Monitoring Production Instances.

We will soon have 200 + production instances. In an effort to be more
pro active, I am looking for a way to monitor jobs, both failed and
long running, Disk space, and other such things like CPU load etc.
I would appreicate any suggestions you might have on accomplishing
this. For instance, is there anything in reporting services that might
help accomplish this ? Most of the instances are 2k, but we also have
some 2k5.
Best Regards
SGB(sgbergkam@.gmail.com) writes:
> We will soon have 200 + production instances. In an effort to be more
> pro active, I am looking for a way to monitor jobs, both failed and
> long running, Disk space, and other such things like CPU load etc.
> I would appreicate any suggestions you might have on accomplishing
> this. For instance, is there anything in reporting services that might
> help accomplish this ? Most of the instances are 2k, but we also have
> some 2k5.

I think you should look at MOM, Microsoft Operations Manager.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodin...ions/books.mspx

Monitoring log usage

Hi Everyone,
I'mn setting up a proposal for a new hard drive for one of our SQL servers.
In an effort to get supporting data, I've defined performance counter logs f
or both %Disk and %Idle. Currently, %Idle is a minimum of 74.161 and a maxi
mum of 100.081. After I get the new drive installed and move the logs over
to that drive, I expect the
se percentages to change.
Question: Are there any other counter(s) I should be using to get more exac
t data that exposes the benefits of having the log files on a different hard
drive?
Thanks in advance
LarryYou should always have the log on a separate physcial drive from the data
for 2 reasons ( irregardless of stats) if there is going to be anything more
than minimal use of the database.
1. separate random IO from Serial IO... Log is serial(mostly) and data files
are random (mostly).
2. If you need up to the minute recovery without loss of data, you'd better
have your log on a separate drive...
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Larry" <Larry@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8A16AAEB-D472-4037-90EE-1D9B9EB5A202@.microsoft.com...
> Hi Everyone,
> I'mn setting up a proposal for a new hard drive for one of our SQL
servers.
> In an effort to get supporting data, I've defined performance counter logs
for both %Disk and %Idle. Currently, %Idle is a minimum of 74.161 and a
maximum of 100.081. After I get the new drive installed and move the logs
over to that drive, I expect these percentages to change.
> Question: Are there any other counter(s) I should be using to get more
exact data that exposes the benefits of having the log files on a different
hard drive?
> Thanks in advance
> Larry

Monitoring log usage

Hi Everyone,
I'mn setting up a proposal for a new hard drive for one of our SQL servers.
In an effort to get supporting data, I've defined performance counter logs for both %Disk and %Idle. Currently, %Idle is a minimum of 74.161 and a maximum of 100.081. After I get the new drive installed and move the logs over to that drive, I expect the
se percentages to change.
Question: Are there any other counter(s) I should be using to get more exact data that exposes the benefits of having the log files on a different hard drive?
Thanks in advance
Larry
You should always have the log on a separate physcial drive from the data
for 2 reasons ( irregardless of stats) if there is going to be anything more
than minimal use of the database.
1. separate random IO from Serial IO... Log is serial(mostly) and data files
are random (mostly).
2. If you need up to the minute recovery without loss of data, you'd better
have your log on a separate drive...
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Larry" <Larry@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8A16AAEB-D472-4037-90EE-1D9B9EB5A202@.microsoft.com...
> Hi Everyone,
> I'mn setting up a proposal for a new hard drive for one of our SQL
servers.
> In an effort to get supporting data, I've defined performance counter logs
for both %Disk and %Idle. Currently, %Idle is a minimum of 74.161 and a
maximum of 100.081. After I get the new drive installed and move the logs
over to that drive, I expect these percentages to change.
> Question: Are there any other counter(s) I should be using to get more
exact data that exposes the benefits of having the log files on a different
hard drive?
> Thanks in advance
> Larry

Monitoring log usage

Hi Everyone,
I'mn setting up a proposal for a new hard drive for one of our SQL servers.
In an effort to get supporting data, I've defined performance counter logs for both %Disk and %Idle. Currently, %Idle is a minimum of 74.161 and a maximum of 100.081. After I get the new drive installed and move the logs over to that drive, I expect these percentages to change.
Question: Are there any other counter(s) I should be using to get more exact data that exposes the benefits of having the log files on a different hard drive?
Thanks in advance
LarryYou should always have the log on a separate physcial drive from the data
for 2 reasons ( irregardless of stats) if there is going to be anything more
than minimal use of the database.
1. separate random IO from Serial IO... Log is serial(mostly) and data files
are random (mostly).
2. If you need up to the minute recovery without loss of data, you'd better
have your log on a separate drive...
--
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Larry" <Larry@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8A16AAEB-D472-4037-90EE-1D9B9EB5A202@.microsoft.com...
> Hi Everyone,
> I'mn setting up a proposal for a new hard drive for one of our SQL
servers.
> In an effort to get supporting data, I've defined performance counter logs
for both %Disk and %Idle. Currently, %Idle is a minimum of 74.161 and a
maximum of 100.081. After I get the new drive installed and move the logs
over to that drive, I expect these percentages to change.
> Question: Are there any other counter(s) I should be using to get more
exact data that exposes the benefits of having the log files on a different
hard drive?
> Thanks in advance
> Larry