Merge Control Synchronization Problem

Hi Guys - I have been using the Merge Control ActiveX successfully for
some time. However, one client has found a problem synchronizing. Here is
the relavent piece of code:
agent.Publisher = "MyServer\InstanceName";
agent.Distributor = agent.Publisher;
agent.DistributorNetwork = TCPIP_SOCKETS;
agent.PublisherNetwork = TCPIP_SOCKETS;
agent.PublisherAddress = "192.168.1.100\InstanceName,2763";
agent.DistributorAddress =
"192.168.1.100\InstanceName,2763";
This is a Merge replication with pull anonymous subscriptions. The
Publisher and Distributor are on the same server.
I am using the PublisherAddress because I need to specify the port.
The error the client gets is the following:
[vbcol=seagreen]
If we try anything else for the publisher name such as
"192.168.1.100\InstanceName" or even the fully qualified name of the server,
it says:
[vbcol=seagreen]
valid Publisher'
Now, we checked and double-checked the settings. We can log in fine to
the publisher and subscribers. As a matter of fact, we were able to
subscribe just fine.
I tested the same scenario with my computers and it works fine for me.
What could cause it to say that The process could not connect to
Distributer?
Is the Publisher name always "ServerName\InstanceName"?
Any help will be apreciated,
Thanks,
Maer
I think you are having name resolution problems from this client. Can this
client ping the publisher/distributor by IP?
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Maer" <maer@.auditleverage.com> wrote in message
news:%23EO95jlPGHA.2080@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi Guys - I have been using the Merge Control ActiveX successfully for
> some time. However, one client has found a problem synchronizing. Here is
> the relavent piece of code:
> agent.Publisher = "MyServer\InstanceName";
> agent.Distributor = agent.Publisher;
> agent.DistributorNetwork = TCPIP_SOCKETS;
> agent.PublisherNetwork = TCPIP_SOCKETS;
> agent.PublisherAddress = "192.168.1.100\InstanceName,2763";
> agent.DistributorAddress =
> "192.168.1.100\InstanceName,2763";
> This is a Merge replication with pull anonymous subscriptions. The
> Publisher and Distributor are on the same server.
> I am using the PublisherAddress because I need to specify the port.
> The error the client gets is the following:
>
> If we try anything else for the publisher name such as
> "192.168.1.100\InstanceName" or even the fully qualified name of the
> server, it says:
> valid Publisher'
> Now, we checked and double-checked the settings. We can log in fine to
> the publisher and subscribers. As a matter of fact, we were able to
> subscribe just fine.
> I tested the same scenario with my computers and it works fine for me.
> What could cause it to say that The process could not connect to
> Distributer?
> Is the Publisher name always "ServerName\InstanceName"?
> Any help will be apreciated,
> Thanks,
> Maer
>
>
>
|||Yes, he has pinged the IP and it responds ok. Also, we can connect fine
to SQL Server (through our application) on the publisher/distributor using
"MyServer\InstanceName" or "IP\InstanceName".
BTW, the publisher/distributor is running on a Windows 2003 Server.
Maer
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23gnkoQmPGHA.2912@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>I think you are having name resolution problems from this client. Can this
>client ping the publisher/distributor by IP?
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
> RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
> This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
> positions, strategies or opinions.
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Maer" <maer@.auditleverage.com> wrote in message
> news:%23EO95jlPGHA.2080@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>

Merege Replication Failed

Hi Guys im newbie but need to learn more of it so please cooperate with me and slolve my problem.

my Sql Server starts merging and it starts dumping the scema and data after some time it the status shows failed, it doesn't give any error message also. please let me know what to check and how to resolve this.

The merge agent must be saying something? Are you looking at the SQL Serrve agent job history?

Also you can try running the merge agent from command line with increased verbosity. -OutputVerboseLevel 2

|||

yeah there is an error saying that

" The process could not deliver the snapshot to the subscriber. Note:The step was was retried the requested number of times(10) without succeeding. the step faild."

