Server Performance from upgrades

Yahoo Archive
1
Gary
If I read your response correctly you only have 16 GB of hard disk
space....I'm still on 6.0 with 135 users. In the past three years my DB
has grown from 2.4 GB to 11.25 GB. I would recommend MORE hard disk
space available. I don't know your number of users and volume but my
grows at a 100 MB a month rate.

Cliff

________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Mark Turner
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 7:45 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades



Gary,

We are new customers and will not go live until May 08. We are running
dual Quad Zeons at 2Ghz with a 1333FSB. We are running the 64 bit
Windows Server 2003 Standard. As long as it is the 64 bit version, then
Standard can still access more than 4GB of memory. (We have 16GB) Raid
10 gives you fault tollerance and better speed. We went with the 15K SAS
drives, but I don't know what the difference would have been with 10K.

Mark Turner

----- Original Message ----
From: Cliff Drumeller <cliff@...
<mailto:cliff%40massprecision.com> >
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 10:20:05 AM
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades

Gary
You might lay your hands on Windows Standard Server 2008.. RC1 is due
out any time now. The standard version is supposed to support 64 bit
address space. Basically unlimited ram.

Cliff

____________ _________ _________ __

From: vantage@yahoogroups .com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups .com] On
Behalf
Of fvrm1510
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 12:41 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
Subject: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades

We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
year.

We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would like
to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
from our current configuration.

We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid 1
with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.

New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s would
have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.

We would appreciate advice/recommendati ons on the following:
We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.

A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
other?
B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
operating system to the other?
C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage -
is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
this on a different server?

The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
is enough drives to configure Raid 10.

A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
the faster hard drive speeds?
B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?

Thanks,
Gary Khulanek
Fasse Valves
308.233.2040
or email to dlabrayere@fasse. com <mailto:dlabrayere% 40fasse.com>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__________________________________________________________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo!
FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/ <http://farechase.yahoo.com/>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2
We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
year.

We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would like
to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
from our current configuration.

We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid 1
with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.

New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s would
have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.

We would appreciate advice/recommendations on the following:
We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.

A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
other?
B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
operating system to the other?
C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage —
is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
this on a different server?

The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
is enough drives to configure Raid 10.

A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
the faster hard drive speeds?
B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?

Thanks,
Gary Khulanek
Fasse Valves
308.233.2040
or email to dlabrayere@...
3
I think you are locked out of standard version if you want to implement 8 GB RAM on 2003.

The only time I have ever actually had anyone not recommend against AD on a DB box is when running a single SBS.
Remember, lots of things happen with AD: authentication, ISA communication, group policy, profile management, and Exchange lookups (if any are applicaple to you.) Also, remember than with a single AD server, that server is the global catalog. If you insist on having AD run on the vantage server as a backup, I would still think that running the GC on a separate machine would be the smarter thing to do if you already have the non-vantage-running hardware available.

Carey


To: vantage@yahoogroups.comFrom: fvrm1510@...: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:41:28 +0000Subject: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades




We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the year. We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would like to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained from our current configuration.We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800 MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid 1 with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s would have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram. We would appreciate advice/recommendations on the following:We would like to go to Windows Server 2003. A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the other?B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one operating system to the other?C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage � is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having this on a different server?The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there is enough drives to configure Raid 10.A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with the faster hard drive speeds? B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10 environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?Thanks,Gary KhulanekFasse Valves308.233.2040or email to dlabrayere@...






_________________________________________________________________
Kick back and relax with hot games and cool activities at the Messenger Caf�.
http://www.cafemessenger.com?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_SeptWLtagline

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
4
Gary,

Point A

With 8GB of physical memory you would
need windows 2003 enterprise edition or 64 bit standard edition to
utilize over 4GB of memory.

Point B

There are many factors to consider, but
even 32 bit applications can benefit from a 64bit OS. Memory addressing
available per process is one of them.

Point C

Active directory load would be minimal
with 20 users, I doubt you would see a noticeable improvement in
removing this, but I would recommend just installing vantage on your new
machine and look at multiple domain controllers if you haven't already.



The disk subsystem configuration should not be overlooked when
specifying hardware. You should look at separating items such as the OS,
DB and BI files at a minimum.

