-10

Desription of problem changed : how to make sure, that my Hyper-V is using all my hardware resources, and if it is using, what is the bottleneck of the system, when discovering performance issues? - First of all what is the rooftop of the hardware performance (so I could compare physical machine vs hyper-V Virtual machine) - Then how to find what is causing my Server slow performance - how to speed up the system?...Hyper-V has ability to use only 4cores, too bad even for 2x quadcore CPUs, not talking about cluster...I found possibility to make it force to use whatever cores I need, but : I did not discover any significant speed change, is it still limited to 4 cores..? I found many Things-to -disable as NUMA nodes, VMQ, dynamic memory alocation, etc.....which should help, I guess there must be much more, if my server is getting bored(CPU,RAM,HDD), but users discovering great latency. Any idea how to measure what is real (in Hyper-V or elsewhere)? Thanks for any ideas....

Improve this question
6
  • MSSQL doesn't play nice with other services on a box. It should be someplace else....that's just touching on the issues here.
    – Nathan C
    Oct 20, 2014 at 16:27
  • 3
    I am sorry, but your question is a rambling TL;DR mess. Can you edit it to focusing on a specific issue?
    – Zoredache
    Oct 20, 2014 at 16:30
  • 5
    So, you're engineering a huge single point of failure for your entire workforce? Moving to an RDS based environment is fine in principle, but requires a lot of care in practice - having MSSQL running on the same box is no doubt the first of many big mistakes here. If you're doing some kind of development, VDI is probably a better solution anyway but is more costly.
    – Dan
    Oct 20, 2014 at 16:31
  • 10
    There is so much wrong here... I don't... I can't even... I mean... you know what, I'm just going to chose to believe this is a brilliant troll. Kudos, sir, on one hilarious post.
    – HopelessN00b
    Oct 20, 2014 at 16:32
  • 2
    @HopelessN00b - Off topic and no offense to the OP, but your comment had me in stiches. :)
    – joeqwerty
    Oct 20, 2014 at 16:34

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
4

I'll bet any amount of money that one of the problem described in your second paragraph is your disk IO. Check your Disk Queue length in Perfmon on the actual hardware server. If you're using a RAID controller without an enabled write cache (Usually via a BBWC or FBWC, battery or flash-backed write cache), you're doing RDP wrong.

Why do you also have MS SQL on a Terminal Server for interactive users? Get that onto another machine.

Improve this answer
10
  • 5
    In addition, I suspect his disks are SATA which is also a bad recipe. For any decent amount of density you should be looking at 10k SAS at a minimum.
    – Dan
    Oct 20, 2014 at 16:40
  • Hi, Thanks for productive answer. The RAID10 is 4x identical SAS 15Krpm,+ SSD for holding OS and Database...IOps for HDDs seems fine, but I will check that tomorrow when full load will. The thing is : - there is not a tool to simulate a realistic 100 or 200 users on single PC. - I could not find any straight answer, how super-PC should be build - RDP takes me 20Kb/s/user, so here my 1Gb and later 10Gb LAN will be OK for while - so RDP way of work seems good solution - I need single scalable hardware, ideally blade
    – Jozef
    Oct 21, 2014 at 19:27
  • Anyway: I read some good posts about the PCI SSDs, but to be honest : The reply from SQL server is not slow, the HDD is normally not slow (I can copy 10Gb files on backround almost normally) The slowishness seems to be related to NUMA nodes, OS, Hyper-V, or some Software limits - I have slow even Chrome tabs, not only SQL, or HDD related tasks...Is there any topology of : how the hardware/software should be set and used for load of 20users, which will be scaled later on to 100 or more users?..I am talking still about the RDP or PCoIP, etc....single Hardware for all users....any idea?
    – Jozef
    Oct 21, 2014 at 19:33
  • I didn't even whisper the word IOPS - I said "disk queue length", which is quite a bit different.
    – mfinni
    Oct 21, 2014 at 20:42
  • Stop using the phrase "Super PC." Out here in the professional world, we (and microsoft) have been calling it Terminal Server for about 14 years or more.
    – mfinni
    Oct 21, 2014 at 20:43

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .