| Author |
Topic |
Nooma K'Larr
Minmatar |
Posted - 2009.09.22 23:45:00 - [ 1]
So with the DB upgrade of SQL 2005 to SQL 2008, will we (the client side) notice any change or improvement? |
Nooma K'Larr
Minmatar |
Posted - 2009.09.23 05:53:00 - [ 2]
anyone?  |
Elisa Llass
Terra Prime Industries |
Posted - 2009.09.23 06:16:00 - [ 3]
You really think they went with MSSQL? |
Lork Niffle
Gallente
External Hard Drive |
Posted - 2009.09.23 06:17:00 - [ 4]
 Originally by: Elisa Llass
You really think they went with MSSQL?
Yes, they did, since MySQl doesnt offer the support that Microsoft gives. In the business world you need a support mechanism since things always go wrong and with a database like tranquility it's certainly above some others in it's dynamic usage. |
Serge Bastana
Gallente
GWA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 06:28:00 - [ 5]
It was well advertised that they were upgrading from SQL Server 2005 to 2008 a couple of months back, they put off the upgrade when the patch for Apoc 1.5 was released.
From what I've read about SQL Server 2008 it has some impressive features. It should allow them to optimize stored procedures in the DB even further for faster response times in the market and session changes, but it will be interesting how it will affect us ingame. |
destinationunreachable
Hello Kitty Fanclub |
Posted - 2009.09.23 08:44:00 - [ 6]
Originally by: Serge Bastana
It was well advertised that they were upgrading from SQL Server 2005 to 2008 a couple of months back, they put off the upgrade when the patch for Apoc 1.5 was released.
From what I've read about SQL Server 2008 it has some impressive features. It should allow them to optimize stored procedures in the DB even further for faster response times in the market and session changes, but it will be interesting how it will affect us ingame.
Last time I checked MySQL offered superior support than MS, or was it Oracle ? ;-) |
Cassiopeia Draco |
Posted - 2009.09.23 09:15:00 - [ 7]
Originally by: Serge Bastana
It was well advertised that they were upgrading from SQL Server 2005 to 2008 a couple of months back, they put off the upgrade when the patch for Apoc 1.5 was released.
From what I've read about SQL Server 2008 it has some impressive features. It should allow them to optimize stored procedures in the DB even further for faster response times in the market and session changes, but it will be interesting how it will affect us ingame.
Its definately an improvement on SQL2005, theres a few new features, new data types for Datetime2 (down to ms, rather than 300ms boundry), Geographic, geometary, Hierarchies. Most of the changes have been on the engine itself, with an improved query planner, better log file useage. Other new features include CDC, better load balencing and mirroring functionality for high end clusters. Now if only MS could fix cursors..... As for in game effects i dont really see there being much improvement though they may be able to migrate the current x,y,z Co-ordinates to the Geometry datatype making loading a little faster. regarding the whole MSSQL vs MySQL vs Oracle vs DB2 vs Progress arguments, im not even going there, each one is fit for purpose in its own way, and there is no right/wrong solution. |
FT Cold
Mission Runner Exclusive
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 10:03:00 - [ 8]
Edited by: FT Cold on 23/09/2009 10:03:39 Originally by: Cassiopeia Draco
Now if only MS could fix cursors.....