Locating working and temporary directories can also help.

Raid 10 is good, but often multiple Raid 1 volumes can provide better
overall performance separating the different types of IO, Sequential /
Random reads and writes.



Regards,

Stephen



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of fvrm1510
Sent: 13 September 2007 20:41
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades



We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
year.

We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would like
to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
from our current configuration.

We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid 1
with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.

New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s would
have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.

We would appreciate advice/recommendations on the following:
We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.

A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
other?
B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
operating system to the other?
C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage -
is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
this on a different server?

The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
is enough drives to configure Raid 10.

A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
the faster hard drive speeds?
B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?

Thanks,
Gary Khulanek
Fasse Valves
308.233.2040





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
5
Enterprise edition is what you need. Standard only supports 4 GB RAM but
also only 4 processors. With 8 overall processor cores you could get a
lack in full utilization, on top of the RAM issue. My suggestion would
be to leave your existing server running online as the DC and get this
new server for Vantage only.



Then you always can also have an active server to roll back to in case
of any severe hardware failure on your primary Vantage server as well as
freeing up your current server to run those necessary processes.

I would also say go with a RAID 5 if you are looking for additional disk
I/O performance, also provides solid fault tolerance, but not to the
level of a RAID 10. That choice basicly just comes down to budget,
business needs, and your personal preference.





Steve Mulder
Information Systems
Rosenboom Machine & Tool



________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of fvrm1510
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 2:41 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades



We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
year.

We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would like
to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
from our current configuration.

We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid 1
with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.

New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s would
have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.

We would appreciate advice/recommendations on the following:
We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.

A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
other?
B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
operating system to the other?
C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage -
is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
this on a different server?

The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
is enough drives to configure Raid 10.

A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
the faster hard drive speeds?
B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?

Thanks,
Gary Khulanek
Fasse Valves
308.233.2040
or email to dlabrayere@... <mailto:dlabrayere%40fasse.com>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
6
Gary,



Would recommend putting Vantage on a separate Windows 2003 server. You
can buy Standard 64-bit edition and this will allow you to bypass the
4GB limit while eventually being able to take advantage of the 64-bit
processing - not available until 8.03.400 as Progress needs the newest
release 10.1b. 8.03.305 seems to work fine on 64-bit edition (in a
32-bit mode though), however, Epicor does not support this scenario. In
order for you to take advantage o the 8GB of RAM you will need either
64-bit edition or Enterprise edition. Unless you have plans for
clustering and some of the other key features in Enterprise edition,
there is no need for the extra expense. The hardware specs you posted
are good, the only thing I would recommend would be a faster FSB - you
spec'd out 677mhz, but you may consider something like a 1033 or better.



I would avoid putting active directory on this server as any extra
network traffic or "noise" could impact overall performance. If you
still feel this is necessary, probably should limit the amount of
replications to this server to once an hour.



RAID 10 or RAID 1 good choices. Not too much speed increase from one or
the other...but the more spindles or hard drives you can spread across
the better you are.



Hope this helps.



Thanks,



Jason Claggett

Microsoft Small Business Specialist

MCP #3856159

2W Technologies, LLC

312.533.4033 x8039

jason@...



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of fvrm1510
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 3:41 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades



We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
year.

We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would like
to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
from our current configuration.

We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid 1
with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.

New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s would
have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.

We would appreciate advice/recommendations on the following:
We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.

A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
other?
B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
operating system to the other?
C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage -
is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
this on a different server?

The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
is enough drives to configure Raid 10.

A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
the faster hard drive speeds?
B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?

Thanks,
Gary Khulanek
Fasse Valves
308.233.2040
or email to dlabrayere@... <mailto:dlabrayere%40fasse.com>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
7
Gary,



I overlooked the 1333Mhz for the FSB on your server specs...you should
be good with that.



Thanks,



Jason Claggett

Microsoft Small Business Specialist

MCP #3856159

2W Technologies, LLC

312.533.4033 x8039

jason@...



