Mirroring in Load Test?
Does anyone have any good links or ideas on the debate over Mirroring or Not Mirroring Load Test if Production is SQL Server 2008 w/ Synchronous mirroring? The debate is over the cost of the extra 4 TB of storage (+ the Server) and whether it is necessary for Load Testing. Thanks.
Of course I know there is some performance hit, but the question is whether a problem would still show up (maybe to a lesser degree) without mirroring in the Load Test environment.
Re: Mirroring in Load Test?
Nothing is necessary for load testing, load testing itself is not technically necessary. But the more and the better you do it then the less risk there is for your project. If the risk/cost of failure is greater than the cost of testing then you test.
You should present your case in those terms. Cost vs. Benefit. So:
It will cost X to have Mirroring load tested.
If Mirroring fails in Production due to an unforeseen problem then this will have an impact/cost of Y.
And then you have the Risk Z that Mirroring will fail.
I'm using algebra here but there's not really a formula because in reality every project is different. But there's a vague relationship. For example, if you worked for NASA, I'm thinking that the cost X and Risk Z would still stay about the same but the Impact Y could be astronomical (ho ho) so in this case of course you would want to test this.
You need to estimate your own costs and risks and then present the case in these terms to management and ask them to make a call - ask them if they are prepared to accept the risk as defined. Don't be biased when you present it, be realistic and give them a complete but concise summary.