married couple" moment you two put on there!

JamesNT

By the way, just to complete the circle, could "IT guy" and "Guitar guy" (Jeff Dunham's Jingle Bombs video") be one in the same?

Was pretty funny. But, in the end, we all have each other's backs. Of course, I still haven't weighed in on the topic yet.

Frank,

Just upgrading to a new OS, as James said, will likely not give you better performance (maybe something I am looking past). Now upgrading to a better server, sure.

Now. There are only two things I am extremely passionate about on here:

1. Good backups

2. SMALL BUSINESS SERVER IS DEFINITELY THE WAY TO GO FOR A SERVER OS IF YOU ARE A SMALL BUSINESS. (Hence the term small business).

Micrososft has screwed us over since day one. The ONLY thing they have ever done that is benevolent besides Foundation Server is Small Business Server. I am not saying it out performs Windows Server 2008. It just gives you a lot more for less and is much easier to manage.

I would say the only reason you would want the regular Windows 2008 is if you are buying it for a bank or your hospital or some company that needs hundreds of clients (not 75) and needs to run multiple domains and sub-domains.

Thanks Bert.

A new server it is.
IT guy tells me that the bus is one of our bottlenecks.

32 or 64 bit os?? I would think that 64 bit would be better to allow us to take advantage of more RAM. If not now but ihn the future.

Looking at the future, I'd like to go with something we can upgrade?

I tend to think that 6.0 (possibly 7.0) will need more to run in the future as the reporting demands increase.

Frank,

Personally, I would go with a Dell T610, although you will get arguments on here that this is too much. The 610 (by Dell's mouth to my ears) is the closest thing to the famous PowerEdge 2900.

Of course anything down to the 310 is fine, depends on how much you want to spend.

I am a big fan of having TWO separate virtual drives, one for the OS and one for your data, but nothing wrong with going RAID1, RAID5 or RAID10 (nice RAID) on one drive. Please note there is a difference between partitions and drives.

It is nice to be able to back up your data "drive" and know that if you need to you can reinstall your OS without having to worry about touching your data drive. Of course, you can accomplish the same thing with partitions, but better off to have them split.

If you go with Small Business Server 2008, it has to be 64-bit, because Exchange Server must be 64 bit. And, as you noted, depending on the motherboard and amount of DIMMS, you can get up to 64GB of RAM, which I can safely say that even for Sandeep, is too much.

12GB is fine, but as I will point out later in my state of the SQL standard address, the more RAM, the more SQL can use, which DOES give you better performance.

Note that SBS 2008 Pro COMES with Windows Server 2008 which unlike two copies of SBS 2008 CAN be put on the domain and still allow SBS to be the DHCP server and domain controller. You can then either back up to Windows Server 2008 in real time and have a system ready to go if necessary. The other thing it can be used for is a Terminal Server, which would be nice depending on if you have multiple users remoting in at the same time. SBS can be the only server on the domain.

Small Business Server gives you:

Exchange Server 2007 easily upgraded to 2010. The nice thing about that is you can archive all email going in and out which is or one day will be HIPAA necessary. Also, any emails sent to users on the network are not going out over the Internet and are, therefore, compliant.

SharePoint: It is impossible to explain the advantages of SharePoint. You will see if you have it.

Remote Web Workplace: The ability to log in easily to any machine with security that is second to none, although with SBS 2008 or regular 2008 will allow an SSL version of RDP, which is just as secure and extremely fast. Also, unlike the past OS which would allow connection to one computer such as the server and not to another client WITHOUT port forwarding, with 2008 RDC, you can log into any client simply by name. This can be done with either SBS or regular 2008.

Group Policy (which all servers with Active Directory have) will allow infinite possibilities of managing the entire network from the server. Just as an example, I just can't deal with my staff turning the entire desktop into a photo album or the latest album cover of the Rolling Stones. One click in Group Policy and that ability is no longer possible

I suppose 2011 would be the way to go. I just am stuck on 2008 and would be less able to help you if you need it.

Sorry for the long post.

Remember, unless you have full versions of SQL, which can take advantage of more memory, Express will still be limited to 1GB. But, if you upgrade (which is possible), then you can take advantage of more RAM. Of course, if you have SQL Server 2005, you would have to limit it or it would take up all your RAM.

Might as well go with SBS 2011. It's about the same as SBS 2008 except it has the newer versions of the software. E.g. Sharepoint 2010, Exchange 2010, built on Server 2008 R2.

SBS 2011 Premium is an addon to SBS 2011 Standard ($750-1000, dependent upon whether you want Software Assurance). You do not need to buy the premium addon right off the bat. ($1200-2000 *for the addon*, dependent upon whether you want Software Assurance).

