More Partition Function and Partition Scheme questions.

Howdy again. Many of my queries are grouped by months. I want to potentially
make use of Partition Functions (PF) and Partition Schemes (PS) but I don't
want to have an out of control amount of of Files and File Groups to create
my PS's on. If I simply partition by year, will my month queries still be
sped up? Or is the only way to accomplish a speed advantage to partition by
month? Im a few weeks out from being able to do a real test, and the
suspence will kill me by then.
TIA, ChrisRPartitions help where the majority of the queries align themselves with your
partitions. In your case you will probably get some, but not the same amount
if you partition by month and year.
Note that you can park your partitions on different disks to spread the IO,
so you might not have 24 disks to spread your io, but you might have data
distribution patterns so that the volatile data could be on separate disks
and partition which are not queries as frequently could be on a single disk.
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"ChrisR" <noFudgingWay@.NoEmail.com> wrote in message
news:%234a9SbNBHHA.3604@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Howdy again. Many of my queries are grouped by months. I want to
> potentially
> make use of Partition Functions (PF) and Partition Schemes (PS) but I
> don't
> want to have an out of control amount of of Files and File Groups to
> create
> my PS's on. If I simply partition by year, will my month queries still be
> sped up? Or is the only way to accomplish a speed advantage to partition
> by
> month? Im a few weeks out from being able to do a real test, and the
> suspence will kill me by then.
> TIA, ChrisR
>|||> I want to potentially
> make use of Partition Functions (PF) and Partition Schemes (PS) but I don'
t
> want to have an out of control amount of of Files and File Groups to creat
e
> my PS's on.
You don't have to direct each partition to an unique filegroup. All can go t
o the same, or you can
distribute the partitions over the filegroups any way you want.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"ChrisR" <noFudgingWay@.NoEmail.com> wrote in message news:%234a9SbNBHHA.3604@.TK2MSFTNGP04.ph
x.gbl...
> Howdy again. Many of my queries are grouped by months. I want to potential
ly
> make use of Partition Functions (PF) and Partition Schemes (PS) but I don'
t
> want to have an out of control amount of of Files and File Groups to creat
e
> my PS's on. If I simply partition by year, will my month queries still be
> sped up? Or is the only way to accomplish a speed advantage to partition b
y
> month? Im a few weeks out from being able to do a real test, and the
> suspence will kill me by then.
> TIA, ChrisR
>|||In addition to the fact that you can place multiple partitions on the same
filegroup, you can also take advantage of the ability to merge partitions. I
t
is a common practice to have many finer-grained partitions for more recent
and often more active data and few larger partitions for aged and often less
active data.
Linchi
"ChrisR" wrote:

> Howdy again. Many of my queries are grouped by months. I want to potential
ly
> make use of Partition Functions (PF) and Partition Schemes (PS) but I don'
t
> want to have an out of control amount of of Files and File Groups to creat
e
> my PS's on. If I simply partition by year, will my month queries still be
> sped up? Or is the only way to accomplish a speed advantage to partition b
y
> month? Im a few weeks out from being able to do a real test, and the
> suspence will kill me by then.
> TIA, ChrisR
>
>

More Partition Function and Partition Scheme questions.

Howdy again. Many of my queries are grouped by months. I want to potentially
make use of Partition Functions (PF) and Partition Schemes (PS) but I don't
want to have an out of control amount of of Files and File Groups to create
my PS's on. If I simply partition by year, will my month queries still be
sped up? Or is the only way to accomplish a speed advantage to partition by
month? Im a few weeks out from being able to do a real test, and the
suspence will kill me by then.
TIA, ChrisR
Partitions help where the majority of the queries align themselves with your
partitions. In your case you will probably get some, but not the same amount
if you partition by month and year.
Note that you can park your partitions on different disks to spread the IO,
so you might not have 24 disks to spread your io, but you might have data
distribution patterns so that the volatile data could be on separate disks
and partition which are not queries as frequently could be on a single disk.
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"ChrisR" <noFudgingWay@.NoEmail.com> wrote in message
news:%234a9SbNBHHA.3604@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Howdy again. Many of my queries are grouped by months. I want to
> potentially
> make use of Partition Functions (PF) and Partition Schemes (PS) but I
> don't
> want to have an out of control amount of of Files and File Groups to
> create
> my PS's on. If I simply partition by year, will my month queries still be
> sped up? Or is the only way to accomplish a speed advantage to partition
> by
> month? Im a few weeks out from being able to do a real test, and the
> suspence will kill me by then.
> TIA, ChrisR
>
|||In addition to the fact that you can place multiple partitions on the same
filegroup, you can also take advantage of the ability to merge partitions. It
is a common practice to have many finer-grained partitions for more recent
and often more active data and few larger partitions for aged and often less
active data.
Linchi
"ChrisR" wrote:

> Howdy again. Many of my queries are grouped by months. I want to potentially
> make use of Partition Functions (PF) and Partition Schemes (PS) but I don't
> want to have an out of control amount of of Files and File Groups to create
> my PS's on. If I simply partition by year, will my month queries still be
> sped up? Or is the only way to accomplish a speed advantage to partition by
> month? Im a few weeks out from being able to do a real test, and the
> suspence will kill me by then.
> TIA, ChrisR
>
>

More Partition Function and Partition Scheme questions.

