Code behaviour/performance on 2 machines

Hi,
I have UAT and production servers with same database schema. I am running a
stored procedure on both machines, Its taking much more time on UAT (31 hrs)
where as it is taking less time i.e. 8 hrs (which is expected because of
nature of query) Can someone please explain why is it taking more time on UA
T?
UAT SQL SERVER 2000 has SP4
Production SQL SERVER 2000 has SP3
Please help ASAP.
I can also be reached at sahil.arora@.cit.com
Thanks
SahilJust becuase the servers share the same database model, there is the issue
of differences in hardware configuration and even differences in the
physical implementation of the database such as: volume of data, placement
of files, index fragmentation, statistics, sever/database configurations,
etc. To start with, take a look at the Performance tab of Task Manager on
both servers and compare to what extent they are maxing out on memory and
CPU.
Compare the execution plan between the 2 servers:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d... />
1_1pfd.asp
Also, the following article provides some good performance oriented check
lists and explains how to audit performance.
http://www.sql-server-performance.c...mance_audit.asp
"Sahil Arora" <Sahil Arora@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:40E34A48-D573-46EF-98BE-BA4A84A9A113@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I have UAT and production servers with same database schema. I am running
> a
> stored procedure on both machines, Its taking much more time on UAT (31
> hrs)
> where as it is taking less time i.e. 8 hrs (which is expected because of
> nature of query) Can someone please explain why is it taking more time on
> UAT?
> UAT SQL SERVER 2000 has SP4
> Production SQL SERVER 2000 has SP3
> Please help ASAP.
> I can also be reached at sahil.arora@.cit.com
> Thanks
> Sahil|||I just checked everything on both servers, its same and the server on which
is taking more time is much more powerful than server with less time. any
comments?
"JT" wrote:

> Just becuase the servers share the same database model, there is the issue
> of differences in hardware configuration and even differences in the
> physical implementation of the database such as: volume of data, placement
> of files, index fragmentation, statistics, sever/database configurations,
> etc. To start with, take a look at the Performance tab of Task Manager on
> both servers and compare to what extent they are maxing out on memory and
> CPU.
> Compare the execution plan between the 2 servers:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...>
n_1_1pfd.asp
> Also, the following article provides some good performance oriented check
> lists and explains how to audit performance.
> http://www.sql-server-performance.c...mance_audit.asp
>
> "Sahil Arora" <Sahil Arora@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:40E34A48-D573-46EF-98BE-BA4A84A9A113@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||Do both servers have identical volumes of data, is the execution plan of the
query identical, is the OS level file fragmentation and database level index
fragmentation optimized or similar on both servers, etc.. It could be one or
all of a hundred things. Perhaps running a performance audit log on both
servers and comparing the results will reveal something.
INF: Job to Monitor SQL Server 2000 Performance and Activity
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;283696
"Sahil Arora" <SahilArora@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2FE8B79F-9EC2-445A-9648-65F1C7CAABAD@.microsoft.com...
>I just checked everything on both servers, its same and the server on which
> is taking more time is much more powerful than server with less time. any
> comments?
> "JT" wrote:
>