If you need to use Cursors that much you're doing it wrong (they aren't broken). Set theory and discrete math is your friend, not your enemy. |
CCP Prism X
Gallente
C C P
C C P Alliance |
Posted - 2009.09.23 10:33:00 - [ 9]
The DB is so low level that you will, generally speaking, hardly notice any changes client side. However, as Cassiopeia Draco mentioned, there have been numerous tweaks to the internal components such as the query planner and resource governor. As MSSQLS is cost based but not rule based the tweaks to the query planner will, hopefully, help the server avoid horrendous query plans being generated for procedures that normally run fine due to the query planner making silly decisions based on silly heuristics. That, in turn, could result in less probability of a cluster wide failure but it's not something you'll notice during normal play. However, we're perfectly capable of forcing our queries hands through index and query execution hints so that's not really a big issue. I'm pretty sure you will not notice the change from an average duration of 13ms -> 11ms for frequently called procedures, or even 30ms -> 11ms for that matter, but we do.  The new resource governor is pretty spiffy though as it allows us to cap the resources used by certain logins and thus allows us to avoid excessive load from external applications interfering with the in-game experience. There are other pretty fancy features that we will use like the MERGE statement which is an INSERT/UPDATE in one statement. Filtered Indexes and Sparse Columns are pretty cool, in theory, but not very useful for an OLTP oriented databases (Although I'm quite sure we can find spiffy uses for the former). The new date/time datatype are quite handy and the geometric stuff is quite interesting from a theory perspective although it's not very useful for us (seriously interesting though, I'll pay close attention to it's future). I could go on talking about little additions here and there but the fact is that we didn't upgrade for these new features. We upgraded for the increased performace from the core components of the engine and, as far as I can see, it's paid off. Paid off to the point where I thought things were all kinds of wrong because I couldn't see any ''normal'' activity on the database. Turns out I need to redefine ''normal'' due to improved performance (still not something you'd notice unless you're Dr. Who). Seeing as people are bringing DB2 vs Oracle vs MSSQL vs MySQL: You use the tools that you have access to and do the job. Anything else is, in my opinion, just pure dogma. I'll freely admit that I hated MySQL until version 5 when they introduced procedures but even now I just recognize that it's improved and would not like to touch it. However, I'd never go about using MSSQL/ORACLE/DB2 if I was just writing the backend for a forum. On the other hand I have serious doubts about MySQL handling Tranquility but seeing as I stopped paying attention to MySQL well before V5.0 then I must admit that opinion to be based on my personal dogma. ..I could go on but I have a meeting now.  P.S. MSSQL Cursors aren't broken. If you're using cursors copiously no matter what engine.. it's you who are broken. |
Serge Bastana
Gallente
GWA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 10:45:00 - [ 10]
You can tell he enjoys his job can't you  |
Cassiopeia Draco |
Posted - 2009.09.23 10:50:00 - [ 11]
Originally by: FT Cold
Edited by: FT Cold on 23/09/2009 10:03:39
Originally by: Cassiopeia Draco
Now if only MS could fix cursors.....
If you need to use Cursors that much you're doing it wrong (they aren't broken).
Set theory and discrete math is your friend, not your enemy.
Totally agree, set theory is your friend, and personally I try and eradicate any cursors i find, though on rare occasions there just isnt an optimal set theory to remove the cursor. I just look at Oracle Cursors and wish that MSSQL performed as well for those odd instances. |
Krem daBrut |
Posted - 2009.09.23 11:10:00 - [ 12]
Originally by: CCP Prism X
technical stuff
So the hamsters are faster and stronger now ? |
Harkwyth Mist
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 11:16:00 - [ 13]
Originally by: Krem daBrut
Originally by: CCP Prism X
technical stuff
So the hamsters are faster and stronger now ?
They are now Giant Mutant Space Hamsters of Doom |
FT Cold
Mission Runner Exclusive
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 11:27:00 - [ 14]
Originally by: CCP Prism X
As MSSQLS is cost based but not rule based the tweaks to the query planner will, hopefully, help the server avoid horrendous query plans being generated for procedures that normally run fine due to the query planner making silly decisions based on silly heuristics. That, in turn, could result in less probability of a cluster wide failure but it's not something you'll notice during normal play.
:cough:Plan Guides:cough: |
CCP Prism X
Gallente
C C P
C C P Alliance |
Posted - 2009.09.23 11:48:00 - [ 15]
|
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire |
Posted - 2009.09.23 12:20:00 - [ 16]
Dr. You |
Akura kawanaka
-Mostly Harmless- |
Posted - 2009.09.23 12:37:00 - [ 17]
if CCP ever move to Oracle, I'll definitely apply to work for you guys. been doing PL/SQL for 11 years now. last year I supported a SQL Server 2005 database but went insane after about 6 months of doing that and promptly changed jobs... the final straw was finding out that 2005 couldn't handle dates prior to start of the gregorian calendar..... 2008 brings in the "DATETIME2" data type to fix this problem...  |
Elisa Llass
Terra Prime Industries |
Posted - 2009.09.23 12:55:00 - [ 18]
I dont think Oracle can handle large databases, its not scalable... well it wasnt at my former job.