Given that SBS 2008 Premium is about $1500-2000, you may want to go with that, should you need the full powered SQL server and the additional Server 2008 included. Buying standard and the premium addon would be about $2000, while going with SBS 2008 Premium would be 400 bucks cheaper.

Personally, I would just go with the SBS 2011 Standard (which I already did lol) and upgrade if necessary in the future. As James NT pointed out, SQL Server isn't really stressed by Amazing Charts.

The same benefits Bert mentioned carry over to SBS 2011 Standard.

For SBS 2011, I would say 12-16GB should suffice. 8GB minimum. Exchange like SQL server loves to grab any free memory. Does it need to? No, but if you have free RAM it'll use it like SQL server.

Perhaps Bert could spec a server for you? My spec involves parts that Dell doesn't sell yet. The Sandy Bridge LGA 1155 processors like the E3-1275.

All the Dell Servers use LGA 1366 which is to be phased out by the end of this year for LGA 2011. (Info overload, I know). Mine involves building on your own/getting someone to build it for you. Don't get me wrong the LGA 1366 provide sufficient performance but the top of the line Xeon is about as good as the top of the line SandyBridge (except the SandyBridge is way cheaper, $1000+ vs $300).

CPU: Intel LGA 1155 Xeon E3-1235 3.2 GHz
HDD: 4X Western Digital RE4 500GB in RAID 10
RAID Card: 3ware 9650SE-4LPML RAID Card
PSU: Silverstone ST500GF 500W 80 Plus Silver Redundant
Mobo: SUPERMICRO MBD-X9SCA-F-O LGA 1155
RAM: Crucial 16GB (4 x 4GB) ECC Unbuffered DDR3 1333 (PC3 10600)
Case: Ark SR-801BB E-ATX
GPU: Matrox G200ew Integrated
Optical Drive: Asus DVDRW
OS: Windows Small Business Server 2011 Standard
Fax: Mainpine IQ Express Fax Modem

http://s278.photobucket.com/albums/kk94/sandeepluthra/Server%20Build/

Total Cost: $2500-3000 after all the SSL certificates and domain names. (5 years)

EDIT:
Two nonessential costly parts were the fax modem which was $400 and the redundant power supply which cost $500. Just removing these two parts drops the price by $1000 almost. If you use UpDox, you have no need for the fax modem. A quality power supply should suffice in place of a redundant one.

I agree with Sandeep completely, thanks for the correction of Pro to Premium.

In a complete about face from some posts a week ago as far as things that are not needed (and SandyBridge is a great way to go), I would recommend going with Dell for a number of reasons.

First, I doubt you are going to want to "roll your own." Second, the person who does it for you is not going to be there at 2 am on a Sunday. Third, as just mentioned, Dell support is excellent. Bad hard drive at 3 pm. Get ready for a new one at 10 am the next morning. Plus, Dell isn't going to allow you to purchase parts that are not compatible, will likely not let you buy unbuffered RAM -- well you would need to know that -- and will tend to know what hard drives you need for the RAID controller you are purchasing.

In summary:

Completely agree with Sandeep, but I would get Dell to do it. And, a tip with Dell. Configure it online, then call Dell and go through it, then at the end ask for a discount, and they will usually give you one.

Enough!!!

I'm going with an 8086 processor and dual floppy drives, no mouse and monochrome screen.

Running DOS.

Done.

Just be sure to configure the floppy drives in a RAID 1.

I am currently sitting on the desk of a fairly expensive hotel at the beach overlooking the water on the 9th floor.

I am properly imbibed.

I talked the hotel manager into free WiFi cuz I could just hope on to the Wi fi of the place next door.

And I am reading this thread.

Ladies and Gentlemen, this IS entertainment.

Thank you all.

JamesNT

Oh, and I'm watching the original Terminator movie - back when movies were movies.

JamesNT

You mean you didn't like the SQL better?

Huh?

OH I see what you did there! Nice, Bert!

JamesNT

I agree with what Bert said as well with one modification.

You probably want to keep an extra hard drive on site or get a "hot spare" in the server. In case one of the hard drives fails, you can reconstruct the array and continue business as usual and keep the extra drive that Dell sends you as a new backup. If the failure occurs when you open the office, you probably wouldn't want to wait until the next day to be able to use the Server. This is the main reason people recommend RAID 10 over RAID 5, the rebuild times for RAID 10 is like 5 times faster.

Sandeep,

I will tell you something funny about Dell. If your hard drive goes bad, they will, as mentioned above, get that hard drive to you stat. But, then they will hound you to death if you don't return that dead one in 10 days.

Your post almost got by me. I thought it was pretty good myself.