Fabricio Araujo's questions

Scenario (real with address/names altered):

Windows Server 2008 R2 with Hyper-V installed.

Originally, there were 2 machines let's call them FileServer and MainServer. The FileServer does a little more that just file serving. MainServer have the MSSQL. When arrived the new shiny server, was decided that they need the FileServer machine to other uses.

Since the 2008 came with Hyper-V, we tried it. It works, but the way the new MainServer machine got configured that's a little weird (at least for someones accostumed to VMWare not touching physical devices ip configuration).

The original network config:

• FileServer machine (originally physical)

IP: x.y.z.6 (invented)
Netmask:255.255.240.0
GateWay: 10.1.35.1

• MainServer machine (physical)

IP: x.y.z.4 (invented)
Netmask: 255.255.240.0
GateWay: 10.1.35.1

It ended like this (it's weird, but we could not make it work another way) when the servers above where changed to an shiny new server with 4 physical network adapters:

• FileServer machine (now virtual guest)

IP: x.y.z.6 (invented)
Netmask: 255.255.240.0
GateWay: 10.1.35.1

• MainServer host machine

Local connection 6 (Hyper-V virtual adapter)

IP: x.y.z.4 (invented)
Netmask: 255.255.240.0
GateWay: 10.1.35.1

Local connection 4 (physical adapter which is configured on Hyper-V)

IP: nothing ( if you run ipconfig you get an address at the 169...* range)
Netmask: 255.255.240.0
GateWay: 10.1.35.1

If I put the x.y.z.6 address on the hyper-v adapter and the x.y.z.4 on the physical adapter it points to in Hyper-V it refuses to work. But people keep asking me why such an strange configuration. And the only answers I have to them is: works that way.

My experience is some with the old VMWare Server and VMWare Workstation. I feel that something wrong happened in this, but have no clue of what. Searches here brought no enlightenging...

Scenario:

• 2 Server HP Proliant recently bought (exactly the same config), below described.
• EDIT:HP Proliant DL360 G7 (rack form)
• 4 (500Gb SATA) disks in RAID 10 configuration
  • Array Alfa: Disks of Bays 1&2
  • Array Beta: Disks of Bays 3&4
• I don't think is relevant, but SO is Windows Server 2008 R2 x64

It's possible that using disks of two arrays (ex.: disks of bays 1 & 3 ) of the Server A to replicate it on Server B ( still non-configured )?

Have you any problems using it on high concurrency environment? It's really works as advertised by MS? I'm using SQL Server 2005 and would like to hear the experiences of those who are/was using it on production.

Snapshot isolation per se is not new for me as I develop/administer Firebird/Interbase as well - where there no explicit locking and all works in row versioning...

Some of the developers are using the following syntax in RaiseError:

RAISERROR('My business error message', 16, 0)

With the purpose of reusing the catch part of the try..catch block for business error too.

But I spotted several event log entries like this:

Msg # 50006, <blabla> please register the error message with sp_addmessage

There's some way to disable the creation of such events? I searched google, msdn and docs but didn't find a clue.

We have a server with a RAID volume. Windows DEFRAG shows very high fragmentation (90%) on the volume. My chief asked if DEFRAG reported fragmentation is correct (or near correct) or not.

We don't have any defrag being made for a long time (at least, not in the last 4 months, the time I work here). It's a production server and we are very worried about it.