Please, take a look at "Inside SQL Server 2000's Memory Management Facilities" by Ken Henderson:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...v_01262004.asp
"... None of the tools you typically use to inspect application memory use (Task Manager, Perfmon/Sysmon, etc.) show the amount of AWE memory used by individual processes. There's no indication of the amount of AWE memory used by each process, nor is this
memory included in the working set size reported for a given process ..."
Thanks,
-Ivan
--Original Message--
From: james
Posted At: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 6:52 AM
Posted To: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
Conversation: MemToLeave area! How to monitor?
Subject: MemToLeave area! How to monitor?
Gurus,
Occasionally I get the error of "WARNING: Failed to reserve contiguous memory of Size= 65536."
What is the unit for this size, is it bytes or KB? Additionally,
I have set up 511 MB for MemToLeave area by adding -g384 for Sql2k SP3a on AWE enabled system. I have total of 16 GB of RAM, of which 14 GB is set up maximum for Sql server.
If I look at Perfmon counter of Process->Private bytes for sql server process it gives me 224 MB.
If I look at sqlserver.exe process on task manager it gives me 215MB.
If I look at DBCC memorystatus, OS in use, it gives me 12 MB.
I would like to know, How can I calculate exactly how much memory is being assigned and how much in use from MemToLeave area by looking at above mentioned counters or any other perfmon or dbcc counters?
I really appreciate any input on this matter.
Thanks Ivan. I had already checked that article and also few other google
search but didn't get the answer.
<ivanpe@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:OenNh9IPGHA.3840@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Please, take a look at "Inside SQL Server 2000's Memory Management
> Facilities" by Ken Henderson:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...v_01262004.asp
> "... None of the tools you typically use to inspect application memory use
> (Task Manager, Perfmon/Sysmon, etc.) show the amount of AWE memory used by
> individual processes. There's no indication of the amount of AWE memory
> used by each process, nor is this memory included in the working set size
> reported for a given process ..."
> Thanks,
> -Ivan
> --Original Message--
> From: james
> Posted At: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 6:52 AM
> Posted To: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
> Conversation: MemToLeave area! How to monitor?
> Subject: MemToLeave area! How to monitor?
>
> Gurus,
> Occasionally I get the error of "WARNING: Failed to reserve contiguous
> memory of Size= 65536."
> What is the unit for this size, is it bytes or KB? Additionally,
> I have set up 511 MB for MemToLeave area by adding -g384 for Sql2k SP3a on
> AWE enabled system. I have total of 16 GB of RAM, of which 14 GB is set up
> maximum for Sql server.
> If I look at Perfmon counter of Process->Private bytes for sql server
> process it gives me 224 MB.
> If I look at sqlserver.exe process on task manager it gives me 215MB.
> If I look at DBCC memorystatus, OS in use, it gives me 12 MB.
> I would like to know, How can I calculate exactly how much memory is being
> assigned and how much in use from MemToLeave area by looking at above
> mentioned counters or any other perfmon or dbcc counters?
> I really appreciate any input on this matter.
|||James,
The unit of measure in the message you list is bytes, not KB. Basically,
the memory mgr is failing to reserve 64KB of memory.
The numbers you report from the various monitoring tools don't sound
surprising -- they all measure different things. For example,
Process:Private Bytes is a measure of _committed_ virtual memory, not
reserved. -G controls the region set aside for MTL, not committed or
reserved -- free. That virtual memory is reserved and committed as needed
by the various memory consumers running inside the SQL Server process.
Also, on SS2K, AWE can't be used for anything except caching data and index
pages. Regular MTL allocations never come from AWE.
Keep in mind that the MTL region is really not a region at all but just
refers to the memory left over once the BPool takes what it needs. It's the
unused virtual memory in the process's virtual address space. -G can grow
or shrink this area, but it basically only amounts to unused memory within
the process.
Allocations by external consumers (COM objects, xprocs (usually), OLEDB
providers, etc.) come from MTL. Also, allocations by the server itself that
are >8KB are serviced from MTL rather than the BPool. This just means that,
at some level, they call VirtualAlloc to allocate VM directly from Windows
rather than using pages already allocated to the BPool.
Accompanying the error message you list should be the equivalent of DBCC
MEMORYSTATUS output. This is more relevant than running the command
yourself because it's taken at the exact moment the error occurred. If I
were you, I'd have a look at the various buckets listed in that report to
see if any of them seem high. Keep in mind that many of them are page
counts, not byte counts, so you need to multiply them by 8KB to get the
exact byte count in use.
