Server with 2GB of memory (As a Virtual Machine on VMWare ESX Server).
From the statistics, we find that the memory utilization of that Windows
2000 Server is around 200MB of memory. In this way, we attempt to change
the RAM from 2GB to 1GB. However, we find that the memory utilization is as
high as around 1GB. In this way, we change the RAM from 2GB to 1GB.
We just thinking the rise of memory required is only for the first 1 to 2
hours OR not ? If there any reason for a SQL Server 2000 to grab more
memory when we start it up ? Will the memory be stabilized to become 200MB
again ?
Your advice is sought.This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--060500000502050507020305
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In most situations, SQL Server's memory allocation will be lowest when
you first start the service. SQL Server will cache each data page as it
is read from disk until a minimum free memory threshold is reached (from
memory the threshold is 10MB by default). SQL Server then removes least
recently used pages from its cache, and releases memory, as necessary in
order to maintain the free memory threshold. This means that the longer
the service runs the more memory it will use (up to a limit). This is
Microsoft's dynamic memory management model.
One exception to this "increasing memory use" model is when you
configure SQL Server to grab its entire memory allocation on service
start-up, in which case all the memory, up to the configured maximum
limit, is reserved up front. However, there are no situations (that I
can think of) where SQL Server initially uses more memory and then
releases a substantial portion of it to "stabilise" at a certain level
(unless you start messing around with DBCC to flush the data buffer &
procedure cache).
--
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Robert wrote:
>We have been running an application on SQL Server 2000 on a Windows 2000
>Server with 2GB of memory (As a Virtual Machine on VMWare ESX Server).
>From the statistics, we find that the memory utilization of that Windows
>2000 Server is around 200MB of memory. In this way, we attempt to change
>the RAM from 2GB to 1GB. However, we find that the memory utilization is as
>high as around 1GB. In this way, we change the RAM from 2GB to 1GB.
>We just thinking the rise of memory required is only for the first 1 to 2
>hours OR not ? If there any reason for a SQL Server 2000 to grab more
>memory when we start it up ? Will the memory be stabilized to become 200MB
>again ?
>
>Your advice is sought.
>
>
--060500000502050507020305
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<tt>In most situations, SQL Server's memory allocation will be lowest
when you first start the service. SQL Server will cache each data page
as it is read from disk until a minimum free memory threshold is
reached (from memory the threshold is 10MB by default). </tt><tt>SQL
Server then removes least recently used pages from its cache,
and releases memory, as necessary in order to maintain the free memory
threshold. </tt><tt>This means that the longer the service runs the
more memory it will use (up to a limit). This is Microsoft's dynamic
memory management model.<br>
<br>
One exception to this "increasing memory use" model is when you
configure SQL Server to grab its entire memory allocation on service
start-up, in which case all the memory, up to the configured maximum
limit, is reserved up front. However, there are no situations (that I
can think of) where SQL Server initially uses more memory and then
releases a substantial portion of it to "stabilise" at a certain level
(unless you start messing around with DBCC to flush the data buffer
& procedure cache).</tt><br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<p><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">--<br>
</font></span> <b><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">mike
hodgson</font></span></b><span lang="en-au"><br>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>
</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
Robert wrote:
<blockquote cite="midOeJwQEbnGHA.4868@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">We have been running an application on SQL Server 2000 on a Windows 2000
Server with 2GB of memory (As a Virtual Machine on VMWare ESX Server).
From the statistics, we find that the memory utilization of that Windows
2000 Server is around 200MB of memory. In this way, we attempt to change
the RAM from 2GB to 1GB. However, we find that the memory utilization is as
high as around 1GB. In this way, we change the RAM from 2GB to 1GB.
We just thinking the rise of memory required is only for the first 1 to 2
hours OR not ? If there any reason for a SQL Server 2000 to grab more
memory when we start it up ? Will the memory be stabilized to become 200MB
again ?
Your advice is sought.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--060500000502050507020305--|||This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--=_NextPart_000_0016_01C69ED0.60E2CBA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear Mike,
Thank you for your advice.
If the physical RAM is 2GB and I change the maximum RAM setting for the =SQL Server 2000 to 1.5GB. Does it mean that the SQL Server 2000 will =use most up to 1.5GB RAM ?
Thanks
"Mike Hodgson" <e1minst3r@.gmail.com> wrote in message =news:OYx8BvknGHA.3340@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
In most situations, SQL Server's memory allocation will be lowest when =you first start the service. SQL Server will cache each data page as it =is read from disk until a minimum free memory threshold is reached (from =memory the threshold is 10MB by default). SQL Server then removes least =recently used pages from its cache, and releases memory, as necessary in =order to maintain the free memory threshold. This means that the longer =the service runs the more memory it will use (up to a limit). This is =Microsoft's dynamic memory management model.
One exception to this "increasing memory use" model is when you =configure SQL Server to grab its entire memory allocation on service =start-up, in which case all the memory, up to the configured maximum =limit, is reserved up front. However, there are no situations (that I =can think of) where SQL Server initially uses more memory and then =releases a substantial portion of it to "stabilise" at a certain level =(unless you start messing around with DBCC to flush the data buffer & =procedure cache).
--
mike hodgson
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com=20
Robert wrote: We have been running an application on SQL Server 2000 on a Windows 2000 =
Server with 2GB of memory (As a Virtual Machine on VMWare ESX Server).
From the statistics, we find that the memory utilization of that Windows =
2000 Server is around 200MB of memory. In this way, we attempt to =change the RAM from 2GB to 1GB. However, we find that the memory utilization =is as high as around 1GB. In this way, we change the RAM from 2GB to 1GB.
We just thinking the rise of memory required is only for the first 1 to =2 hours OR not ? If there any reason for a SQL Server 2000 to grab more memory when we start it up ? Will the memory be stabilized to become =200MB again ?
Your advice is sought.
--=_NextPart_000_0016_01C69ED0.60E2CBA0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
&
Dear Mike,
Thank you for your advice.
If the physical RAM is 2GB and I change =the maximum RAM setting for the SQL Server 2000 to 1.5GB. Does it mean that =the SQL Server 2000 will use most up to 1.5GB RAM ?
Thanks
"Mike Hodgson"
--mike =hodgsonhttp://sqlnerd.blogspot.com Robert wrote: We have been running an application on SQL =Server 2000 on a Windows 2000 Server with 2GB of memory (As a Virtual Machine on VMWare ESX Server).
From the statistics, we find that the memory utilization of that Windows =2000 Server is around 200MB of memory. In this way, we attempt to =change the RAM from 2GB to 1GB. However, we find that the memory utilization =is as high as around 1GB. In this way, we change the RAM from 2GB to 1GB.
We just thinking the rise of memory required is only for the first 1 to =2 hours OR not ? If there any reason for a SQL Server 2000 to grab more memory when we start it up ? Will the memory be stabilized to become =200MB again ?
Your advice is sought.
--=_NextPart_000_0016_01C69ED0.60E2CBA0--|||This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--060007000708090601070304
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
It means that SQL Server will be allowed, at most, a 1.5GB address
space. It does not necessarily mean this will be backed by physical
memory. If there is not enough physical memory to support SQL Server's
requests, in addition to the other applications requesting memory on the
box (including the OS itself), then part of that memory space will be
backed by virtual memory, which, needless-to-say, is not a
high-performance situation. The exception to this, which does not apply
to you because you are playing with less than 4GB of physical memory, is
AWE memory, which is always satisfied from physical memory (it is never
swapped to disk).
--
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Robert wrote:
> Dear Mike,
> Thank you for your advice.
> If the physical RAM is 2GB and I change the maximum RAM setting for
> the SQL Server 2000 to 1.5GB. Does it mean that the SQL Server 2000
> will use most up to 1.5GB RAM ?
> Thanks
>
> "Mike Hodgson" <e1minst3r@.gmail.com <mailto:e1minst3r@.gmail.com>>
> wrote in message news:OYx8BvknGHA.3340@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> In most situations, SQL Server's memory allocation will be lowest
> when you first start the service. SQL Server will cache each data
> page as it is read from disk until a minimum free memory threshold
> is reached (from memory the threshold is 10MB by default). SQL
> Server then removes least recently used pages from its cache, and
> releases memory, as necessary in order to maintain the free memory
> threshold. This means that the longer the service runs the more
> memory it will use (up to a limit). This is Microsoft's dynamic
> memory management model.
