Originally by: Erik Pathfinder

---

everything is loading faster! when it loads that is....

---

Originally by: Draquin

---

Irealyneedtoburnoffthat12packofredbullIjustdrankinonesetting,

---

Originally by: Aberthain

---

I'd just like the server to be up finally... My skill ran out 6 hours ago.

---

Originally by: Navicerts

---

Edited by: Navicerts on 10/05/2006 20:55:21
Which RDBMS is written FOR 64 bit?

EDIT: never mind.... SQL Server 2005 :) (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/64bit/default.mspx)

Theres a great article (but terribly biased in favor of Microsoft) on the site, they basically put in "people words" who/how/when to upgrade to 64 bit in relation to database performance.

In case there is anyone else out there that has to look it up to figure out what exactly will be better about 64 compared to 32, im dumb i know :(... here is a copy paste from the white paper.....


SQL Server 2005 (64-bit) is optimized to run on servers using Intel Itanium 2, AMD Opteron, AMD Athlon 64, Intel Xeon with EM64T support, or Intel Pentium IV with EM64T support processors and Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Service Pack (SP) 1, offering exceptional performance and scalability. Both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions of SQL Server 2005 are based on a common architecture, providing an easy migration path for existing applications. Companies can capitalize on existing tools and expertise for new applications.
The primary differences between the 64-bit and 32-bit versions of SQL Server 2005 are derived from the benefits of the underlying 64-bit architecture. Some of these are:
òThe 64-bit architecture offers a larger directly-addressable memory space. SQL Server 2005 (64-bit) is not bound by the memory limits of 32-bit systems. Therefore, more memory is available for performing complex queries and supporting essential database operations.
òThe 64-bit processor provides enhanced parallelism, thereby providing more linear scalability and support for up to 64 processors, and yielding stronger returns per processor as compared to 32-bit systems.
òThe improved bus architecture enhances performance by moving more data between cache and processors in shorter periods.
òA larger on-die cache allows for faster completion of user requests and more efficient use of processor time.
By taking advantage of these architectural advantages, SQL Server 2005 (64-bit) can handle large and complex query workloads, consolidate many database applications, and effortlessly scale to meet the increasing processing and performance demands of today's IT environment.

---

Originally by: Draquin

---

Well at least we can post untill the servers come up

Irealyneedtoburnoffthat12packofredbullIjustdrankinonesetting,

---

Originally by: Navicerts

---

Edited by: Navicerts on 10/05/2006 20:55:21
Which RDBMS is written FOR 64 bit?

EDIT: never mind.... SQL Server 2005 :) (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/64bit/default.mspx)

---

Originally by: David Sinclair

---

As we approach 24 hours of downtime, something is clearly screwed up with the new hardware in a major way. Something wasn't planned for, some piece of hardware was DOA, new hardware got racked backwards, power cables not long enough, or whatever it was (And I've had all of those problems I listed), at some point it should have become rather clear that this upgrade is not happening.

Why was a rollback to the old hardware not called for? Servers are down, so no data needed to be changed. It should have been a simple process to rollback, get some sleep, and figure out what went wrong tomorrow and schedule a new time. Past 16 hours, people stop thinking straight and you just end up making the issue worse.

We haven't had a single update other than "hardware problems are causing extreme delays". I think we figured that one out for ourselves.

What's going on?

---

Originally by: Aberthain

---

I'd just like the server to be up finally... My skill ran out 6 hours ago.

---

Originally by: Madimus Max

---

Can we get a countdown until servers are back up?

---