at 15:44 Mr.Brent, you talk about local SSDs to put tempdb on. I bilieve that "...SQL Server´s plublic toilet.." will have a lot, and probably huge amount of data, coming in and out every second. If I´m correct, does the SSDs are up to the challange, since that they have a very limited lifetime of writing data?
@@marcosoliveira8731 sure, for consulting advice head to BrentOzar.com and contact us there. (Personalized architecture advice is obviously beyond the scope of what I can do in UA-cam comments.) Thanks!
@@TheBrentOzar First of all, thank you to for your time to talk about it. Not really. I meant the SSDs tend to have shorter lifetime than a HD when lots of reads and writes are envolved. The SAN that I´m usign rigth now uses SSDs to cache data and I´d like to propose to the SAN administrator that using this disks for tempdb could be a better option to increase speed and get rid of other issues.Once one disk presents a problem, is just a matter of swap it like any other disk. Often I think that, It seems, we will have to swap SSDs more often that a HD. So the whole idea is ruled out by the SANs admin.
I have been googling all over the internet for a clear explanation of the query execution plan. You are the best!
Great refresher series ,Brent. Basics with clear explanation!!! please do more of these.
Brent, I thank you (and your past/present/future team) so very much for the knowledge you share!
WA stands for Waterloo, Ontario Canada location of Sybase Inc which is where SQL came from.
at 15:44 Mr.Brent, you talk about local SSDs to put tempdb on.
I bilieve that "...SQL Server´s plublic toilet.." will have a lot, and probably huge amount of data, coming in and out every second.
If I´m correct, does the SSDs are up to the challange, since that they have a very limited lifetime of writing data?
Marcos - hmm, are you saying hard drives live forever?
@@marcosoliveira8731 sure, for consulting advice head to BrentOzar.com and contact us there. (Personalized architecture advice is obviously beyond the scope of what I can do in UA-cam comments.) Thanks!
@@TheBrentOzar First of all, thank you to for your time to talk about it. Not really.
I meant the SSDs tend to have shorter lifetime than a HD when lots of reads and writes are envolved.
The SAN that I´m usign rigth now uses SSDs to cache data and I´d like to propose to the SAN administrator that using this disks for tempdb could be a better option to increase speed and get rid of other issues.Once one disk presents a problem, is just a matter of swap it like any other disk. Often I think that, It seems, we will have to swap SSDs more often that a HD. So the whole idea is ruled out by the SANs admin.
@@marcosoliveira8731 OK, cool, sounds like you've got it all under control.
@@TheBrentOzar Thank you!
"Oh the jokes today" lmao
PSA with Brent:
SQL Server doesn't like inappropriate touching.
SQL doesn't like inappropriate touching :D