By submitting your information, you agree that devx.com may send you DevX offers via email, phone and text message, as well as email offers about other products and services that DevX believes may be of interest to you. DevX will process your information in accordance with the Quinstreet Privacy Policy.
SQL Server 2008 (Katmai) Reporting Services Performance: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back? : Page 2
In this article, David Leibowitz compares the performance of the prerelease of Microsoft's SQL Server 2008 Reporting Services to SSRS 2005. While it is clear performance improvements have been made for report automation, developers might have differing opinions on the new Report Designer.
Test 1: Cold Server Spool Up
In the Cold Server Spool Up test, each VHD was restarted and booted into an administrative screen. The ASP test harness accessed the VHD, simulating a first web service request to a freshly booted Reporting Services (RS) Server.
Perhaps due in part to the omission of IIS reliance in Katmai, SQL Server 2008 wins this test hands down. The average
web service test in SQL Server 2008 took a little over 36 seconds, while web service access to a SQL Server 2005
machine took about 66 seconds, or an improvement of about 45 percent (see Table 1 and
Figure 1)!
Cold Server Spool Up Test
SQL 2005
SQL 2008
Trial 1
63.19s
33.48s
Trial 2
67.20s
43.80s
Trial 3
68.15s
32.57s
Avg
65.52
36.62s
Table 1. Cold Server Spool Up: This table shows the Cold Server Spool Up test results.
Figure 1. Cold Start Test: The winner of the Cold Server Spool Up Test is the SQL Server 2008 (Katmai).
Test 2: Warm Refresh
Each Warm Refresh test made an additional call to the RS Web Service within a few moments of the initial test
call to simulate another user accessing a report prior to a reboot or any service/application pool refresh.
After several attempts the SQL 2005 results were fairly predictable at under 0.3 seconds; however, the Katmai machine exhibited a strange anomaly: response time was either well under 0.1 seconds
(twice the speed of 2005) or as high as 2.9 seconds. This was reproduced several times: two trials at 0.15 seconds,
the next at 2.8, another trial at 0.1, and the next two at 2.9 and 3.0. This could have been simply the result of the
VHD test environment (antivirus, etc.), but because this behavior was not observed with SQL 2005, one of the high
values from the Katmai test were left in the test results (see Table 2 and Figure 2).
Warm Refresh
SQL 2005
SQL 2008
Trial 1
0.27s
0.1s
Trial 2
0.22s
43.80s
Trial 3
0.11s
0.02s
Avg
0.2s
1.026667s
Table 2. Warm Refresh: This table shows the results of the Warm Refresh tests.
Figure 2. Warm Refresh
Winner: The SQL Server 2005 wins the Warm Refresh Test?
Previous Page
