We have a SQL Server 2005 database, and currently all our users are connecting to the database via the TCP/IP protocol.
我们有一个SQL Server 2005数据库,目前我们所有用户都通过TCP / IP协议连接到数据库。
The SQL Server Configuration Manager allows you to "enable" both Named Pipes, and TCP/IP connections at the same time. Is this a good idea? My question is not whether we should use named pipes instead of TCP/IP, but are there problems associated with enabling both?
SQL Server配置管理器允许您同时“启用”命名管道和TCP / IP连接。这是一个好主意吗?我的问题不是我们是否应该使用命名管道而不是TCP / IP,但是否存在与启用两者相关的问题?
One of our client's IT guys, says that enabling database communication with both protocols will limit the bandwidth that either protocol can use - to like 50% of the total. I would think that the bandwidth that TCP/IP could use would be directly tied (inversely) to the amount of traffic that Named Pipes (or any of the other types of traffic) were occupying on the network at that moment. However, this IT person is indicating that the fact that we have enabled two protocols on the server, artificially limits the bandwidth that TCP/IP can use. Is this correct?
我们客户的IT人员之一表示,使用这两种协议实现数据库通信将限制协议可以使用的带宽 - 占总数的50%。我认为TCP / IP可以使用的带宽将直接与命名管道(或任何其他类型的流量)在那时占用网络的流量量相关联(反向)。但是,这位IT人员表示我们在服务器上启用了两个协议,人为地限制了TCP / IP可以使用的带宽。它是否正确?
I did Google searches but could not come up with an answer to this question. Any help would be appreciated.
我进行了谷歌搜索,但无法得出这个问题的答案。任何帮助,将不胜感激。
2 个解决方案
#1
3
This is not correct. Your thought on network traffic is correct - capacity is not 'reserved'.
这是不正确的。您对网络流量的看法是正确的 - 容量不是“保留”。
You should not enable named pipes if it is not needed.
如果不需要,则不应启用命名管道。
#2
2
no there is no limit on the bandwidth. the problem with named pipes is that they can be quite "chatty" in a slow network and can take a lot of bandwidth. there is a priority list of protocols to try first. but there is no internal threshold for this that i know of.
没有带宽限制。命名管道的问题在于它们在慢速网络中可能非常“繁琐”并且可能占用大量带宽。首先尝试的协议优先级列表。但我知道没有内部门槛。
#1
3
This is not correct. Your thought on network traffic is correct - capacity is not 'reserved'.
这是不正确的。您对网络流量的看法是正确的 - 容量不是“保留”。
You should not enable named pipes if it is not needed.
如果不需要,则不应启用命名管道。
#2
2
no there is no limit on the bandwidth. the problem with named pipes is that they can be quite "chatty" in a slow network and can take a lot of bandwidth. there is a priority list of protocols to try first. but there is no internal threshold for this that i know of.
没有带宽限制。命名管道的问题在于它们在慢速网络中可能非常“繁琐”并且可能占用大量带宽。首先尝试的协议优先级列表。但我知道没有内部门槛。