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Jason Claggett
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 9:01 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades



Gary,

Would recommend putting Vantage on a separate Windows 2003 server. You
can buy Standard 64-bit edition and this will allow you to bypass the
4GB limit while eventually being able to take advantage of the 64-bit
processing - not available until 8.03.400 as Progress needs the newest
release 10.1b. 8.03.305 seems to work fine on 64-bit edition (in a
32-bit mode though), however, Epicor does not support this scenario. In
order for you to take advantage o the 8GB of RAM you will need either
64-bit edition or Enterprise edition. Unless you have plans for
clustering and some of the other key features in Enterprise edition,
there is no need for the extra expense. The hardware specs you posted
are good, the only thing I would recommend would be a faster FSB - you
spec'd out 677mhz, but you may consider something like a 1033 or better.

I would avoid putting active directory on this server as any extra
network traffic or "noise" could impact overall performance. If you
still feel this is necessary, probably should limit the amount of
replications to this server to once an hour.

RAID 10 or RAID 1 good choices. Not too much speed increase from one or
the other...but the more spindles or hard drives you can spread across
the better you are.

Hope this helps.

Thanks,

Jason Claggett

Microsoft Small Business Specialist

MCP #3856159

2W Technologies, LLC

312.533.4033 x8039

jason@... <mailto:jason%402wtech.com>

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
Of fvrm1510
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 3:41 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades

We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
year.

We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would like
to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
from our current configuration.

We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid 1
with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.

New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s would
have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.

We would appreciate advice/recommendations on the following:
We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.

A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
other?
B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
operating system to the other?
C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage -
is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
this on a different server?

The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
is enough drives to configure Raid 10.

A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
the faster hard drive speeds?
B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?

Thanks,
Gary Khulanek
Fasse Valves
308.233.2040
or email to dlabrayere@... <mailto:dlabrayere%40fasse.com>
<mailto:dlabrayere%40fasse.com>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
8
We are not live yet, but we run Vantage 8.03 on a similar hardware
configuration.

We run dual Xeons, 64-bit Windows 2003 Standard with 16gb of ram.
Vantage is still very slow for us. We have heard that the .400
release will provide a performance boost. So, we are planning to
install that before we go live.

It takes up to 5 minutes for us to get details for a Method. Vantage
8.03 is painfully slow for us.


--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "fvrm1510" <fvrm1510@...> wrote:
>
> We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
> gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
> ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
> Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
> year.
>
> We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would
like
> to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
> from our current configuration.
>
> We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
> approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
> Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
> MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid
1
> with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.
>
> New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
> Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s
would
> have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.
>
> We would appreciate advice/recommendations on the following:
> We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.
>
> A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
> Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
> recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
> other?
> B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
> anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
> operating system to the other?
> C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage —

> is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
> this on a different server?
>
> The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
> is enough drives to configure Raid 10.
>
> A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
> the faster hard drive speeds?
> B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
> environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?
>
> Thanks,
> Gary Khulanek
> Fasse Valves
> 308.233.2040
> or email to dlabrayere@...
>
9
Have you spoke with Epicor at all as to why it takes 5 min? That is
unusually long. There has to be to it than hardware. How my operation
in your processes? How many Sub-Assemblies? Is virus protection off?
What RAID are you using?



Paul



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of lapulsifer
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 10:44 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Server Performance from upgrades



We are not live yet, but we run Vantage 8.03 on a similar hardware
configuration.

We run dual Xeons, 64-bit Windows 2003 Standard with 16gb of ram.
Vantage is still very slow for us. We have heard that the .400
release will provide a performance boost. So, we are planning to
install that before we go live.

It takes up to 5 minutes for us to get details for a Method. Vantage
8.03 is painfully slow for us.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"fvrm1510" <fvrm1510@...> wrote:
>
> We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
> gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
> ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
> Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
> year.
>
> We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would
like
> to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
> from our current configuration.
>
> We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
> approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
> Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
> MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid
1
> with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.
>
> New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
> Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s
would
> have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.
>
> We would appreciate advice/recommendations on the following:
> We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.
>
> A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
> Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
> recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
> other?
> B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
> anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
> operating system to the other?
> C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage -

> is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
> this on a different server?
>
> The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
> is enough drives to configure Raid 10.
>
> A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
> the faster hard drive speeds?
> B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
> environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?
>
> Thanks,
> Gary Khulanek
> Fasse Valves
> 308.233.2040
> or email to dlabrayere@...
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
10
Steve, Gary,
Please note I will strongly disagree with Steve on the Disk configuration.
This is not intended to be an argument or flame at Steve in any way, but due
to the technical nature of this group, it is intended to set the record
straight and then to give my opinion related to the issue.
First, Raid 5 is not Supported by either Progress or Epicor!
Second, if you read up on performance for various levels of Raid you will
find that Raid 5 is recommended for file servers due to fast file access,
but Raid 10 is recommended for database applications partially due to the
excessive amount of I/O created by database applications and the additional
I/O of parity in Raid 5 causing premature wear of disks.
Third, I highly recommend Raid 10 for Vantage. The reason is that when I
started with Vantage Plastics I inherited a server that was configured by an
outside IT service that did not follow the recommendations of Epicor and
chose to configure a Raid 5 array. That server lasted about 3 years (the
warranty on the drives) until about a year ago when 2 drives of the Raid 5
array failed. We lost 24 hours of data due to the timing of the failure in
relation to the backup routines.
So, if you are using or planning on using Raid 5, rethink it soon. Raid 10
can survive multiple drive failure and that does happen. It also is much
faster than Raid1. It also is supported by Epicor and Progress (as is
Raid1). It can also be set up with as little as 4 drives (as compared with
3 for Raid 5) and consider if your Vantage data is worth the extra couple
hundred dollars.
I personally keep my OS on a separate Raid1 served by a separate Raid
controller (onboard in my case) and then have a dedicated Raid 10 controller
for my Vantage drives. All our drives are 15K rpm SAS drives for
performance. I buy $2 keyboards and $3 mice and make similar sacrifices
across the rest of my budget so Vantage can run as fast and reliable as
possible.
Steve, I hope you do not take offence to my comments, but with my history
and knowing that nearly 2000 people belong to this list, I feel a need to
speak whenever a recommendation is made to run Vantage on a Raid 5 array.
Aaron Hoyt
Vantage Plastics

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
Steve Mulder
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 4:43 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades


Enterprise edition is what you need. Standard only supports 4 GB RAM but
also only 4 processors. With 8 overall processor cores you could get a
lack in full utilization, on top of the RAM issue. My suggestion would
be to leave your existing server running online as the DC and get this
new server for Vantage only.

Then you always can also have an active server to roll back to in case
of any severe hardware failure on your primary Vantage server as well as
freeing up your current server to run those necessary processes.

I would also say go with a RAID 5 if you are looking for additional disk
I/O performance, also provides solid fault tolerance, but not to the
level of a RAID 10. That choice basicly just comes down to budget,
business needs, and your personal preference.

Steve Mulder
Information Systems
Rosenboom Machine & Tool

________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of fvrm1510
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 2:41 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades

We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
year.

We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would like
to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
from our current configuration.

We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid 1
with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.

New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s would
have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.

We would appreciate advice/recommendations on the following:
We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.

A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
other?
B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
operating system to the other?
C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage -
is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
this on a different server?

The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
is enough drives to configure Raid 10.

A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
the faster hard drive speeds?
B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?

Thanks,
Gary Khulanek
Fasse Valves
308.233.2040
or email to dlabrayere@... <mailto:dlabrayere%40fasse.com>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
11
Aaron,

We went with a raid 10 array on our Vantage server about three years ago. It's much faster than our old raid 5 array and like you said it's supported by Epicor and Progress. Drives are cheap these days, get 6 of the 300GB SAS drives, configure a RAID 10, set one as a global hot spare and your ready to rock and roll.

JMO
Paul L.