> One exception to this "increasing memory use" model is when you
> configure SQL Server to grab its entire memory allocation on
> service start-up, in which case all the memory, up to the
> configured maximum limit, is reserved up front. However, there
> are no situations (that I can think of) where SQL Server initially
> uses more memory and then releases a substantial portion of it to
> "stabilise" at a certain level (unless you start messing around
> with DBCC to flush the data buffer & procedure cache).
> --
> *mike hodgson*
> http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
>
> Robert wrote:
>>We have been running an application on SQL Server 2000 on a Windows 2000
>>Server with 2GB of memory (As a Virtual Machine on VMWare ESX Server).
>>From the statistics, we find that the memory utilization of that Windows
>>2000 Server is around 200MB of memory. In this way, we attempt to change
>>the RAM from 2GB to 1GB. However, we find that the memory utilization is as
>>high as around 1GB. In this way, we change the RAM from 2GB to 1GB.
>>We just thinking the rise of memory required is only for the first 1 to 2
>>hours OR not ? If there any reason for a SQL Server 2000 to grab more
>>memory when we start it up ? Will the memory be stabilized to become 200MB
>>again ?
>>
>>Your advice is sought.
>>
>>
--060007000708090601070304
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<tt>It means that SQL Server will be allowed, at most, a 1.5GB address
space. It does not necessarily mean this will be backed by physical
memory. If there is not enough physical memory to support SQL Server's
requests, in addition to the other applications requesting memory on
the box (including the OS itself), then part of that memory space will
be backed by virtual memory, which, needless-to-say, is not a
high-performance situation. The exception to this, which does not
apply to you because you are playing with less than 4GB of physical
memory, is AWE memory, which is always satisfied from physical memory
(it is never swapped to disk).</tt><br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<p><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">--<br>
</font></span> <b><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">mike
hodgson</font></span></b><span lang="en-au"><br>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>
</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
Robert wrote:
<blockquote cite="miducrwUrnnGHA.4728@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl" type="cite">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name="GENERATOR">
<style></style>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Dear Mike,</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Thank you for your advice.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">If the physical RAM is 2GB and I
change the maximum RAM setting for the SQL Server 2000 to 1.5GB. Does
it mean that the SQL Server 2000 will use most up to 1.5GB RAM ?</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Thanks</font></div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;"
dir="ltr">
<div>"Mike Hodgson" <<a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=mailto:e1minst3r@.gmail.com">e1minst3r@.gmail.com</a>>
wrote in message <a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=news:OYx8BvknGHA.3340@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl">news:OYx8BvknGHA.3340@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl</a>...</div>
<tt>In most situations, SQL Server's memory allocation will be
lowest when you first start the service. SQL Server will cache each
data page as it is read from disk until a minimum free memory threshold
is reached (from memory the threshold is 10MB by default). </tt><tt>SQL
Server then removes least recently used pages from its cache, and
releases memory, as necessary in order to maintain the free memory
threshold. </tt><tt>This means that the longer the service runs the
more memory it will use (up to a limit). This is Microsoft's dynamic
memory management model.<br>
<br>
One exception to this "increasing memory use" model is when you
configure SQL Server to grab its entire memory allocation on service
start-up, in which case all the memory, up to the configured maximum
limit, is reserved up front. However, there are no situations (that I
can think of) where SQL Server initially uses more memory and then
releases a substantial portion of it to "stabilise" at a certain level
(unless you start messing around with DBCC to flush the data buffer
& procedure cache).</tt><br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<p><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">--<br>
</font></span><b><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">mike
hodgson</font></span></b><span lang="en-au"><br>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>
</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
Robert wrote:
<blockquote cite="midOeJwQEbnGHA.4868@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">We have been running an application on SQL Server 2000 on a Windows 2000
Server with 2GB of memory (As a Virtual Machine on VMWare ESX Server).
