Post reply

640

  • August 4, 2006 at 7:34 am

    #653316

    last year it was 400 servers with somewhere in the region of 5000 databases (2 dba's), but after consolidation this year 100 servers with a total of maybe 70tb of data

    the most work comes from the trabsactional replication of 100gb databases to up to 90 subscribers - ouch

    MVDBA

  • August 4, 2006 at 7:38 am

    #653317

    Currently myself and one other DBA support about 1400 database servers in 883 locations.  By the end of the year we will have close to 1800 database servers.

    Greg Mathis

  • August 4, 2006 at 8:11 am

    #653339

    Am I the only one who noticed that the post says 640 db server, while upon reading the article it states:

    MySpace's extensive IT architecture currently features 2,682 Web servers, 90 Cache servers with 16GB RAM, 450 Dart Servers, 60 database servers, 150 media processing servers, 1,000 disks in a SAN (storage area network) deployment, three data centers and 17,000MB per second of bandwidth throughput.

     

    So, it looks to me like it's 60 not 640.  Not that it matters here...

     

  • August 4, 2006 at 8:27 am

    #653347

    27 total stand alone (26 sql2k standard, 1 cluster) with 25 for production, 1 for in-house development and 1 for test. Also 1 on VMWare for multiple instances (used for vendor testing).

    1 dba, 1 jr dba

  • August 4, 2006 at 8:43 am

    #653357

    6 SQL 2000, 1 SQL 6.0, 1 Oracle (all prod)

    2 MySQL on site, 2 Off site (all production)

    Many many dev databases--

    1 MySQL Dev Database Server

    1 Oracle Dev Database Server

    I guess looking around my office right now something like 10 dev 2000 database servers...

    And on top of that the applications that use those servers are mostly administrated by me, or written by me, or both.

    A failure to plan on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part!

  • August 4, 2006 at 8:55 am

    #653362

    In-house: 3 DB2 (AS400), 1 central development SQL Server 2000, 1 central development SQL Server 2005, 7 individual developer SQL Server (mix of 2000 and 2005), 1 support SQL Server 2000, 1 support SQL Server 2005,

    Customer Sites: *** (confidential but much more than a score) of both SQL Servers 2000 and 2005 (not really a DBA for them but when troubleshooting that what I end up being )


    Steven E Broomhead, Sr

  • August 4, 2006 at 8:56 am

    #653363

    My current environment is relatively small with only 2 SQL 2000 servers and one SQL 2005, these are all production servers, we do however have another 2 SQL 2000 development servers and 2 SQL 2005 development servers.

    My previous environment grew from no SQL Servers at all, to 5 SQL Server 2000 both Enterprise and Standard and some 100 MSDE on Sales Force laptops all these were production servers and there was also a handful of development servers.  We also had 1 Oracle box and a MYSQL server as well, so a mixed bag.

  • August 4, 2006 at 9:42 am

    #653372

    Too Many!!!

    Why does everyone think their third party applicaiton needs its own dedicated SQL Box? The vast majority of these sql boxes do virtually nothing.

    Terry

  • August 4, 2006 at 9:59 am

    #653374

    Production has 15 servers with 3 SQL 2000 and 12 SQL 2005. We will migrate the remaining databases off of 2000 onto 2005 in the next month or two and putting those servers in as mirror servers for the SQL 2005 databases.

    My blog: SQL Soldier[/url]
    SQL Server Best Practices:     SQL Server Best Practices
    Twitter: @SQLSoldier
    My book: Pro SQL Server 2008 Mirroring[/url]
    Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, Data Platform MVP
    Database Engineer at BlueMountain Capital Management[/url]

  • August 4, 2006 at 10:43 am

    #653386

    1 clustered 2000 to be upgraded to 2K5 soon, 1 development, 1 test, about 8-10 other productional ones all SQL 2000 for and a single one upgraded to 2K5.

  • August 4, 2006 at 10:51 am

    #653390

    I read the article you wrote this on, using your link.  I'm pasting it here so that you can understand my conern: MySpace's extensive IT architecture currently features 2,682 Web servers, 90 Cache servers with 16GB RAM, 450 Dart Servers, 60 database servers, 150 media processing servers, 1,000 disks in a SAN (storage area network) deployment, three data centers and 17,000MB per second of bandwidth throughput.  They say 60 database servers, NOT 640.  Or, Is there something I don't understand?  By the way, my company currently has 9 SQL Server 2000 servers.

  • August 4, 2006 at 11:17 am

    #653397

    It's because of the third parties, not the host enterprise.  I ask, no insist over and over again that their application can put it's 500MB database on a enterprise SQL server.  They usually say something like "yeah, ok.  No problem.  It's just that we won't give you any tech support."

    Saving the world one ticket at a time.

    Dowdian

  • August 4, 2006 at 12:19 pm

    #653419

    11 Active\Passive Clusters, about 250 SQL Servers with roughly 10 DBs on each server. 3 DBA

  • August 4, 2006 at 12:24 pm

    #653423

    I have 8 servers with SQL Server - but three are clusters. About 29 databases. Also 1 server with 1 Ingres database.

  • August 4, 2006 at 12:31 pm

    #653424

    2 years ago - 10 active/active clusters (some NT4 running SQL7, rest were windows 2000, sql 2000 GEO Clusters), about 120 other servers running multiple instances on some, some dev, some production located in about 36 plant sites worldwide.  I don't remember the number of databases -- close to 1,000. For a period of time - by myself.  It was insain.  If not for an in house written app that monitored backup status - impossible.

    Now... at a different employer (I don't think you need to ask why), 5 production, 4 dev. 

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 31 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply