Hey.
Table1 replicates to table3
Table2, just another table with the same schema as Table1 and 3.
In my setup, I created a copy table, copied 66 rows from table1 on publisher
to table2 on subscriber and deleted all 66 rows. The changes were replicated
to the subscriber to Table2(66 deletes made). Now i insert all 66 rows from
Table2 to table3 on the subscriber side. The change should have gone to
publisher. Instead, the inserts get deleted on the subscriber... Why would
SQL do this?
The inserts done later should be taken as new changes on subscriber and
should be replicated to publisher, isn't it?
Forgot to add, it took it as a conflict between pub and sub and for me, by
default, the pub wins... The problem with this is though, it shouldn't be a
conflict. I've ADDED these rows right now and ONLY to the subscriber...
Any clues.
Showing posts with label inserts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label inserts. Show all posts
Monday, March 26, 2012
Monday, February 20, 2012
Memory Leaks using MSDE 2000
Hello.
Our company is running an application that uses the MSDE 2000 (SP4), to load
large amount of data using bulk inserts.
The sqlservr.exe process increases from the 4-10MB that it starts with to
80-100MB after all transactions has been completed.
When starting a new transaction session, the process just continue to grow
causing the OS to perform poorly.
Ok, I understand that while on an insert transaction, the memory should grow
but when we are done, why doesn’t it release the resources?
You can see that this is a bad behavior if you just close the process
manually and start it again, the memory will start with 4-10MB, and the
application still works, meaning that the exe have lots of unused resources.
What can I do about that (other than limiting the memory size to xMB)?
Hi
Not leaking, it is by design
INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;321363
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Eli" <Eli@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3444B8D1-3E64-4EF3-B457-2EFB5543C0C7@.microsoft.com...
> Hello.
> Our company is running an application that uses the MSDE 2000 (SP4), to
> load
> large amount of data using bulk inserts.
> The sqlservr.exe process increases from the 4-10MB that it starts with to
> 80-100MB after all transactions has been completed.
> When starting a new transaction session, the process just continue to grow
> causing the OS to perform poorly.
> Ok, I understand that while on an insert transaction, the memory should
> grow
> but when we are done, why doesn't it release the resources?
> You can see that this is a bad behavior if you just close the process
> manually and start it again, the memory will start with 4-10MB, and the
> application still works, meaning that the exe have lots of unused
> resources.
> What can I do about that (other than limiting the memory size to xMB)?
>
>
|||Ok, it’s by design, pretty weird design, by ok.
Now, how can I handle this, design or not, it is a problem…
Limiting the max memory? Stopping and starring the process of the SQL?
What is the best practice for it?
Eli.
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
> Hi
> Not leaking, it is by design
> INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;321363
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "Eli" <Eli@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:3444B8D1-3E64-4EF3-B457-2EFB5543C0C7@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Hi
Set the MAX memory.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Eli" <Eli@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5D23EFC5-6240-47E3-AF83-B8B0CB0DC5D7@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Ok, it's by design, pretty weird design, by ok.
> Now, how can I handle this, design or not, it is a problem.
> Limiting the max memory? Stopping and starring the process of the SQL?
> What is the best practice for it?
> Eli.
>
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
Our company is running an application that uses the MSDE 2000 (SP4), to load
large amount of data using bulk inserts.
The sqlservr.exe process increases from the 4-10MB that it starts with to
80-100MB after all transactions has been completed.
When starting a new transaction session, the process just continue to grow
causing the OS to perform poorly.
Ok, I understand that while on an insert transaction, the memory should grow
but when we are done, why doesn’t it release the resources?
You can see that this is a bad behavior if you just close the process
manually and start it again, the memory will start with 4-10MB, and the
application still works, meaning that the exe have lots of unused resources.
What can I do about that (other than limiting the memory size to xMB)?
Hi
Not leaking, it is by design
INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;321363
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Eli" <Eli@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3444B8D1-3E64-4EF3-B457-2EFB5543C0C7@.microsoft.com...
> Hello.
> Our company is running an application that uses the MSDE 2000 (SP4), to
> load
> large amount of data using bulk inserts.
> The sqlservr.exe process increases from the 4-10MB that it starts with to
> 80-100MB after all transactions has been completed.
> When starting a new transaction session, the process just continue to grow
> causing the OS to perform poorly.
> Ok, I understand that while on an insert transaction, the memory should
> grow
> but when we are done, why doesn't it release the resources?
> You can see that this is a bad behavior if you just close the process
> manually and start it again, the memory will start with 4-10MB, and the
> application still works, meaning that the exe have lots of unused
> resources.
> What can I do about that (other than limiting the memory size to xMB)?
>
>
|||Ok, it’s by design, pretty weird design, by ok.
Now, how can I handle this, design or not, it is a problem…
Limiting the max memory? Stopping and starring the process of the SQL?
What is the best practice for it?
Eli.
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
> Hi
> Not leaking, it is by design
> INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;321363
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "Eli" <Eli@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:3444B8D1-3E64-4EF3-B457-2EFB5543C0C7@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Hi
Set the MAX memory.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Eli" <Eli@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5D23EFC5-6240-47E3-AF83-B8B0CB0DC5D7@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Ok, it's by design, pretty weird design, by ok.
> Now, how can I handle this, design or not, it is a problem.
> Limiting the max memory? Stopping and starring the process of the SQL?
> What is the best practice for it?
> Eli.
>
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)