So please let me know wht to do on this. Thanks and Praises in advance.

|||

Try one of all of the following:

1. Can you expand all the + in the job history view and see if there is any relevant information there.

2. Run the merge agent from command line tool D:\Program FIles\Microsoft SQL Server\90\COM\replmerg.exe with all the relevant parameters and also add -OutputVerboseLevel 2

3. Look in distribution..MSmerge_history for the error message for this session.

Memory Utilization

Guys,
I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a Dual-Xeon
2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with huge
processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole memory?
I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper than
1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
Thx,
Rafa
Hi,
What edition of SQL Server you are using? Only Enterprise or Developer
editions of SQL server supports more than 2 GB memory.
Sheck the version of SQL Server using
Select @.@.version
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Rafa" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a
> Dual-Xeon
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with
> huge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole
> memory?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper
> than
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa
|||According to Books Online
(mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Microsoft%20SQL% 20Server\80\Tools\Books\architec.chm::/8_ar_ts_8dbn.htm)
the Standard Edition of SQL Server will not use more than 2GB of RAM.
Keith
"Rafa" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a
> Dual-Xeon
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with
> huge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole
> memory?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper
> than
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa
|||Take a look at the following URL
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;274750
There is a \3GB switch
Wayne Snyder MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
(Please respond only to the newsgroup.)
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server ( PASS) and it's
community of SQL Professionals.
"Rafa" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a
Dual-Xeon
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with
huge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole
memory?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper
than
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa
|||Hi,
Try /3gb switch in boot.ini
"Rafa?" wrote:

> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a Dual-Xeon
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with huge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole memory?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper than
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa
|||Well, it's the Enterprise Edition...
What does /3gb in boot.ini?
"Wayne Snyder" wrote:

> Take a look at the following URL
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;274750
> There is a \3GB switch
>
> --
> Wayne Snyder MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
> Mariner, Charlotte, NC
> (Please respond only to the newsgroup.)
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server ( PASS) and it's
> community of SQL Professionals.
> "Rafa?" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> Dual-Xeon
> huge
> memory?
> than
>
>
|||Since you are running on Enterprise Edition you could try using /3GB and or
/PAE within boot.ini.
You will then probably want to specify the memory usage within SQL Server
Using AWE Memory on Windows 2000
mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Microsoft%20SQL%2 0Server\80\Tools\Books\architec.chm::/8_ar_sa_6b3k.htm
Managing AWE Memory
mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Microsoft%20SQL%2 0Server\80\Tools\Books\adminsql.chm::/ad_1_server_1fnd.htm
Keith
"Rafa" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a
> Dual-Xeon
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with
> huge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole
> memory?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper
> than
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa
|||Keith,
Why would you use the /PAE and AWE switches if his server only has 4 GB RAM.
Those settings are for servers with more than 4GB.
"Keith Kratochvil" wrote:

> Since you are running on Enterprise Edition you could try using /3GB and or
> /PAE within boot.ini.
> You will then probably want to specify the memory usage within SQL Server
> Using AWE Memory on Windows 2000
> mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Microsoft%20SQL%2 0Server\80\Tools\Books\architec.chm::/8_ar_sa_6b3k.htm
> Managing AWE Memory
> mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Microsoft%20SQL%2 0Server\80\Tools\Books\adminsql.chm::/ad_1_server_1fnd.htm
> --
> Keith
>
> "Rafa?" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
>
>

Memory Utilization

Guys,
I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a Dual-Xeon
2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with huge
processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole memory?
I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper tha
n
1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
Thx,
RafaHi,
What edition of SQL Server you are using? Only Enterprise or Developer
editions of SQL server supports more than 2 GB memory.
Sheck the version of SQL Server using
Select @.@.version
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Rafa" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a
> Dual-Xeon
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with
> huge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole
> memory?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper
> than
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa|||According to Books Online
(mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Micros
oft%20SQL%20Server\80\Tools\Books\ar
chitec.chm::/8_ar_ts_8dbn.htm)
the Standard Edition of SQL Server will not use more than 2GB of RAM.
Keith
"Rafa" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a
> Dual-Xeon
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with
> huge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole
> memory?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper
> than
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa|||Take a look at the following URL
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;274750
There is a \3GB switch
Wayne Snyder MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
(Please respond only to the newsgroup.)
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server ( PASS) and it's
community of SQL Professionals.
"Rafa" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a
Dual-Xeon
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with
huge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole
memory?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper
than
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa|||Hi,
Try /3gb switch in boot.ini
"Rafa?" wrote:

> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a Dual-Xeo
n
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with hu
ge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole memory
?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper t
han
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa|||Well, it's the Enterprise Edition...
What does /3gb in boot.ini?
"Wayne Snyder" wrote:

> Take a look at the following URL
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;274750
> There is a \3GB switch
>
> --
> Wayne Snyder MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
> Mariner, Charlotte, NC
> (Please respond only to the newsgroup.)
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server ( PASS) and it's
> community of SQL Professionals.
> "Rafa?" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> Dual-Xeon
> huge
> memory?
> than
>
>|||Since you are running on Enterprise Edition you could try using /3GB and or
/PAE within boot.ini.
You will then probably want to specify the memory usage within SQL Server
Using AWE Memory on Windows 2000
mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Microso
ft%20SQL%20Server\80\Tools\Books\arc
hitec.chm::/8_ar_sa_6b3k.htm
Managing AWE Memory
mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Microso
ft%20SQL%20Server\80\Tools\Books\adm
insql.chm::/ad_1_server_1fnd.htm
Keith
"Rafa" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a
> Dual-Xeon
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with
> huge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole
> memory?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper
> than
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa|||Keith,
Why would you use the /PAE and AWE switches if his server only has 4 GB RAM.
Those settings are for servers with more than 4GB.
"Keith Kratochvil" wrote:

> Since you are running on Enterprise Edition you could try using /3GB and
or
> /PAE within boot.ini.
> You will then probably want to specify the memory usage within SQL Server
> Using AWE Memory on Windows 2000
> mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Microso
ft%20SQL%20Server\80\Tools\Books\a
rchitec.chm::/8_ar_sa_6b3k.htm
> Managing AWE Memory
> mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Microso
ft%20SQL%20Server\80\Tools\Books\a
dminsql.chm::/ad_1_server_1fnd.htm
> --
> Keith
>
> "Rafa?" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
>
>

Memory Utilization

Guys,
I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a Dual-Xeon
2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with huge
processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole memory?
I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper than
1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
Thx,
RafaHi,
What edition of SQL Server you are using? Only Enterprise or Developer
editions of SQL server supports more than 2 GB memory.
Sheck the version of SQL Server using
Select @.@.version
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Rafa®" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a
> Dual-Xeon
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with
> huge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole
> memory?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper
> than
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa|||Take a look at the following URL
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;274750
There is a \3GB switch
Wayne Snyder MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
(Please respond only to the newsgroup.)
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server ( PASS) and it's
community of SQL Professionals.
"Rafa®" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a
Dual-Xeon
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with
huge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole
memory?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper
than
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa|||According to Books Online
(mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Microsoft%20SQL%20Server\80\Tools\Books\architec.chm::/8_ar_ts_8dbn.htm)
the Standard Edition of SQL Server will not use more than 2GB of RAM.
--
Keith
"Rafa®" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a
> Dual-Xeon
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with
> huge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole
> memory?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper
> than
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa|||Hi,
Try /3gb switch in boot.ini
"Rafa®" wrote:
> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a Dual-Xeon
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with huge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole memory?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper than
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa|||Well, it's the Enterprise Edition...
What does /3gb in boot.ini?
"Wayne Snyder" wrote:
> Take a look at the following URL
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;274750
> There is a \3GB switch
>
> --
> Wayne Snyder MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
> Mariner, Charlotte, NC
> (Please respond only to the newsgroup.)
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server ( PASS) and it's
> community of SQL Professionals.
> "Rafa®" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> > Guys,
> > I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a
> Dual-Xeon
> > 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> > can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> >
> > Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> > that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with
> huge
> > processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> > special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole
> memory?
> >
> > I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> > boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper
> than
> > 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> >
> > Thx,
> > Rafa
>
>|||Since you are running on Enterprise Edition you could try using /3GB and or
/PAE within boot.ini.
You will then probably want to specify the memory usage within SQL Server
Using AWE Memory on Windows 2000
mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Microsoft%20SQL%20Server\80\Tools\Books\architec.chm::/8_ar_sa_6b3k.htm
Managing AWE Memory
mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Microsoft%20SQL%20Server\80\Tools\Books\adminsql.chm::/ad_1_server_1fnd.htm
--
Keith
"Rafa®" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> Guys,
> I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a
> Dual-Xeon
> 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with
> huge
> processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole
> memory?
> I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper
> than
> 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> Thx,
> Rafa|||Keith,
Why would you use the /PAE and AWE switches if his server only has 4 GB RAM.
Those settings are for servers with more than 4GB.
"Keith Kratochvil" wrote:
> Since you are running on Enterprise Edition you could try using /3GB and or
> /PAE within boot.ini.
> You will then probably want to specify the memory usage within SQL Server
> Using AWE Memory on Windows 2000
> mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Microsoft%20SQL%20Server\80\Tools\Books\architec.chm::/8_ar_sa_6b3k.htm
> Managing AWE Memory
> mk:@.MSITStore:C:\Program%20Files\Microsoft%20SQL%20Server\80\Tools\Books\adminsql.chm::/ad_1_server_1fnd.htm
> --
> Keith
>
> "Rafa®" <Rafa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:98A36C40-7BAF-4883-902D-D01BFE02FEFB@.microsoft.com...
> > Guys,
> > I have a server running MS-SQL SP3. The server configuration is a
> > Dual-Xeon
> > 2.4Ghz, with 4GB RAM. The server is reserved for running SQL Server, so he
> > can use the whole memory for the SQL Server service...
> >
> > Just as a 2GB server that I had before, monitoring with Task Manager I see
> > that the memory utilization don't grow up more than 1,84gb... Even with
> > huge
> > processing and disk reading... So my question is, is there any kind of
> > special configuration that you must set to let server use the whole
> > memory?
> >
> > I know about AWE, but I thought AWE is just for servers who break the 4GB
> > boundary... Would like to know why the memory utilization don't go upper
> > than
> > 1,84gb, even setting this as a fixed value in Server configuration...
> >
> > Thx,
> > Rafa
>
>

Memory question for the gurus

Hi Guys, first time posting here. My boss has a Lotus Notes application accessing SQL server with about 60 users. I have a custom VB app with 40+ users. Our SQL Server has
2 gigabyte of memory on it. Is this too low? My boss is expecting to have 300+ users on his Notes app when he rolls it out to our other branches. What would be the ideal amount of memory for 300+ users?Depends: will the 300+ users access the data simultaneously? 24/7? How much data will they transfer? How big is the database, and how is it used by the application? Are there any agreements with users concerning availablility/performance? What's acceptable to them?|||My boss has a Lotus Notes application accessing SQL server with about 60 users.

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

In the name of GOD WHY?

Got a lot of left over Notus Lotes developers who haven't made the jump?

Notestrix? Notespump? How are they talking to SQL Server?

OH, the volume of users and the amount of memory isn't the issue.

How big is the database?|||Hi Guys,

Im not sure if you guys are referring to the size of the database file. Anyway the database that Notes is accessing is 13 gigabytes as of today and the database my VB app is using is 200 mb. I just ran performance monitor on the server and it says 90 MB of memory available and over 440 pages fault per second. It looks like SQL is taking up over 1.6 gig of memory. Yikes!|||You can perform an assessment using PERFMON while sQL server is in working state, which gives you full information.|||Lotus Notues and a 13gig database...hmmmm

Is he calling stored procedures or is everything in the application layer?

I'd be curious as to how it performs...

Oh, and SQL will grab as much memory as it needs...that's a good thing...

This is a dedicated SQL Server box...right?|||Yeah, it is a dedicated server box. We are using Lotus Notes through Citrix and I believe we have about 4 servers dedicated to Lotus Notes. His application is running fine so far but Im concern about the available memory on our SQL server (and espcecially since it started crashing and rebooting about once a week). The reason the SQL database Notes is accessing is fairly big is because of document archiving. I have a custom APP that produces customer statements and invoices in postcript format that we send to our customers. These documents then get archived each night in SQL server. The Notes App allows our customer reps to quickly find and view these documents. We send thousands and thousands of documents each month so this database is going to grow quickly. What do you guys think? Throw more memory in there? Im not a SQL DBA so I have no idea if 2 gig of memory is enough to handle 100+ users and like I said, it will be 300+ soon.|||There is no such thing as too much memory for MS-SQL! You can safely get that notion out of your head ;)

A lot depends on the architecture, how the Notes users are accessing the database, how your VB app works, etc.

Being the wild man that I am, I usually start my MS-SQL boxes at 8 Gb, then let somebody try to talk me down. I almost always manage to convince them there is no point in saving a few hundred dollars on RAM that would save them at least 10 hours of overtime each month.

-PatP|||Thanks Pat. I've convinced my boss to order more memory for the server. I'll see if I can get 8 gigs like you mentioned :D|||See...the thing of it is, is that Pat didn't ask you what version you're running or what the OS is...

This is kind of important|||See...the thing of it is, is that Pat didn't ask you what version you're running or what the OS is...

This is kind of important
Is that because Pat has a business on the side building bargain basement desktops?
;)|||See...the thing of it is, is that Pat didn't ask you what version you're running or what the OS is...

This is kind of importantAnd not only that, it also depends on whether the box will take 8GB or not. It's nice to sit there and say: "Yeah, memory is cheap!" Sure, what about a box itself? Maybe you can afford only the one expandable to 6GB? Where are you gonna put the other 2? In your ear?|||Maybe you can afford only the one expandable to 6GB? Where are you gonna put the other 2? In your ear?

Dude! that is so funny! "In his ear"?! .. I almost made a mess with the cup of cofee on my desk.|||See...the thing of it is, is that Pat didn't ask you what version you're running or what the OS is...

This is kind of importantGood point... Sometimes I miss details like that.

If jmondia is running NT 3.51 or earlier, then 8 Gb is a problem, since the OS has problems addressing that much memory. The same is true if they are running SQL 6.5 or earlier, although there used to be work-arounds for those problems from Micrsoft Professional Support Services.

I assumed that anyone planning to run 300+ simultaneous users would be running on server grade hardware (which by my definition has to support at least 8 Gb of RAM), with at least Windows 2000 and SQL 7. I shouldn't have taken those things for granted. Based on jmondia's response, it looks like I was safe making those assumptions though.

-PatP|||Man, I wish you were around when we were running our HMO on a 4-way with 4GB maxed out with 6.5 and NT (4.0 though, 3.51 wouldn't have taken it) PSS participated in setting up this server, all the specs were met...where did you get this idea that PSS would come up with a workaround for 6.5 to recognize even 2/3 of 8GB of RAM? Man, my veins (as Lindman once noticed) are about to pop even imagining this! We would have been all set with 8GB! Dreaming again?|||Dreaming again?A good TAM helps a lot.

-PatP

Memory leak...How to get memory usage for each connections?

Hi Guys,
I find there is memory leak in our SQL 2000+SP3 databass. We have a
client-server system, and the there are Jrun4.0 running JSP and someother
Java application talks to the database.
However, for only less than 40 users, the SQL 2000 memory usage will
increase consistantly until it use all the memory it can get ,about 1.7G
memory. Then eventually the SQL server process will hang in couple days.
I don't know whether JRun JSP stuff or Java application is the culprit, and
I am wondering if there is a way to monitor the memory usage of every
database connection.
I would love to know what you guys think!
Thanks a lot!The number of users has little or nothing to do with how much memory sql
server uses. It's more the amount of data your accessing and how you do it.
A single user can easily take up all the available ram. The process you
describe (except maybe for the hanging portion) is normal and by design.
See here: http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=321363 SQL Server 7 &
2000 memory usage
This is not to say there isn't a memory leak somewhere but it is unlikely
from SQL Server. I would suggest you make sure your queries are properly
tuned and you might want to set an upper limit on the SQL Server memory and
see if that helps.
--
Andrew J. Kelly
SQL Server MVP
"Erik Miller" <bopew2000@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7RNMa.46791$T85.5399682@.news1.telusplanet.net...
> Hi Guys,
> I find there is memory leak in our SQL 2000+SP3 databass. We have a
> client-server system, and the there are Jrun4.0 running JSP and someother
> Java application talks to the database.
> However, for only less than 40 users, the SQL 2000 memory usage will
> increase consistantly until it use all the memory it can get ,about 1.7G
> memory. Then eventually the SQL server process will hang in couple days.
> I don't know whether JRun JSP stuff or Java application is the culprit,
and
> I am wondering if there is a way to monitor the memory usage of every
> database connection.
> I would love to know what you guys think!
> Thanks a lot!
>|||Well.One thing is for sure, the SQL server hangs.
The application is quite complicated, so it is very hard for me to push
developers to tune every thing they wrote. I only want to find out if there
is way to find who takes the most memory or makes SQL server grab more
momory.
I did try to limit the max memory to 1.5 G. It hangs too.
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23K%23kUzRQDHA.560@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> The number of users has little or nothing to do with how much memory sql
> server uses. It's more the amount of data your accessing and how you do
it.
> A single user can easily take up all the available ram. The process you
> describe (except maybe for the hanging portion) is normal and by design.
> See here: http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=321363 SQL Server 7 &
> 2000 memory usage
> This is not to say there isn't a memory leak somewhere but it is unlikely
> from SQL Server. I would suggest you make sure your queries are properly
> tuned and you might want to set an upper limit on the SQL Server memory
and
> see if that helps.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly
> SQL Server MVP
>
> "Erik Miller" <bopew2000@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:7RNMa.46791$T85.5399682@.news1.telusplanet.net...
> > Hi Guys,
> >
> > I find there is memory leak in our SQL 2000+SP3 databass. We have a
> > client-server system, and the there are Jrun4.0 running JSP and
someother
> > Java application talks to the database.
> >
> > However, for only less than 40 users, the SQL 2000 memory usage will
> > increase consistantly until it use all the memory it can get ,about 1.7G
> > memory. Then eventually the SQL server process will hang in couple days.
> >
> > I don't know whether JRun JSP stuff or Java application is the culprit,
> and
> > I am wondering if there is a way to monitor the memory usage of every
> > database connection.
> >
> > I would love to know what you guys think!
> >
> > Thanks a lot!
> >
> >
>|||Do you have other apps running on the same server as sql server? How about
extended sp's? The only real way to tell what is making it use more memory
is to run profiler and perfmon to see what is running when the buffers start
climbing. But if you run profiler traces you can easily tell what sp's are
taking large amounts of I/O, cpu etc. This will certainly give you a clue
as to what may be gobbling up ram in the buffer.
Maybe this will help:
http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/troubleshooting-memoryleak.asp
Andrew J. Kelly
SQL Server MVP
"Erik Miller" <bopew2000@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:mpXMa.52170$Mc4.6537800@.news0.telusplanet.net...
> Well.One thing is for sure, the SQL server hangs.
> The application is quite complicated, so it is very hard for me to push
> developers to tune every thing they wrote. I only want to find out if
there
> is way to find who takes the most memory or makes SQL server grab more
> momory.
> I did try to limit the max memory to 1.5 G. It hangs too.
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23K%23kUzRQDHA.560@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > The number of users has little or nothing to do with how much memory sql
> > server uses. It's more the amount of data your accessing and how you do
> it.
> > A single user can easily take up all the available ram. The process you
> > describe (except maybe for the hanging portion) is normal and by design.
> > See here: http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=321363 SQL Server 7
&
> > 2000 memory usage
> > This is not to say there isn't a memory leak somewhere but it is
unlikely
> > from SQL Server. I would suggest you make sure your queries are
properly
> > tuned and you might want to set an upper limit on the SQL Server memory
> and
> > see if that helps.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Andrew J. Kelly
> > SQL Server MVP
> >
> >
> > "Erik Miller" <bopew2000@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:7RNMa.46791$T85.5399682@.news1.telusplanet.net...
> > > Hi Guys,
> > >
> > > I find there is memory leak in our SQL 2000+SP3 databass. We have a
> > > client-server system, and the there are Jrun4.0 running JSP and
> someother
> > > Java application talks to the database.
> > >
> > > However, for only less than 40 users, the SQL 2000 memory usage will
> > > increase consistantly until it use all the memory it can get ,about
1.7G
> > > memory. Then eventually the SQL server process will hang in couple
days.
> > >
> > > I don't know whether JRun JSP stuff or Java application is the
culprit,
> > and
> > > I am wondering if there is a way to monitor the memory usage of every
> > > database connection.
> > >
> > > I would love to know what you guys think!
> > >
> > > Thanks a lot!
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>|||SQL using 1.7GB of memory is perfectly normal. the hanging is probably NOT
caused by memory usage. Have you checked for blocking?
"Erik Miller" <bopew2000@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:mpXMa.52170$Mc4.6537800@.news0.telusplanet.net...
> Well.One thing is for sure, the SQL server hangs.
> The application is quite complicated, so it is very hard for me to push
> developers to tune every thing they wrote. I only want to find out if
there
> is way to find who takes the most memory or makes SQL server grab more
> momory.
> I did try to limit the max memory to 1.5 G. It hangs too.
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23K%23kUzRQDHA.560@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > The number of users has little or nothing to do with how much memory sql
> > server uses. It's more the amount of data your accessing and how you do
> it.
> > A single user can easily take up all the available ram. The process you
> > describe (except maybe for the hanging portion) is normal and by design.
> > See here: http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=321363 SQL Server 7
&
> > 2000 memory usage
> > This is not to say there isn't a memory leak somewhere but it is
unlikely
> > from SQL Server. I would suggest you make sure your queries are
properly
> > tuned and you might want to set an upper limit on the SQL Server memory
> and
> > see if that helps.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Andrew J. Kelly
> > SQL Server MVP
> >
> >
> > "Erik Miller" <bopew2000@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:7RNMa.46791$T85.5399682@.news1.telusplanet.net...
> > > Hi Guys,
> > >
> > > I find there is memory leak in our SQL 2000+SP3 databass. We have a
> > > client-server system, and the there are Jrun4.0 running JSP and
> someother
> > > Java application talks to the database.
> > >
> > > However, for only less than 40 users, the SQL 2000 memory usage will
> > > increase consistantly until it use all the memory it can get ,about
1.7G
> > > memory. Then eventually the SQL server process will hang in couple
days.
> > >
> > > I don't know whether JRun JSP stuff or Java application is the
culprit,
> > and
> > > I am wondering if there is a way to monitor the memory usage of every