Howdy again. Many of my queries are grouped by months. I want to potentially
make use of Partition Functions (PF) and Partition Schemes (PS) but I don't
want to have an out of control amount of of Files and File Groups to create
my PS's on. If I simply partition by year, will my month queries still be
sped up? Or is the only way to accomplish a speed advantage to partition by
month? Im a few weeks out from being able to do a real test, and the
suspence will kill me by then.
TIA, ChrisRPartitions help where the majority of the queries align themselves with your
partitions. In your case you will probably get some, but not the same amount
if you partition by month and year.
Note that you can park your partitions on different disks to spread the IO,
so you might not have 24 disks to spread your io, but you might have data
distribution patterns so that the volatile data could be on separate disks
and partition which are not queries as frequently could be on a single disk.
--
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"ChrisR" <noFudgingWay@.NoEmail.com> wrote in message
news:%234a9SbNBHHA.3604@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Howdy again. Many of my queries are grouped by months. I want to
> potentially
> make use of Partition Functions (PF) and Partition Schemes (PS) but I
> don't
> want to have an out of control amount of of Files and File Groups to
> create
> my PS's on. If I simply partition by year, will my month queries still be
> sped up? Or is the only way to accomplish a speed advantage to partition
> by
> month? Im a few weeks out from being able to do a real test, and the
> suspence will kill me by then.
> TIA, ChrisR
>|||> I want to potentially
> make use of Partition Functions (PF) and Partition Schemes (PS) but I don't
> want to have an out of control amount of of Files and File Groups to create
> my PS's on.
You don't have to direct each partition to an unique filegroup. All can go to the same, or you can
distribute the partitions over the filegroups any way you want.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"ChrisR" <noFudgingWay@.NoEmail.com> wrote in message news:%234a9SbNBHHA.3604@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Howdy again. Many of my queries are grouped by months. I want to potentially
> make use of Partition Functions (PF) and Partition Schemes (PS) but I don't
> want to have an out of control amount of of Files and File Groups to create
> my PS's on. If I simply partition by year, will my month queries still be
> sped up? Or is the only way to accomplish a speed advantage to partition by
> month? Im a few weeks out from being able to do a real test, and the
> suspence will kill me by then.
> TIA, ChrisR
>|||In addition to the fact that you can place multiple partitions on the same
filegroup, you can also take advantage of the ability to merge partitions. It
is a common practice to have many finer-grained partitions for more recent
and often more active data and few larger partitions for aged and often less
active data.
Linchi
"ChrisR" wrote:
> Howdy again. Many of my queries are grouped by months. I want to potentially
> make use of Partition Functions (PF) and Partition Schemes (PS) but I don't
> want to have an out of control amount of of Files and File Groups to create
> my PS's on. If I simply partition by year, will my month queries still be
> sped up? Or is the only way to accomplish a speed advantage to partition by
> month? Im a few weeks out from being able to do a real test, and the
> suspence will kill me by then.
> TIA, ChrisR
>
>

months_between & new_time

In sql 2000 months_between & new_time do these functions work?I think you may be looking for the function called datediff. See BOL for
details
Ray Higdon MCSE, MCDBA, CCNA
--
"trollins" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:247B8AC4-CBA6-4F23-8EEE-BE5713CB574D@.microsoft.com...
> In sql 2000 months_between & new_time do these functions work?|||Hi,
Months_between : Datediff (datepart,startdate,enddate)
--Datepart can be year, month, Quarter, day
...)
new_time : getdate()
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"trollins" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:247B8AC4-CBA6-4F23-8EEE-BE5713CB574D@.microsoft.com...
> In sql 2000 months_between & new_time do these functions work?

months_between & new_time

In sql 2000 months_between & new_time do these functions work?I think you may be looking for the function called datediff. See BOL for
details
--
Ray Higdon MCSE, MCDBA, CCNA
--
"trollins" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:247B8AC4-CBA6-4F23-8EEE-BE5713CB574D@.microsoft.com...
> In sql 2000 months_between & new_time do these functions work?|||Hi,
Months_between : Datediff (datepart,startdate,enddate)
--Datepart can be year, month, Quarter, day
...)
new_time : getdate()
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"trollins" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:247B8AC4-CBA6-4F23-8EEE-BE5713CB574D@.microsoft.com...
> In sql 2000 months_between & new_time do these functions work?

Monitoring setup

Hi,
I am having a question on how to setup the followings in our MS SQL 2000
server. We would like to setup some monitoring functions to monitor the CPU
usage, Memory usage and Disk usage in our MS SQL 2000 server. Is there any
way of doing this?
Thanks.
PS : Please bare with me if I am posting this question in the wrong groupYou can use one of many monitoring tools for this, NetIQ AppManager being
one and Microsoft Operations Manager being another example.
If you want to grow your own solution, your best bet would be to find a
command line utility that can give your 'cooked' performance counter values.
Microsoft command line utility logman.exe is such a utility. Note that this
command line works on XP. I've heard that it works on Win2K as well if you
copy the additional DLL along. But I have not tried it on Win2K.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/xpehelp/html/PerformanceCommandLineTools.asp
--
Linchi Shea
linchi_shea@.NOSPAMml.com
"TYM" <sniperlc@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ecceScOpDHA.2588@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I am having a question on how to setup the followings in our MS SQL 2000
> server. We would like to setup some monitoring functions to monitor the
CPU
> usage, Memory usage and Disk usage in our MS SQL 2000 server. Is there any
> way of doing this?
> Thanks.
> PS : Please bare with me if I am posting this question in the wrong group
>