views:

3966

answers:

4

I'm looking into running a single instance web application on SQL Server 2008. What are the specific advantages that the Enterprise version has over the Standard version in terms of speed. I'm not looking at the management and reporting side of things, which I understand Enterprise is much better at, but just at raw speed point of view. Based on the information found here, I've only been able to find a few differences.

  1. Parallel index operations - Only matters when you're creating or altering indexes. Does nothing to effect day to day speed.

  2. Table and Index Partitioning - Does this really make a difference if everything is on the same disk/raid array?

  3. Limited to 4 CPUs - I understand this is number of physical processor sockets, not cores, and I don't plan on needing a server ever that has more than 4 sockets. If I do, the extra cost of SQL Server Enterprise is going to be negligible. Or I could just use replication with multiple machines, which Standard edition also supports.

Basically, what it comes down to, is Enterprise really worth the extra cash ($8487 + CAL vs. $885 + CAL), for a single instance web application?

+2  A: 

I don't believe the CAL license permits you to sit SQL Server behind a web server application. You must purchase a per-processor license to do that. Even if not, if you have more than 25 users/devices, the per-processor model is less costly (you need a CAL for each user or each device connected).

Per-processor pricing for Enterprise is $24,999 and for Standard it's $5,999. You might also look into Web edition, which is $15/mo. per processor.

In answer to your question, there is some stuff like indexed views, but if you have less than 10,000 users total, your schema and query design will have way more of an impact on performance than any features not included in standard or web edition.

Robert C. Barth
The way I undestand it, Each web server that's accessing the database can be give a single client access license. A per processor license is used in situations where you want to have a large number (hundreds?) of individual machines/users access the database at the same time.
Kibbee
@Kibbee: Look under "multiplexing" on this page: http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2005/en/us/Special-Considerations.aspx. That basically indicates that you either need CALs for the web site users (not realistic) or a proc license.
John Rudy
Exactly. Kibbee, you are incorrect. You would circumvent the entire licensing structure if you could just always build an app in front of the database and call it one CAL. Besides the fact that the language of the CAL says you can't do that.
Robert C. Barth
FYI, the device license is for when you have an application that runs in a call center, and multiple users per machine would be using the SQL Server. The regular CAL is for single user desktops accessing the SQL Server. Proc licenses are for everything else (web apps, etc.)
Robert C. Barth
A: 

Unless you're going to have huge databases, no, it's not worth it, spend the extra money on tuning the database design.

SqlACID
Define "huge".
Kibbee
100's of millions of rows.
Robert C. Barth
100GB+ or more than 1000+ users connecting at once.
SqlACID
+2  A: 

In short - given you're worrying about performances I don't think the extra-cash is worth it unless you need extensive use of full mirroring and the other extras you mention.

Following links might be helpful:

SQLServer2008 Standard VS Workgroup

Differences between SQLServer2008 editions - similar to the one you have there

JohnIdol
A: 

You really need to use the Processor licensing. There are more complicated issues regarding the licensing than you might think.

BobbyShaftoe

related questions