From the statistics, we find that the memory utilization of that Windows
2000 Server is around 200MB of memory. In this way, we attempt to change
the RAM from 2GB to 1GB. However, we find that the memory utilization is as
high as around 1GB. In this way, we change the RAM from 2GB to 1GB.
We just thinking the rise of memory required is only for the first 1 to 2
hours OR not ? If there any reason for a SQL Server 2000 to grab more
memory when we start it up ? Will the memory be stabilized to become 200MB
again ?
Your advice is sought.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--060007000708090601070304--|||This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--070103030000040705020106
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
For a little more background info about it, see the blog entry I just wrote:
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com/2006/07/memory-use-in-sql-server.html
Plus there's a stack of info about it in BOL and several quality
publications including The Guru's Guide to SQL Server Architecture and
Internals
<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0201700476/sr=8-2/qid=1152005971/ref=sr_1_2/104-4550407-8498336?ie=UTF8>
by Ken Henderson and Inside SQL Server 2000
<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0735609985/sr=8-2/qid=1152006007/ref=pd_bbs_2/104-4550407-8498336?ie=UTF8>
by Kalen Delaney.
--
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Mike Hodgson wrote:
> It means that SQL Server will be allowed, at most, a 1.5GB address
> space. It does not necessarily mean this will be backed by physical
> memory. If there is not enough physical memory to support SQL
> Server's requests, in addition to the other applications requesting
> memory on the box (including the OS itself), then part of that memory
> space will be backed by virtual memory, which, needless-to-say, is not
> a high-performance situation. The exception to this, which does not
> apply to you because you are playing with less than 4GB of physical
> memory, is AWE memory, which is always satisfied from physical memory
> (it is never swapped to disk).
> --
> *mike hodgson*
> http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
>
> Robert wrote:
>> Dear Mike,
>> Thank you for your advice.
>> If the physical RAM is 2GB and I change the maximum RAM setting for
>> the SQL Server 2000 to 1.5GB. Does it mean that the SQL Server 2000
>> will use most up to 1.5GB RAM ?
>> Thanks
>>
>> "Mike Hodgson" <e1minst3r@.gmail.com <mailto:e1minst3r@.gmail.com>>
>> wrote in message news:OYx8BvknGHA.3340@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> In most situations, SQL Server's memory allocation will be lowest
>> when you first start the service. SQL Server will cache each
>> data page as it is read from disk until a minimum free memory
>> threshold is reached (from memory the threshold is 10MB by
>> default). SQL Server then removes least recently used pages from
>> its cache, and releases memory, as necessary in order to maintain
>> the free memory threshold. This means that the longer the
>> service runs the more memory it will use (up to a limit). This
>> is Microsoft's dynamic memory management model.
>> One exception to this "increasing memory use" model is when you
>> configure SQL Server to grab its entire memory allocation on
>> service start-up, in which case all the memory, up to the
>> configured maximum limit, is reserved up front. However, there
>> are no situations (that I can think of) where SQL Server
>> initially uses more memory and then releases a substantial
>> portion of it to "stabilise" at a certain level (unless you start
>> messing around with DBCC to flush the data buffer & procedure cache).
>> --
>> *mike hodgson*
>> http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
>>
>> Robert wrote:
>>We have been running an application on SQL Server 2000 on a Windows 2000
>>Server with 2GB of memory (As a Virtual Machine on VMWare ESX Server).
>>From the statistics, we find that the memory utilization of that Windows
>>2000 Server is around 200MB of memory. In this way, we attempt to change
>>the RAM from 2GB to 1GB. However, we find that the memory utilization is as
>>high as around 1GB. In this way, we change the RAM from 2GB to 1GB.
>>We just thinking the rise of memory required is only for the first 1 to 2
>>hours OR not ? If there any reason for a SQL Server 2000 to grab more
>>memory when we start it up ? Will the memory be stabilized to become 200MB
>>again ?
>>
>>Your advice is sought.
>>
>>
--070103030000040705020106
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<tt>For a little more background info about it, see the blog entry I
just wrote:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com/2006/07/memory-use-in-sql-server.html</a><br>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com/2006/07/memory-use-in-sql-server.html">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com/2006/07/memory-use-in-sql-server.html</a><br>
<br>
Plus there's a stack of info about it in BOL and several quality
publications including <a
href="http://links.10026.com/?link=The">http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0201700476/sr=8-2/qid=1152005971/ref=sr_1_2/104-4550407-8498336?ie=UTF8">The
Guru's Guide to SQL Server Architecture and Internals</a> by Ken
Henderson and <a
href="http://links.10026.com/?link=Inside">http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0735609985/sr=8-2/qid=1152006007/ref=pd_bbs_2/104-4550407-8498336?ie=UTF8">Inside
SQL Server 2000</a> by Kalen Delaney.<br>
</tt>
<div class="moz-signature">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<p><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">--<br>
</font></span> <b><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">mike
hodgson</font></span></b><span lang="en-au"><br>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>
</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
Mike Hodgson wrote:
<blockquote cite="midef076WpnGHA.3340@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
<tt>It means that SQL Server will be allowed, at most, a 1.5GB
address
space. It does not necessarily mean this will be backed by physical
memory. If there is not enough physical memory to support SQL Server's
requests, in addition to the other applications requesting memory on
the box (including the OS itself), then part of that memory space will
be backed by virtual memory, which, needless-to-say, is not a
high-performance situation. The exception to this, which does not
apply to you because you are playing with less than 4GB of physical
memory, is AWE memory, which is always satisfied from physical memory
(it is never swapped to disk).</tt><br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<p><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">--<br>
</font></span> <b><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">mike
hodgson</font></span></b><span lang="en-au"><br>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>
</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
Robert wrote:
<blockquote cite="miducrwUrnnGHA.4728@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;">
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name="GENERATOR">
<style></style>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Dear Mike,</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Thank you for your advice.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">If the physical RAM is 2GB and I
change the maximum RAM setting for the SQL Server 2000 to 1.5GB. Does
it mean that the SQL Server 2000 will use most up to 1.5GB RAM ?</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Thanks</font></div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;"
dir="ltr">
<div>"Mike Hodgson" <<a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=mailto:e1minst3r@.gmail.com">e1minst3r@.gmail.com</a>>
wrote in message <a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=news:OYx8BvknGHA.3340@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl">news:OYx8BvknGHA.3340@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl</a>...</div>
<tt>In most situations, SQL Server's memory allocation will be
lowest when you first start the service. SQL Server will cache each
data page as it is read from disk until a minimum free memory threshold
is reached (from memory the threshold is 10MB by default). </tt><tt>SQL
Server then removes least recently used pages from its cache, and
releases memory, as necessary in order to maintain the free memory
threshold. </tt><tt>This means that the longer the service runs the
more memory it will use (up to a limit). This is Microsoft's dynamic
memory management model.<br>
<br>
One exception to this "increasing memory use" model is when you
configure SQL Server to grab its entire memory allocation on service
start-up, in which case all the memory, up to the configured maximum
limit, is reserved up front. However, there are no situations (that I
can think of) where SQL Server initially uses more memory and then
releases a substantial portion of it to "stabilise" at a certain level
(unless you start messing around with DBCC to flush the data buffer
& procedure cache).</tt><br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<p><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">--<br>
</font></span><b><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">mike
hodgson</font></span></b><span lang="en-au"><br>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>
</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
Robert wrote:
<blockquote cite="midOeJwQEbnGHA.4868@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">We have been running an application on SQL Server 2000 on a Windows 2000
Server with 2GB of memory (As a Virtual Machine on VMWare ESX Server).
From the statistics, we find that the memory utilization of that Windows
2000 Server is around 200MB of memory. In this way, we attempt to change
the RAM from 2GB to 1GB. However, we find that the memory utilization is as
high as around 1GB. In this way, we change the RAM from 2GB to 1GB.
We just thinking the rise of memory required is only for the first 1 to 2
hours OR not ? If there any reason for a SQL Server 2000 to grab more
memory when we start it up ? Will the memory be stabilized to become 200MB
again ?
Your advice is sought.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--070103030000040705020106--
No comments:
Post a Comment