________________________________
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Aaron Hoyt
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 10:22 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades


Steve, Gary,
Please note I will strongly disagree with Steve on the Disk configuration.
This is not intended to be an argument or flame at Steve in any way, but due
to the technical nature of this group, it is intended to set the record
straight and then to give my opinion related to the issue.
First, Raid 5 is not Supported by either Progress or Epicor!
Second, if you read up on performance for various levels of Raid you will
find that Raid 5 is recommended for file servers due to fast file access,
but Raid 10 is recommended for database applications partially due to the
excessive amount of I/O created by database applications and the additional
I/O of parity in Raid 5 causing premature wear of disks.
Third, I highly recommend Raid 10 for Vantage. The reason is that when I
started with Vantage Plastics I inherited a server that was configured by an
outside IT service that did not follow the recommendations of Epicor and
chose to configure a Raid 5 array. That server lasted about 3 years (the
warranty on the drives) until about a year ago when 2 drives of the Raid 5
array failed. We lost 24 hours of data due to the timing of the failure in
relation to the backup routines.
So, if you are using or planning on using Raid 5, rethink it soon. Raid 10
can survive multiple drive failure and that does happen. It also is much
faster than Raid1. It also is supported by Epicor and Progress (as is
Raid1). It can also be set up with as little as 4 drives (as compared with
3 for Raid 5) and consider if your Vantage data is worth the extra couple
hundred dollars.
I personally keep my OS on a separate Raid1 served by a separate Raid
controller (onboard in my case) and then have a dedicated Raid 10 controller
for my Vantage drives. All our drives are 15K rpm SAS drives for
performance. I buy $2 keyboards and $3 mice and make similar sacrifices
across the rest of my budget so Vantage can run as fast and reliable as
possible.
Steve, I hope you do not take offence to my comments, but with my history
and knowing that nearly 2000 people belong to this list, I feel a need to
speak whenever a recommendation is made to run Vantage on a Raid 5 array.
Aaron Hoyt
Vantage Plastics

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>]On Behalf Of
Steve Mulder
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 4:43 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades

Enterprise edition is what you need. Standard only supports 4 GB RAM but
also only 4 processors. With 8 overall processor cores you could get a
lack in full utilization, on top of the RAM issue. My suggestion would
be to leave your existing server running online as the DC and get this
new server for Vantage only.

Then you always can also have an active server to roll back to in case
of any severe hardware failure on your primary Vantage server as well as
freeing up your current server to run those necessary processes.

I would also say go with a RAID 5 if you are looking for additional disk
I/O performance, also provides solid fault tolerance, but not to the
level of a RAID 10. That choice basicly just comes down to budget,
business needs, and your personal preference.

Steve Mulder
Information Systems
Rosenboom Machine & Tool

________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf
Of fvrm1510
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 2:41 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades

We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
year.

We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would like
to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
from our current configuration.

We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid 1
with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.

New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s would
have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.

We would appreciate advice/recommendations on the following:
We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.

A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
other?
B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
operating system to the other?
C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage -
is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
this on a different server?

The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
is enough drives to configure Raid 10.

A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
the faster hard drive speeds?
B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?

Thanks,
Gary Khulanek
Fasse Valves
308.233.2040
or email to dlabrayere@...<mailto:dlabrayere%40fasse.com> <mailto:dlabrayere%40fasse.com>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
12
Aaron is 100% correct. Vantage doesn't support RAID5 it isn't the way
to go.



Paul



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Aaron Hoyt
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 11:22 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades



Steve, Gary,
Please note I will strongly disagree with Steve on the Disk
configuration.
This is not intended to be an argument or flame at Steve in any way, but
due
to the technical nature of this group, it is intended to set the record
straight and then to give my opinion related to the issue.
First, Raid 5 is not Supported by either Progress or Epicor!
Second, if you read up on performance for various levels of Raid you
will
find that Raid 5 is recommended for file servers due to fast file
access,
but Raid 10 is recommended for database applications partially due to
the
excessive amount of I/O created by database applications and the
additional
I/O of parity in Raid 5 causing premature wear of disks.
Third, I highly recommend Raid 10 for Vantage. The reason is that when I
started with Vantage Plastics I inherited a server that was configured
by an
outside IT service that did not follow the recommendations of Epicor and
chose to configure a Raid 5 array. That server lasted about 3 years (the
warranty on the drives) until about a year ago when 2 drives of the Raid
5
array failed. We lost 24 hours of data due to the timing of the failure
in
relation to the backup routines.
So, if you are using or planning on using Raid 5, rethink it soon. Raid
10
can survive multiple drive failure and that does happen. It also is much
faster than Raid1. It also is supported by Epicor and Progress (as is
Raid1). It can also be set up with as little as 4 drives (as compared
with
3 for Raid 5) and consider if your Vantage data is worth the extra
couple
hundred dollars.
I personally keep my OS on a separate Raid1 served by a separate Raid
controller (onboard in my case) and then have a dedicated Raid 10
controller
for my Vantage drives. All our drives are 15K rpm SAS drives for
performance. I buy $2 keyboards and $3 mice and make similar sacrifices
across the rest of my budget so Vantage can run as fast and reliable as
possible.
Steve, I hope you do not take offence to my comments, but with my
history
and knowing that nearly 2000 people belong to this list, I feel a need
to
speak whenever a recommendation is made to run Vantage on a Raid 5
array.
Aaron Hoyt
Vantage Plastics

