I am looking at the failover options for SQL Server 2005 and the mirroring option as documented in Using Database Mirroring with Office SharePoint Server and Windows SharePoint Services seems to cover this however I have a concern about the recommended limit of 10 databases.
Has anyone had any experience with this, i.e. can it support more and also what sizing limits would be expected (I assume as it uses transactions this is not an issue).
Hi Andrew,
The database size shouldn't really matter. Its the usage. I think the capacity is limited because of the numbers of worker threads that are consumed by each database mirroring session.
regards
Jag
|||Thanks Jag
I think mirroring is a really fantastic solution, it just has limitiations that require careful design. One option may be (not tested or really comfortable doing) would be to do this via Virtual Machines? If the main bottleneck is threads, however I can see lots of other issues here with networks cards, processors and ram.... perhap just purchase more machines :).
I'll look at clustering options and the use of log shipping for DR
Andrew
|||Hi,
Just wondering if you found any more information out on the max threads/sessions limit? I'm looking to mirror around 340 DB's from 17 locations (Each location to hold 20 db's of varing size)
Cheers,
Steve
|||Virtual memory fragmentation is also a key consideration for mirroring, so you should definitiely not to your scenario on 32-bit servers.
64-bit servers with enough memory and processors to support the thread and memory usage might be OK depending on the load, but you should do testing of your specific scenario.
|||Is there a way to understand/formula on how many mirroring database there can be. If i have two nodes and both "active" for some principle databases can i run more or are there just as many threads on the mirror is there are on the principle? The recomendations of 10 seem quite small for todays hardware of dual core boxes with 8 gigs of memory.
Scott
No comments:
Post a Comment