Also keep in mind that this error can be caused by extreme fragmentation as
well as over-allocation of memory. IOW, you could have well more than 64KB
available within the process, but no single contiguous block of that size or
larger.
If, after you've worked through the above, you still can't figure out why
the reservation is failing, you might want to contact PSS to help you
troubleshoot it further. They deal with these all the time and should be
able to get you fixed up in no time.
HTH,
-kh
"james" <kush@.brandes.com> wrote in message
news:%23hTPNHLPGHA.720@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Ivan. I had already checked that article and also few other google
> search but didn't get the answer.
> <ivanpe@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:OenNh9IPGHA.3840@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
Showing posts with label management. Show all posts
Showing posts with label management. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
MemToLeave area! How to monitor?
Please, take a look at "Inside SQL Server 2000's Memory Management Facilitie
s" by Ken Henderson:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...ev_01262004.asp
"... None of the tools you typically use to inspect application memory use (
Task Manager, Perfmon/Sysmon, etc.) show the amount of AWE memory used by in
dividual processes. There's no indication of the amount of AWE memory used b
y each process, nor is this
memory included in the working set size reported for a given process ..."
Thanks,
-Ivan
--Original Message--
From: james
Posted At: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 6:52 AM
Posted To: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
Conversation: MemToLeave area! How to monitor?
Subject: MemToLeave area! How to monitor?
Gurus,
Occasionally I get the error of "WARNING: Failed to reserve contiguous memo
ry of Size= 65536."
What is the unit for this size, is it bytes or KB? Additionally,
I have set up 511 MB for MemToLeave area by adding -g384 for Sql2k SP3a on A
WE enabled system. I have total of 16 GB of RAM, of which 14 GB is set up ma
ximum for Sql server.
If I look at Perfmon counter of Process->Private bytes for sql server proces
s it gives me 224 MB.
If I look at sqlserver.exe process on task manager it gives me 215MB.
If I look at DBCC memorystatus, OS in use, it gives me 12 MB.
I would like to know, How can I calculate exactly how much memory is being a
ssigned and how much in use from MemToLeave area by looking at above mention
ed counters or any other perfmon or dbcc counters?
I really appreciate any input on this matter.Thanks Ivan. I had already checked that article and also few other google
search but didn't get the answer.
<ivanpe@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:OenNh9IPGHA.3840@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Please, take a look at "Inside SQL Server 2000's Memory Management
> Facilities" by Ken Henderson:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...ev_01262004.asp
> "... None of the tools you typically use to inspect application memory use
> (Task Manager, Perfmon/Sysmon, etc.) show the amount of AWE memory used by
> individual processes. There's no indication of the amount of AWE memory
> used by each process, nor is this memory included in the working set size
> reported for a given process ..."
> Thanks,
> -Ivan
> --Original Message--
> From: james
> Posted At: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 6:52 AM
> Posted To: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
> Conversation: MemToLeave area! How to monitor?
> Subject: MemToLeave area! How to monitor?
>
> Gurus,
> Occasionally I get the error of "WARNING: Failed to reserve contiguous
> memory of Size= 65536."
> What is the unit for this size, is it bytes or KB? Additionally,
> I have set up 511 MB for MemToLeave area by adding -g384 for Sql2k SP3a on
> AWE enabled system. I have total of 16 GB of RAM, of which 14 GB is set up
> maximum for Sql server.
> If I look at Perfmon counter of Process->Private bytes for sql server
> process it gives me 224 MB.
> If I look at sqlserver.exe process on task manager it gives me 215MB.
> If I look at DBCC memorystatus, OS in use, it gives me 12 MB.
> I would like to know, How can I calculate exactly how much memory is being
> assigned and how much in use from MemToLeave area by looking at above
> mentioned counters or any other perfmon or dbcc counters?
> I really appreciate any input on this matter.|||James,
The unit of measure in the message you list is bytes, not KB. Basically,
the memory mgr is failing to reserve 64KB of memory.
The numbers you report from the various monitoring tools don't sound
surprising -- they all measure different things. For example,
Process:Private Bytes is a measure of _committed_ virtual memory, not
reserved. -G controls the region set aside for MTL, not committed or
reserved -- free. That virtual memory is reserved and committed as needed
by the various memory consumers running inside the SQL Server process.
Also, on SS2K, AWE can't be used for anything except caching data and index
pages. Regular MTL allocations never come from AWE.
