<div>
As a SQL Server guy, I will never recommend to install any other application in the same machine where is installed a SQL Server instance.<br />
SQL Server should be installed in a dedicated machine. Isn't good to share resources with other applications even from Microsoft.
</div>


<div>
Hi.<br />
Fine, heard that before. What do you think/know about question 1 and 2?
</div>


<div>
My motivation of Q1, in detail: the lab environment in our seminar:<br />
<br />
Host hardware: Xeon 8x3,5 GHz Skylake, 24 GB RAM, 1 SSD<br />
Host Software: Server 2012 R2 with Hyper-V<br />
<br />
Hyper-V-Guests:<br />
1 DC Server 2012R2, 2 vCPUs, 2 GB RAM<br />
1 SQL2014 Server@Server2012R2, 4 vcores, 12 GB RAM<br />
1 Sharepoint2016 Server@Server2012R2, 4 vCores 8 GB RAM<br />
Load: very little, almost empty.<br />
<br />
All setup by specialists<br />
Result: sluggish as hell.<br />
-------<br />
Our test server: Core I5 Skylake 4x3,5 GHz, 24 GB RAM, 1 SSD<br />
Test server software: Server 2012 R2 with Hyper-V<br />
<br />
Hyper-V Guest (just one):<br />
1 SQL2014+Sharepoint2016@Ser<wbr />ver2012R2,<wbr /> 4vCores, 20 GB RAM<br />
[as DC, we took our production DC]<br />
Load: very little<br />
Setup by me<br />
Result: very fast.<br />
<br />
How to explain that?<br />
--------------------------<wbr />----------<wbr />----------<wbr />----------<wbr />---<br />
2 Sounds good, thanks, we will do a test in a few weeks, I guess.
</div>


<div>
<blockquote>
How to explain that?
</blockquote>
It really depends on the load they have in their server. How many VMs they have created and how many do you have? And what's the usage of those VMs?
</div>


<div>
All your questions were answered in my description.
</div>


<div>
Ok, assuming that Microsoft didn't have more VMs created in their server the configuration still different. Your configuration it's mapping 1 virtual CPU to 1 physical CPU and their 1,25 vCPU for 1 CPU. Even that in my opinion shouldn't be enough to have a big difference in the performance.
</div>


<div>
This has nothing to do with hyper-v since both scenarios were on hyper-v and the result was different. Topic removed.
</div>


<div>
Ok. It's your question. I just think that are few variables between the 2 options and all should be validated even just for sanity check.
</div>


<div>
To be honest, we did more tests already: we also setup tests on the Xen Hypervisor and again, having sharepoint consisting of two servers as compared to one performs worse. I wonder why.
</div>


<div>
Quick question - how are you testing the performance? Are you browsing from the server directly in either scenario? Have you tested from a client workstation? <br />
<br />
It is generally not good practice to have SharePoint all on one server for more than a small workgroup. There are so many variables that it is impossible to say what works good and what causes problems. For example, if you have a single server and a small group of 20 people and they are doing nothing more than collaboration (file sharing) you may get decent performance if the server has standard horsepower. As soon as a few uses start to use the App server side of SharePoint by using things such as search, tasks that trigger timer excessive time jobs (usually administrative tasks), streaming of videos, uploading (lot of I/O) activity, use of very large lists, (50k items for example that are using filters to remain under the display threshold), and other things that can strain I/O's as well as CPU performance will start to take a hit. In those scenarios it is best to overload that load by using a separate SQL server. You may come to a point where adding a separate web server is a good thing to do. That point comes when the app side of SharePoint is so busy that it can render pages at a decent speed. You would then set up a web server that has the lone role of serving pages.<br />
<br />
As far as why the multi server performs poorer than a single server, sorry, but too many variables to answer correctly. Here are a few possibilities, but these are nothing more than guesses;<br />
Testing procedure - make sure solid testing is done, same circumstances testing both environments<br />
SQL server is two server environment is not tuned for performance<br />
Network connectivity between servers is good<br />
Test with all types of procedures, such as running search on a large index, 100k+ objects, open office documents from a document library, upload large files<br />
Other tests...<br />
<br />
Hope that helps...
</div>


<div>
About testing: it was a sharepoint seminar. Introduction to sharepoint administration. So imagine you create website collections, setup a search center and all and you test the results from a client computer. Any action was slow during the seminar. The tutor was kind of too lazy to explain why and said &quot;well, you need much stronger machines than our lab for this to run fast&quot; which wasn't true at all, my own test machines proved that. That made me think about possible reasons, maybe the small network latency is already enough to make a difference when you have a connection sharepoint-&gt;SQL@remote compared to sharepoint-&gt;SQL@localhost.<wbr />
</div>