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ]On
Behalf Of
Steve Mulder
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 4:43 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades

Enterprise edition is what you need. Standard only supports 4 GB RAM but
also only 4 processors. With 8 overall processor cores you could get a
lack in full utilization, on top of the RAM issue. My suggestion would
be to leave your existing server running online as the DC and get this
new server for Vantage only.

Then you always can also have an active server to roll back to in case
of any severe hardware failure on your primary Vantage server as well as
freeing up your current server to run those necessary processes.

I would also say go with a RAID 5 if you are looking for additional disk
I/O performance, also provides solid fault tolerance, but not to the
level of a RAID 10. That choice basicly just comes down to budget,
business needs, and your personal preference.

Steve Mulder
Information Systems
Rosenboom Machine & Tool

________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
Of fvrm1510
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 2:41 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades

We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
year.

We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would like
to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
from our current configuration.

We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid 1
with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.

New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s would
have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.

We would appreciate advice/recommendations on the following:
We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.

A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
other?
B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
operating system to the other?
C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage -
is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
this on a different server?

The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
is enough drives to configure Raid 10.

A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
the faster hard drive speeds?
B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?

Thanks,
Gary Khulanek
Fasse Valves
308.233.2040
or email to dlabrayere@... <mailto:dlabrayere%40fasse.com>
<mailto:dlabrayere%40fasse.com>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
13
I agree with Aaron

All tests done for RAID 10 versus RAID 5 show that RAID 10 is faster,
especially for writes, reads are roughly equal.

As far as specing out a server. In my case, 30 users, close to 1GB DB (went
live last September) I have watched the CPU and Memory performances on my
Server 2003 Standard Edition, Dual Xeon 3.2GHz Processors with 4GB RAM.

Currently I have 8.0 Live and Test DB running along with 1 DB for 8.03
running in a Test Mode (going to 8.03 in November). Even with those 3 DBs
and the 9 related AppServers running my CPU utilization has not gone over
50%, averaging around 27%, and my Physical Memory Usage is at 3GB steady.

So I my opinion it is the disk I/O system that is most critical. Run RAID 10
with the fastest drives you can, 15,000 RPM SAS is the best option out
there.

Also, with the posts that I am reading the 8.03.400 is the performance boost
we have been looking for from Vantage.

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Aaron Hoyt
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 10:22 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades

Steve, Gary,
Please note I will strongly disagree with Steve on the Disk configuration.
This is not intended to be an argument or flame at Steve in any way, but due
to the technical nature of this group, it is intended to set the record
straight and then to give my opinion related to the issue.
First, Raid 5 is not Supported by either Progress or Epicor!
Second, if you read up on performance for various levels of Raid you will
find that Raid 5 is recommended for file servers due to fast file access,
but Raid 10 is recommended for database applications partially due to the
excessive amount of I/O created by database applications and the additional
I/O of parity in Raid 5 causing premature wear of disks.
Third, I highly recommend Raid 10 for Vantage. The reason is that when I
started with Vantage Plastics I inherited a server that was configured by an
outside IT service that did not follow the recommendations of Epicor and
chose to configure a Raid 5 array. That server lasted about 3 years (the
warranty on the drives) until about a year ago when 2 drives of the Raid 5
array failed. We lost 24 hours of data due to the timing of the failure in
relation to the backup routines.
So, if you are using or planning on using Raid 5, rethink it soon. Raid 10
can survive multiple drive failure and that does happen. It also is much
faster than Raid1. It also is supported by Epicor and Progress (as is
Raid1). It can also be set up with as little as 4 drives (as compared with
3 for Raid 5) and consider if your Vantage data is worth the extra couple
hundred dollars.
I personally keep my OS on a separate Raid1 served by a separate Raid
controller (onboard in my case) and then have a dedicated Raid 10 controller
for my Vantage drives. All our drives are 15K rpm SAS drives for
performance. I buy $2 keyboards and $3 mice and make similar sacrifices
across the rest of my budget so Vantage can run as fast and reliable as
possible.
Steve, I hope you do not take offence to my comments, but with my history
and knowing that nearly 2000 people belong to this list, I feel a need to
speak whenever a recommendation is made to run Vantage on a Raid 5 array.
Aaron Hoyt
Vantage Plastics

