Tempdb in ram, how "useful" is it?

Question

SQL

Good afternoon.
How useful and not useful in MSSQL2012 to keep tempdb in ram, provided that tempdb almost never exceeds 8GB? How much more efficient will mssql work if tempdb runs on the same san as the main database?
I have a suspicion that RAM starts to work too slowly when temp fills up to 6 GB, because the ram disk shows queues up to 0.5s.

Answer 1

Полезно, но саму tempdb я бы разбил бы на несколько файлов.
+ неободимо задуматься о том, почему tempdb узкое место и "допилить логику" для меньшего использования tempdb.
Кол-во решений для RAM disk много, может быть проблема в используемом?

Answer 2

We used MSSQL in one project, 2 servers (one - Master, one - Slave), both were 128 gigabytes of RAM, and therefore decided to store the database entirely in RAM to speed up the work. We bought licenses for one of the programs that can provide such functionality. In terms of performance, everything was really smart, fast and stable.
Then they left such a solution in the direction of MySQL (more precisely, Percona), since MSSQL (we used the 2008 version at that time) had a number of problems with transactional replication, which were initially solved in Percona. But the idea of ​​keeping a relatively small database in RAM is useful. Well, or at least TempDB, if the database is too large to fit into the RAM as a whole.

Answer 3

first we make a slider and then a block with min foto, that is, the same photos, only the html structure is already as convenient for you, when everything has already loaded when you click on min foto, we take its index and do it through the slider function, scroll to index
, I don’t know if I explained the rules, but I would do so,
in theory, there should be a ready-made solution!

Answer 4

What is the actual difficulty, this is an ordinary slider with thumbnails, take Slider Syncing slick slider for example and just customize it, everything is simple.