in reply to (OT) question about clustering

++ to JavaFan for his answer. Instead of clustering you might check whether your database can do replication. You have more than one database and each has the same data (but beware, maybe MS calls replication database clustering).

Ideally you can split the workload evenly between those databases, otherwise you also need a load balancer to distribute the load. Google for sql load balancing and you'll find some microsoft pages with more info.

Disclaimer: I'm speaking generally, I have no experience at all with SQL Server.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: (OT) question about clustering
by JavaFan (Canon) on Oct 01, 2008 at 23:26 UTC
    Replication can often be an answer if the applications do a lot of reading (of course, replication isn't an answer to a performance problem if the database isn't the bottleneck).

    But if you do a lot of writes (which is what the OP is doing if I understand him correctly) using replication can be quite tricky, and even if you manage to set up your replication schemes correctly (replicating both ways is far from trivial), and have changed your application so it can deal with such a scheme, it may not give a significant speed up.

    Note that the OP is talking about a desktop application. Performance problems for such applications are typically not solved with replication or clustering.

    I think the OP should first do some performance analysis to determine where the bottleneck is.

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom