0

Currently I am working on a project that requires me to consolidate 3 servers into 1 server, so I am trying to find the best method at the moment. Right now my options are:

  1. Consolidate the 3 servers into 1 separate server and set up a high availability cluster on it
  2. Consolidate the 3 servers into an existing server that already has a clustered environment.

As of now, I am leaning towards the 1st option because the existing server currently holds over 40 databases and performance wise, I don't think it will be a good idea to add more databases into it. I was also told to use perfmon to look at cpu, memory, disks, etc. but I'm still trying to understand how to use it efficiently.

This is my first time working with server/database consolidation in SQL server, so I'm not sure where exactly I can find pros and cons to those 2 options. It'll be very helpful if I can get an answer to guide me where and what I should look at to compare those 2 options! Thank you in advance!

Screenshots of some analysis are below if that helps.

enter image description here enter image description here

Note: The 2 nodes in the cluster server are synchronized and the 3rd node is asynchronous.

  • So many factors--hard for us to know what direction. I would start by "eyeballing" it. Can you easily add CPU, memory, and disk to server(s) in scenario 2 to accommodate more load? Are there I/O patterns with the DBs that will conflict if you add them to the existing servers? Saying there are 40 databases--that's not helpful. Is it 40 database that average 100 MB in size, or 100 GB in size? If you don't use new servers, could you use the $$$ to buy more memory or SSDs for the existing servers? – Tony Hinkle Feb 22 at 21:29
  • can you add more info on SQL Server edition, version including windows? – Asteway Feb 24 at 3:50
  • If you do #1, you now have one more server to manage/maintain. If you do #2, you are guessing that it would have a negative impact on performance. You also have to look at the use case/SLAs for the servers, and if they are the same or different. The suggestion to look at resource utilization is valid - you will need to do some research and learn that on your own, before you can make a decision. – Greg Feb 25 at 16:52
  • @TonyHinkle I provided screenshots above if that helps. I am also assuming we are able to increase capacity if we go with the migration to existing server route. As of now, I am still looking into how I/O patterns, CPU usage, and all that will be affected, but the screenshots provided above is what I have so far. – dbbk Mar 5 at 20:37
  • @Asteway SQL Server 2012 and Windows Server 2012 R2, screenshots of other numbers are also attached above if that helps. – dbbk Mar 5 at 20:39

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.