Consolidating databases sql server
Consolidating databases sql server - Nude only cams
In some circumstances, both approaches could be used for different reasons.
When hardware upgrades and software licensing are budgeted and downtime is expected and acceptable.
As such, this could be a reasonable time to perform the analysis and capacity planning to identify commonalities among the databases and determine which databases could ultimately reside on the same SQL Server instance after the upgrade.
At this juncture, you may also be able to easily show the cost savings in tangible numbers when comparing your current approach versus a tangible set of alternatives.
Since 2002, Jeremy Kadlec has delivered value to the global SQL Server community as an Edgewood Solutions SQL Server Consultant, co-founder and Baltimore SSUG co-leader.
In the recent years, there have been a few different trends related to the hardware platform for SQL Server.
One trend was to have a dedicated SQL Server for each application.
This trend has been countered in some organizations by a major consolidation effort.The consolidation effort in some circumstances consists of consolidating the hardware and storage to a unified set of devices although the same number of logical machines exists.In other circumstances, the consolidation is for the hardware, storage, Windows and SQL Server instances.Both alternatives have advantages and disadvantages, so what is the correct path? When considering migrating to SQL Server 2005 or 2008, should a consolidation effort be considered as well if we have a large number of SQL Servers are in scope for the project?You are correct, the opposing paths of dedicated versus shared SQL Servers have been major trends for different reasons at many organizations.Neither path is necessarily right or wrong as an approach, but the support and development related to each path should be analyzed from an organizational level and then a decision should be made.