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
Steve Mulder
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 4:43 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades


Enterprise edition is what you need. Standard only supports 4 GB RAM but
also only 4 processors. With 8 overall processor cores you could get a
lack in full utilization, on top of the RAM issue. My suggestion would
be to leave your existing server running online as the DC and get this
new server for Vantage only.

Then you always can also have an active server to roll back to in case
of any severe hardware failure on your primary Vantage server as well as
freeing up your current server to run those necessary processes.

I would also say go with a RAID 5 if you are looking for additional disk
I/O performance, also provides solid fault tolerance, but not to the
level of a RAID 10. That choice basicly just comes down to budget,
business needs, and your personal preference.

Steve Mulder
Information Systems
Rosenboom Machine & Tool

________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of fvrm1510
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 2:41 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades

We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
year.

We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would like
to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
from our current configuration.

We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid 1
with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.

New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s would
have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.

We would appreciate advice/recommendations on the following:
We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.

A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
other?
B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
operating system to the other?
C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage -
is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
this on a different server?

The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
is enough drives to configure Raid 10.

A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
the faster hard drive speeds?
B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?

Thanks,
Gary Khulanek
Fasse Valves
308.233.2040
or email to dlabrayere@... <mailto:dlabrayere%40fasse.com>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
Yahoo! Groups Links
14
> The disk subsystem configuration should not be overlooked when
> specifying hardware. You should look at separating items such as
the OS,
> DB and BI files at a minimum.
>
> Locating working and temporary directories can also help.
>

Regarding the separation of O/S, DB and BI files etc., is this
accomplished by using multiple disk controllers? How are folks
configuring their servers to do this?

[OT] Regarding Windows Server 2003 and processor use, when the O/S
specs say that N number of processors are supported, say 4 or 8, are
they referring to Cores or sockets?

Thank you in advance for any and all responses!

Peter Dunbar
Halm Industries Co., Inc.
15
According to the 8.x System Administration Course from Perspectives last year, you should avoid Raid 5 arrays on the server. Under the Trouble Shooting Servers section the quote is as follows:
"No Raid 5 arrays on the server ! Raid 5 is very slow as far as writing to databases. Also, when a user upgrades, it will take about five times longer to Schema Change and convert a database. Raid 5 is not recommended for any relationship database (as most ERP databases are)."

Claudia Stone
Aspacia Systems Inc
866-566-9600

www.aspacia.com

This email, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify me by telephone and permanently delete the original and any copy of any email and any printout thereof.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
16
I agree with my colleagues response, except for the fact that it is NOT
RECOMMENDED to run on RAID 5.






Toby Boogerd
Information Systems
712-324-4854 x1119

NOTICE: This email may contain confidential and proprietary information
of Rosenboom Machine & Tool, Inc. By opening any enclosed files, the
recipient agrees not to use, reproduce, disclose, or manufacture its
contents, in whole or in part, without prior written consent of
Rosenboom Machine & Tool, Inc.



________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Steve Mulder
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 3:43 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades



Enterprise edition is what you need. Standard only supports 4 GB RAM but
also only 4 processors. With 8 overall processor cores you could get a
lack in full utilization, on top of the RAM issue. My suggestion would
be to leave your existing server running online as the DC and get this
new server for Vantage only.

Then you always can also have an active server to roll back to in case
of any severe hardware failure on your primary Vantage server as well as
freeing up your current server to run those necessary processes.

