OT: Dev Box Configuration

I have a development PC that has been working great for several years for
SQL Server 2000 and .NET 1.1 development. It has a PIV 2.4G processor, 512
RAM, 7200/8MB cache RPM IDE hard drive.

I have seen people in the various NGs claim that one *must* have a
significantly faster box with gobs of RAM when developing with VS 2005 and
SQL Server 2005. Is this true? Or are many of you running fine on a box like
the one I already have (as described above)?

Yes I know more is better... just wondering if I really *must* develop with
a more powerful box.

Thanks.

My laptop is 1.6ghz Pentium M and 512mb Ram.
I have been working on a VS2005 ASP.NET application lately.

I have noticed slow downs, especially after a custom code gen where it
tries to parse the pasted code.
This slow down is MASSIVE.

Sometimes I have to recompile something 3 times in a row before it gets
rid of the make believe build errors, but this might be a VS bug, not a
computer issue.

Generally I have been getting by though, so you should be ok on your PC
I reckon.

Sorry, not using SQL 2005 yet.

I was using a machine with 2005 for about 4 months that has 1 gig of RAM and
a 2.8 Ghtz processor. It was acceptable, but, a bit slow using Management
Studio and Visual Studio.

Last week I installed in a a laptop with 2 gig RAM and a 2.4 ghtz processor.
The difference is amazing and SQL 2005 responds much better. SO, More RAM
will definitely speed it up.

"Smithers" <A@B.COM> wrote in message
news:%23bZwGZSLGHA.904@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I have a development PC that has been working great for several years for
>SQL Server 2000 and .NET 1.1 development. It has a PIV 2.4G processor, 512
>RAM, 7200/8MB cache RPM IDE hard drive.
>
> I have seen people in the various NGs claim that one *must* have a
> significantly faster box with gobs of RAM when developing with VS 2005 and
> SQL Server 2005. Is this true? Or are many of you running fine on a box
> like the one I already have (as described above)?
>
> Yes I know more is better... just wondering if I really *must* develop
> with a more powerful box.
>
> Thanks.
>

The problem with running SQL Server (even the Developer edition) on a
non-dedicated workstation is that SQL Server wants to buffer memory for it's
own use. This may leave insufficient physical memory when building a large
application with Visual Studio.NET, re-processing cubes in Analysis
Services, etc. and result in virtual memory paging to disk.

You can use Performance Monitor to determine what exactly is going on:
http://www.informit.com/guides/cont...&seqNum=28&rl=1
Also, see if the following helps:
How to adjust memory usage by using configuration options in SQL Server
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...b;en-us;q321363


"Smithers" <A@B.COM> wrote in message
news:%23bZwGZSLGHA.904@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I have a development PC that has been working great for several years for
>SQL Server 2000 and .NET 1.1 development. It has a PIV 2.4G processor, 512
>RAM, 7200/8MB cache RPM IDE hard drive.
>
> I have seen people in the various NGs claim that one *must* have a
> significantly faster box with gobs of RAM when developing with VS 2005 and
> SQL Server 2005. Is this true? Or are many of you running fine on a box
> like the one I already have (as described above)?
>
> Yes I know more is better... just wondering if I really *must* develop
> with a more powerful box.
>
> Thanks.
>