Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3

    Unanswered: MSQL SERVER EXPRESSS and ecommerce, a good Idea or Bad?

    I work for an E-commerce website/ distribution company that receives on any given day, 800-1600 hits a day. These numbers include the employees (HR department) hitting the site to process orders from the back end of the shopping cart. The database we use now is MSSQL, but on a shared server and it has slowed down terribly. Any dynamic content accessed is starting to "time out" or when accessed is resulting in a ODBC Error. This isen't happening all the time, its jsut becoming more apparent. So I am not trouble shooting the problem, because i know its not a programming problem, Its the shared server.

    We are looking at other hosting options such as VPS and dedicated servers and all of them are coming standard with MSSQL SERVER EXPRESS and/or MySQL.

    My question is, is MSSQL server express capable of supporting our needs? The database itself is no more than 100 meg in size. But I am more concerned about how many people will be accessing the dynamic content at one time especially during work hours.

    Any thoughts? Bad experiences? Any suggestions?

    Cheers!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    3,662
    So how do you know it's not the programming (or the code, as it should be referred to)? What criteria do you apply to come up to this conclusion?
    "The data in a record depends on the Key to the record, the Whole Key, and
    nothing but the Key, so help me Codd."

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3
    Well I guess i can only assume really. I am just basing it on the fact that it just started happening recently and at certain times of the day (busy times). There was not a problem up until now. No modifications in the code have been made except for a new field added here or there, and some HTML stuff.

    If there is something in the code that could effect the time out I am All open ears as this is becoming a big problem.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    12,592
    Provided Answers: 1
    Always look at the code first.
    And coding inefficiencies are more likely to rear their heads during peak hours.
    If it's not practically useful, then it's practically useless.

    blindman
    www.chess.com: "sqlblindman"
    www.LobsterShot.blogspot.com

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    One Flump in One Place
    Posts
    14,912
    Performance will rapidly degrade at a particular threshold rather than linearly with added load. The reason for the degradation cannot inferred without some analysis. To third what has come before - start with the code, the code and then look at the code again.

    To give some perspective, up until recently I worked with half terrabyte databases. Other guys on here work with much larger. Well designed and coded, Access could comfortably handle a 100 MB database, let alone SQL Server.
    Testimonial:
    pootle flump
    ur codings are working excelent.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3
    We have looked at code, and Nothing That i know of could be causing this(of course its obvious. that I am not a master proggrammer). I mean we are talking about something quite simple right? Is there somewhere to be pointed at, a direction for what ever reason for what in the code it might be, A resource of somekind. Because the last to posts have been aimed at checking the code, I have been everywhere on the net that i could find to help resolve this problem and it has all lead to Hardware efficiancy. Though there were some software/coding solutions, they only instructed to change the timeout to infinite or something.

    Any thing on the credibility of MSSQL SERVER EXPRESS and Ecommerce sites?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    5,800
    Provided Answers: 11
    Provided the code is effiicient enough, SQL Express should be able to handle a 100 MB database taking a few thousand queries per hour.

    As to your current problem, have you run Profiler against the database in question, to check what queries are running for longer than say 2 seconds?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    5,800
    Provided Answers: 11
    One of the reasons we are encouraging to look at the code can be illustrated by a fairly simple example of a Cartesian Join. In this example, you can increase the number of rows in a (very simplified) table by 100, then see how long a Cartesian Join with itself takes to execute. My test box is admittedly slow (one processor), but it did not take all that long for me to go over the default ODBC timeout of 30 seconds:

    Code:
    -- Create an oversimplified table
    create table test1
    (col1 int)
    
    -- Populate with 100 rows (can be run multiple times)
    insert into test1
    select top 100 row_number() over (order by type)
    from sys.allocation_units
    
    -- Run the Cartesian Join query
    select a.col1, b.col1
    from test1 a, test1 b
    
    /* results for my own test box.
    rows	time
    100	0:01
    200	0:02
    300	0:07
    400	0:12
    500	0:19
    600	0:28
    700	0:37
    */

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    12,592
    Provided Answers: 1
    Quote Originally Posted by pootle flump
    Well designed and coded, Access could comfortably handle a 100 MB database, let alone SQL Server.
    Heck, I ran a nearly 2gb database on Access 2.0 10 years ago.
    If it's not practically useful, then it's practically useless.

    blindman
    www.chess.com: "sqlblindman"
    www.LobsterShot.blogspot.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •