Your Sr. DBA doesn't know what he is doing. Adding multiple log files does nothing to improve performance unfortunately. It's a shame that he doesn't know how log files work. Log files are used sequentially and if you add 5 more log files they won't be used anyway unless the first one is completely used. In normal day to day operations that won't happen.
As per adding multiple data files to tempdb, there is some conflict between MSFT and industry experts on the recommendation. MSFT plays nice and recommends 1:1 for core:files but in all cases that is NOT necessary. Industry experts say only 1:1/4 to 1:1/2 is enough but you need to watch for the 2:1:1 (Page Free Space i.e PFS bottleneck) and 2:1:3 (SGAM bottleneck) and tweak the number of files as necessary. In some extreme cases, you may have to add more files than the number of cores also but its a big "It Depends".
Coming to the memory issue, have you checked the % use of PageFile, Page Life Expectancy, buffer cache hit ratio. If these numbers look good then It may be the case this new server not stressed enough.
YOu need to look at the wait statistics information before changing the # of files in tempdb. If 24 files worked for you then its good, but look at the wait stats and find out if tempdb is the bottleneck. Note that there are 2 common types of bottleneck for tempdb (IO +allocation bottleneck). If it is allocation bottleneck then you may also want to use TF 1118.
-- Isolate top waits for server instance since last restart or statistics clear
WITH Waits AS
(SELECT wait_type, wait_time_ms / 1000. AS wait_time_s,
100. * wait_time_ms / SUM(wait_time_ms) OVER() AS pct,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY wait_time_ms DESC) AS rn
FROM sys.dm_os_wait_stats
WHERE wait_type NOT IN ('CLR_SEMAPHORE','LAZYWRITER_SLEEP','RESOURCE_QUEUE','SLEEP_TASK'
,'SLEEP_SYSTEMTASK','SQLTRACE_BUFFER_FLUSH','WAITFOR', 'LOGMGR_QUEUE','CHECKPOINT_QUEUE'
,'REQUEST_FOR_DEADLOCK_SEARCH','XE_TIMER_EVENT','BROKER_TO_FLUSH','BROKER_TASK_STOP','CLR_MANUAL_EVENT'
,'CLR_AUTO_EVENT','DISPATCHER_QUEUE_SEMAPHORE', 'FT_IFTS_SCHEDULER_IDLE_WAIT'
,'XE_DISPATCHER_WAIT', 'XE_DISPATCHER_JOIN', 'SQLTRACE_INCREMENTAL_FLUSH_SLEEP'))
SELECT W1.wait_type,
CAST(W1.wait_time_s AS DECIMAL(12, 2)) AS wait_time_s,
CAST(W1.pct AS DECIMAL(12, 2)) AS pct,
CAST(SUM(W2.pct) AS DECIMAL(12, 2)) AS running_pct
FROM Waits AS W1
INNER JOIN Waits AS W2
ON W2.rn <= W1.rn
GROUP BY W1.rn, W1.wait_type, W1.wait_time_s, W1.pct
HAVING SUM(W2.pct) - W1.pct < 99 OPTION (RECOMPILE); -- percentage threshold
Best Answer
Noe. Zero. Possibly some more ram, bu very little. At the end, DataCenter does nothing more than Enterprise unless conigured to in hard or software. Unless you scale up to those levels in hardare it makes no difference. DataCenter is mostly for LARGE boxes with EHAVY virtualaization (not it comes with the right to install unlimited windows bvirtual instances - Enterprise limtis you to I think 4, which makes it unfeasible for a virtual server of non-trivial size).