Anyways, how dare CCP respond with thoughtful and technical jargon! |
CCP Valar
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 12:59:00 - [ 19]
Originally by: Elisa Llass
I dont think Oracle can handle large databases, its not scalable... well it wasnt at my former job.
Anyways, how dare CCP respond with thoughtful and technical jargon!
I'm afraid you are wrong here. Oracle is way more scalable than MSSQL and is used in much larger settings than we have on TQ. |
Thenoran
Caldari
Tranquility Industries
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 12:59:00 - [ 20]
Edited by: Thenoran on 23/09/2009 12:59:36 Originally by: CCP Prism X
However, I'd never go about using MSSQL/ORACLE/DB2 if I was just writing the backend for a forum. On the other hand I have serious doubts about MySQL handling Tranquility but seeing as I stopped paying attention to MySQL well before V5.0 then I must admit that opinion to be based on my personal dogma.
..I could go on but I have a meeting now.
What does the forum run on? Compared to other forums, the EVE Forums are kinda lacking in tools and post searching. I've made PHP based software in the past that ran with MSSQL just fine and honestly said, PHPBB Forums for example are better than the current EVE Forum software, if not due to PHPBB having forum/topic/post search functionality. Ofcourse, I have no idea what kind of limitations there are from the EVE DB. |
CCP Valar
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 13:02:00 - [ 21]
|
CCP Prism X
Gallente
C C P
C C P Alliance |
Posted - 2009.09.23 13:05:00 - [ 22]
Originally by: CCP Valar
The forum is on the same database as the game.
Hey! Don't give away all my hidden humor, they're supposed to not get it! |
Elisa Llass
Terra Prime Industries |
Posted - 2009.09.23 13:09:00 - [ 23]
Originally by: CCP Valar
The forum is on the same database as the game.
Who allowed you to do that? o.O |
Serge Bastana
Gallente
GWA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 13:19:00 - [ 24]
And who allowed the naughty bad men to put the Time Flux Detector on the forums, you make my Buddy Jesus cry |
CCP Valar
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 13:24:00 - [ 25]
Originally by: Elisa Llass
Originally by: CCP Valar
The forum is on the same database as the game.
Who allowed you to do that? o.O
It's a relic from the days of ye olde when there was a station service that allowed you to read the forums. I don't think it was ever visible to people witout GM roles as it never worked properly. |
El'essar Viocragh
Minmatar
Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 13:29:00 - [ 26]
|
Julius Rigel
Sub-warp Racing Venture |
Posted - 2009.09.23 13:33:00 - [ 27]
Originally by: CCP Valar
The forum is on the same database as the game.
Are you saying that if we planned carefully and executed it juuuuust right, we could actually influence large fleet battles or the market by posting on the forum?  ') DROP TABLE starbases_delve;  |
Mashie Saldana
Minmatar
Veto Corp |
Posted - 2009.09.23 13:35:00 - [ 28]
Edited by: Mashie Saldana on 23/09/2009 13:39:13 Originally by: CCP Valar
It's a relic from the days of ye olde when there was a station service that allowed you to read the forums. I don't think it was ever visible to people witout GM roles as it never worked properly.
So THAT is why it is named ingameboard.asp OMG your face, you were the last dev with Jovian portrait and now it's gone  |
CCP Prism X
Gallente
C C P
C C P Alliance |
Posted - 2009.09.23 13:37:00 - [ 29]
Originally by: Julius Rigel
Originally by: CCP Valar
The forum is on the same database as the game.
Are you saying that if we planned carefully and executed it juuuuust right, we could actually influence large fleet battles or the market by posting on the forum?
') DROP TABLE starbases_delve;
No that wouldn't work. We have a specific table for every starbase for each solarsystem, not region. . . . ... I kid, I kid. |
Thenoran
Caldari
Tranquility Industries
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 13:46:00 - [ 30]
|
All Channels
EVE General Discussion