<div>
Hi.<br />
<br />
1 did you ever compare 2server vs all-in-one?<br />
2 Did you read what Vitor has linked? <a href="http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/664029/Migrate-SharePoint-s-SQL-Server-to-another-SQL-Ser" rel="ugc">http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/664029/Migrate-SharePoint-s-SQL-Server-to-another-SQL-Ser</a>&nbsp;- anything else to add from your perspective?
</div>


<div>
Quick answers - <br />
Over the years I have worked with all type of server combinations, so yes to your question. Multiple servers have always had better performance when set up correctly and tested from a client, not directly on the server. &nbsp;When a SharePoint server also renders pages in a browser performance will take a major hit. Test from a remote client when possible.<br />
<br />
The procedure looks good, although I did not spend a great amount of time reviewing as I would in a live situation.<br />
<br />
Good luck...
</div>


<div>
&quot;Multiple servers have always had better performance <b>when set up correctly</b>&quot; I wrote that experts (MS certifies sharepoint tutors) set it up.<br />
&quot;Test from a remote client when possible.&quot; - I wrote that I did,
</div>


<div>
I read what you wrote. Although experts set it up, for whatever reason it did not have better performance as you noted. It happens. Maybe they did an incomplete job. Maybe they were running late and didn't do it as well as possible. Maybe, maybe, maybe.... You may never find an answer that meets your expectations. <br />
<br />
It's not a perfect world and stuff happens. You can't judge every result by one or two occurrence in my opinion. <br />
<br />
Good luck...
</div>


<div>
Actually we documented the installation and I just reproduced it. Well, time to rebenchmark on saw new 2-server system, this time with sql 2016 (not 2014) and on server 2016. Will update this after some time.
</div>


<div>
Today I used the instructions on Vitor's link successfully. So 2) is solved.<br />
About 1: I opened a separate question: <a href="https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/28975458/Performance-testing-on-sharepoint.html" rel="ugc">https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/28975458/Performance-testing-on-sharepoint.html</a>&nbsp;to find benchmark tools for SharePoint (if those exist).
</div>


<div>
Glad you got it solved! At least question two anyway.
</div>


<div>
Fell like closing this question now. Vitor, your link with steps to migrate SQL worked. Sneek, you gave me confidence that what we saw on the 2 server environment was not expected. We hoped to be ready with the performance tests by now, but no, we didn't manage to set them up completely, yet. Will let you know some numbers later.<br />
<br />
Thank you
</div>


<div>
Many Thanks - glad I could help.
</div>


<div>
<div class="content wysiwyg-content">
Hi experts.<br />
<br />
We are testing sharepoint 2016. For the test, we installed sharepoint together with SQL on a single machine and it works very well.<br />
In a training seminar, Microsoft-certified specialists had set up a test lab environment with two servers, one sharepoint, the other SQL - in between: Gigabit ethernet.<br />
If I compare the performance while using sharepoint on the test lab to our &quot;all-in-one&quot; installation, the 2-server-setup felt sluggish as hell, really. The hardware however was comparable to our hardware.<br />
<br />
Questions: <br />
1 is the performance &nbsp;expected to be better when using sql and sharepoint on the same machine? (I guess it depends on what you do with it)<br />
2 if we chose to use an all-in-one machine, could we decide to change that setup someday and switch to a 2-server-setup without starting from scratch?
</div>
</div>


Hi experts.

We are testing sharepoint 2016. For the test, we installed sharepoint together with SQL on a single machine and it works very well.
In a training seminar, Microsoft-certified specialists had set up a test lab environment with two servers, one sharepoint, the other SQL - in between: Gigabit ethernet.
If I compare the performance while using sharepoint on the test lab to our "all-in-one" installation, the 2-server-setup felt sluggish as hell, really. The hardware however was comparable to our hardware.

Questions: 
1 is the performance  expected to be better when using sql and sharepoint on the same machine? (I guess it depends on what you do with it)
2 if we chose to use an all-in-one machine, could we decide to change that setup someday and switch to a 2-server-setup without starting from scratch?

Sharepoint 2016 - all-in-one-server vs. two servers

Microsoft Sharepoint is a software platform and family of software products used for collaboration and web publishing combined. These capabilities include developing web sites, portals, intranets, content management systems, search engines, wikis, blogs, and other tools for business intelligence and collaboration. SharePoint has a Microsoft Office-like interface, and it is closely integrated with the Office suite.

Microsoft SharePoint

Microsoft SQL Server is a suite of relational database management system (RDBMS) products providing multi-user database access functionality.SQL Server is available in multiple versions, typically identified by release year, and versions are subdivided into editions to distinguish between product functionality. Component services include integration (SSIS), reporting (SSRS), analysis (SSAS), data quality, master data, T-SQL and performance tuning.