> > > database connection.
> > >
> > > I would love to know what you guys think!
> > >
> > > Thanks a lot!
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>|||Thanks for all the hints here, appreciated !
I'll try to check them accordingly.
"Hal Berenson" <haroldb@.truemountainconsulting.com> wrote in message
news:Ou4J3sXQDHA.2432@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> The hang situation makes this quite different from the usual concerns
about
> SQL Server allocating very large amounts of memory. Likely culprits:
> - Extended Stored Procedures (XP) - If you have any user written XPs then
> they are a very likely cause of problems. For example, they don't use SQL
> Server's internal memory management, and there is nothing to prevent them
> from behaving badly.
> - OLE Automation - If you use this feature then you have some similar
> problems as XPs in that the environment the objects run in is "outside"
the
> SQL Server environment itself. The likeliness of a problem is much lower
> than an XP, but its still present.
> - Distributed Queries - The only OLE DB provider that really has been
tuned
> to run in the SQL Server address space, and stress tested in high
> transaction rate environments by the SQL Server group, is SQLOLEDB. Other
> OLE DB providers aren't concious of running in the SQL Server address
space
> and are more likely to misbehave in that environment. I'd particularly be
> wary of providers that are not supplied by Microsoft. Fortunately, you
can
> just make sure that AllowInProcess=0 for these OLE DB providers. (A more
> general recommendation would be to test with AllowInProcess=0 and then set
> AllowInProcess=1 when you are very confident that the provider is working
> well.)
> - Bug in SQL Server. If you rule out all the external items that could
> behave badly, then you tend to look at the possibility that you are
running
> into a bug in SQL Server. In that case, I'd place a support call with
> Microsoft. Debugging something so general can be very complex, and it
could
> take a very long time to do simply based on suggestions from folks in a
> newsgroup of what you should try.
> --
> Hal Berenson, SQL Server MVP
> True Mountain Group LLC
>
> "Erik Miller" <bopew2000@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:mpXMa.52170$Mc4.6537800@.news0.telusplanet.net...
> > Well.One thing is for sure, the SQL server hangs.
> >
> > The application is quite complicated, so it is very hard for me to push
> > developers to tune every thing they wrote. I only want to find out if
> there
> > is way to find who takes the most memory or makes SQL server grab more
> > momory.
> >
> > I did try to limit the max memory to 1.5 G. It hangs too.
> >
> >
> > "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> > news:%23K%23kUzRQDHA.560@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > The number of users has little or nothing to do with how much memory
sql
> > > server uses. It's more the amount of data your accessing and how you
do
> > it.
> > > A single user can easily take up all the available ram. The process
you
> > > describe (except maybe for the hanging portion) is normal and by
design.
> > > See here: http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=321363 SQL Server
7
> &
> > > 2000 memory usage
> > > This is not to say there isn't a memory leak somewhere but it is
> unlikely
> > > from SQL Server. I would suggest you make sure your queries are
> properly
> > > tuned and you might want to set an upper limit on the SQL Server
memory
> > and
> > > see if that helps.
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Andrew J. Kelly
> > > SQL Server MVP
> > >
> > >
> > > "Erik Miller" <bopew2000@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > news:7RNMa.46791$T85.5399682@.news1.telusplanet.net...
> > > > Hi Guys,
> > > >
> > > > I find there is memory leak in our SQL 2000+SP3 databass. We have a
> > > > client-server system, and the there are Jrun4.0 running JSP and
> > someother
> > > > Java application talks to the database.
> > > >
> > > > However, for only less than 40 users, the SQL 2000 memory usage will
> > > > increase consistantly until it use all the memory it can get ,about
> 1.7G
> > > > memory. Then eventually the SQL server process will hang in couple
> days.
> > > >
> > > > I don't know whether JRun JSP stuff or Java application is the
> culprit,
> > > and
> > > > I am wondering if there is a way to monitor the memory usage of
every
> > > > database connection.
> > > >
> > > > I would love to know what you guys think!
> > > >
> > > > Thanks a lot!
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>