Should I take SSD disks for the server?

Question

Database

Window Server 2016 platform
DB: SQL SERVER
DB size: 10GB
Peak load 10k requests per second.
Very little static is given.
In general, as far as I know, the database caches in RAM and it should be more than 10GB.
Still under everything else, ie. RAM starts at 16GB
So what about an SSD? If necessary? The static is given from another server.
What about processors? Is it worth taking a server with 2 processors?
I am considering something like this:
2 × Intel Xeon L5630 2.13 GHz 24 GB DDR3 3 × 1000 GB SATA
Intel Xeon E3-1270v3 3.5 GHz 32 GB DDR3 2 × 240 GB SSD
Intel Xeon E3-1230v5 3.4 GHz 32 GB DDR4 2 × 2 TB SATA
Can In general, I do not think correctly in iron.

Answer 1

take

Answer 2

It depends on what kind of database you have, what data it stores, what queries it processes.
In our particular situation, the best performance was achieved by a large number of physical cores without HT, because. the database was processing complex queries that required a lot of CPU time. At the same time, disk IO was also high, mainly due to the lack of RAM, so the SSD had a positive effect on performance.

Answer 3

Maybe in general I'm not thinking correctly in iron.

There are performance dependencies for random read/write for different disk systems. It is also worth taking a closer look at the advice of Dmitry Shitskov .
Under the database you need a disk system with as many IOPS as possible. That is, either a multi-spindle solution on a SERVER-CLASS HDD or SSD.
In your case, pumping knowledge of the storage subsystem is highly recommended.
When a conscious theory of work is in the head, depending on the type of drive and the template of work, the world becomes clear.
And yes - there is never a lot of RAM ....

Answer 4

Server class SSD.
Server CPUs, the number of physical cores depends on specific requests.
There is not much memory. Naturally, also server.

Answer 5

if as the main storage - then only the server class.
if for caching (caching ssd over a group of conventional hard drives) - then only about series and read reviews, otherwise it will be like this https://www.overclockers.ru/lab/79779/raznye-ssd-a...
the same applies and nvme ssd are server versions. at home, there may be problems with continuous recording https://www.overclockers.ru/lab/79939/raznye-ssd-a... .
if it is as cheap as possible - raid-0 from ssd with obligatory backup, on ssd leave half the space unallocated - under overprovisioning.
look at sas, not sata, and not nearline sas
if you are given a test - turn off caching in the OS and write 30-40 GB continuously, measure iops with a test immediately upon completion.

Answer 6

> Very little static is given.
then it makes no sense, since you need to buy Enterprise class disks with a daily overwriting parameter of the total disk volume greater than 1.0,
such a solution will be expensive,
it makes sense to buy regular SATA disks or more expensive SAS disks with a bandwidth of 6G or 12G
> In general, as far as I know, The database caches in RAM and it must > be more than 10GB.
here, IMHO, you need to look in the direction of the cache for the disk controller, since RAM will not help much, it is
also worth buying a non-volatile battery for the controller, in case of a power outage or power outage
> What about processors? Is it worth taking a server with 2 processors?
IMHO our Customers look more at not the number of processors, but at the number of cores, cache and clock speed,
here, I think, we need to test - buy 2 servers with the same parameters,
but one with 1 processor and the other with two and see the monitor of the database server (statistics),
although is it worth saving on 20t.r. here - it's up to you)
Good day everyone, in touch