I would also say go with a RAID 5 if you are looking for additional disk
I/O performance, also provides solid fault tolerance, but not to the
level of a RAID 10. That choice basicly just comes down to budget,
business needs, and your personal preference.

Steve Mulder
Information Systems
Rosenboom Machine & Tool

________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
Of fvrm1510
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 2:41 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades

We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
year.

We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would like
to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
from our current configuration.

We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid 1
with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.

New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s would
have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.

We would appreciate advice/recommendations on the following:
We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.

A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
other?
B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
operating system to the other?
C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage -
is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
this on a different server?

The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
is enough drives to configure Raid 10.

A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
the faster hard drive speeds?
B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?

Thanks,
Gary Khulanek
Fasse Valves
308.233.2040
or email to dlabrayere@... <mailto:dlabrayere%40fasse.com>
<mailto:dlabrayere%40fasse.com>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
17
Gary
You might lay your hands on Windows Standard Server 2008. RC1 is due
out any time now. The standard version is supposed to support 64 bit
address space. Basically unlimited ram.

Cliff

________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of fvrm1510
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 12:41 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades



We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
year.

We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would like
to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
from our current configuration.

We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid 1
with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.

New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s would
have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.

We would appreciate advice/recommendations on the following:
We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.

A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
other?
B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
operating system to the other?
C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage -
is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
this on a different server?

The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
is enough drives to configure Raid 10.

A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
the faster hard drive speeds?
B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?

Thanks,
Gary Khulanek
Fasse Valves
308.233.2040
or email to dlabrayere@... <mailto:dlabrayere%40fasse.com>






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
18
Gary,

We are new customers and will not go live until May 08. We are running dual Quad Zeons at 2Ghz with a 1333FSB. We are running the 64 bit Windows Server 2003 Standard. As long as it is the 64 bit version, then Standard can still access more than 4GB of memory. (We have 16GB) Raid 10 gives you fault tollerance and better speed. We went with the 15K SAS drives, but I don't know what the difference would have been with 10K.

Mark Turner


----- Original Message ----
From: Cliff Drumeller <cliff@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 10:20:05 AM
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades

Gary
You might lay your hands on Windows Standard Server 2008.. RC1 is due
out any time now. The standard version is supposed to support 64 bit
address space. Basically unlimited ram.

Cliff

____________ _________ _________ __

From: vantage@yahoogroups .com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups .com] On Behalf
Of fvrm1510
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 12:41 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
Subject: [Vantage] Server Performance from upgrades

We are still looking for a performance increase even though we did
gain from some of your responses on performance issues a few weeks
ago (thanks to all who helped!) As a reminder we are running
Vantage 8.0 with a likely transition to 8.03 at the end of the
year.

We are currently looking at upgrading server hardware and would like
to have some input as to what improvements if any would be gained
from our current configuration.

We are currently running on one server with Vantage 8.00 & have
approximately 20 users on the system. Our operating system is
Windows Server 2000 with two Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz/1MB processors, 800
MHz FSB, & 3.4 GB of ram running at 400MHZ. We are running Raid 1
with two hard drives that run at 10,000 rpm.

New server/s that we are considering would have two Intel Quad Core
Xeon processors 2x4MB Cache, 2.66Ghz, 1333Mhz FSB. The unit/s would
have at least 8 GB 677MHz of ram.

We would appreciate advice/recommendati ons on the following:
We would like to go to Windows Server 2003.

A. We are considering installing either the Standard version or the
Enterprise version of Windows Server 2003. Can anyone make
recommendation as to possible advantages of one system over the
other?
B. When 64 bit technology is eventually supported in Vantage, can
anyone tell us if there would be a performance advantage from one
operating system to the other?
C. Our active directory is currently on the same server as Vantage -
is anyone doing this or is there a performance advantage to having
this on a different server?

The new Server/s have hard drives that run at 15,000 rpm and there
is enough drives to configure Raid 10.

A. Would we likely see any performance increase in Vantage 8 with
the faster hard drive speeds?
B. What if any performance improvements would we gain in a Raid 10
environment vs our current raid 1 configuration?

Thanks,
Gary Khulanek
Fasse Valves
308.233.2040
or email to dlabrayere@fasse. com <mailto:dlabrayere% 40fasse.com>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]