Keep in mind that the MTL region is really not a region at all but just
refers to the memory left over once the BPool takes what it needs. It's the
unused virtual memory in the process's virtual address space. -G can grow
or shrink this area, but it basically only amounts to unused memory within
the process.
Allocations by external consumers (COM objects, xprocs (usually), OLEDB
providers, etc.) come from MTL. Also, allocations by the server itself that
are >8KB are serviced from MTL rather than the BPool. This just means that,
at some level, they call VirtualAlloc to allocate VM directly from Windows
rather than using pages already allocated to the BPool.
Accompanying the error message you list should be the equivalent of DBCC
MEMORYSTATUS output. This is more relevant than running the command
yourself because it's taken at the exact moment the error occurred. If I
were you, I'd have a look at the various buckets listed in that report to
see if any of them seem high. Keep in mind that many of them are page
counts, not byte counts, so you need to multiply them by 8KB to get the
exact byte count in use.
Also keep in mind that this error can be caused by extreme fragmentation as
well as over-allocation of memory. IOW, you could have well more than 64KB
available within the process, but no single contiguous block of that size or
larger.
If, after you've worked through the above, you still can't figure out why
the reservation is failing, you might want to contact PSS to help you
troubleshoot it further. They deal with these all the time and should be
able to get you fixed up in no time.
HTH,
-kh
"james" <kush@.brandes.com> wrote in message
news:%23hTPNHLPGHA.720@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Ivan. I had already checked that article and also few other google
> search but didn't get the answer.
> <ivanpe@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:OenNh9IPGHA.3840@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
s" by Ken Henderson:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...ev_01262004.asp
"... None of the tools you typically use to inspect application memory use (
Task Manager, Perfmon/Sysmon, etc.) show the amount of AWE memory used by in
dividual processes. There's no indication of the amount of AWE memory used b
y each process, nor is this
memory included in the working set size reported for a given process ..."
Thanks,
-Ivan
--Original Message--
From: james
Posted At: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 6:52 AM
Posted To: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
Conversation: MemToLeave area! How to monitor?
Subject: MemToLeave area! How to monitor?
Gurus,
Occasionally I get the error of "WARNING: Failed to reserve contiguous memo
ry of Size= 65536."
What is the unit for this size, is it bytes or KB? Additionally,
I have set up 511 MB for MemToLeave area by adding -g384 for Sql2k SP3a on A
WE enabled system. I have total of 16 GB of RAM, of which 14 GB is set up ma
ximum for Sql server.
If I look at Perfmon counter of Process->Private bytes for sql server proces
s it gives me 224 MB.
If I look at sqlserver.exe process on task manager it gives me 215MB.
If I look at DBCC memorystatus, OS in use, it gives me 12 MB.
I would like to know, How can I calculate exactly how much memory is being a
ssigned and how much in use from MemToLeave area by looking at above mention
ed counters or any other perfmon or dbcc counters?
I really appreciate any input on this matter.Thanks Ivan. I had already checked that article and also few other google
search but didn't get the answer.
<ivanpe@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:OenNh9IPGHA.3840@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Please, take a look at "Inside SQL Server 2000's Memory Management
> Facilities" by Ken Henderson:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...ev_01262004.asp
> "... None of the tools you typically use to inspect application memory use
> (Task Manager, Perfmon/Sysmon, etc.) show the amount of AWE memory used by
> individual processes. There's no indication of the amount of AWE memory
> used by each process, nor is this memory included in the working set size
> reported for a given process ..."
> Thanks,
> -Ivan
> --Original Message--
> From: james
> Posted At: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 6:52 AM
> Posted To: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
> Conversation: MemToLeave area! How to monitor?
> Subject: MemToLeave area! How to monitor?
>
> Gurus,
> Occasionally I get the error of "WARNING: Failed to reserve contiguous
> memory of Size= 65536."
> What is the unit for this size, is it bytes or KB? Additionally,
> I have set up 511 MB for MemToLeave area by adding -g384 for Sql2k SP3a on
> AWE enabled system. I have total of 16 GB of RAM, of which 14 GB is set up
> maximum for Sql server.
> If I look at Perfmon counter of Process->Private bytes for sql server
> process it gives me 224 MB.
> If I look at sqlserver.exe process on task manager it gives me 215MB.
> If I look at DBCC memorystatus, OS in use, it gives me 12 MB.
> I would like to know, How can I calculate exactly how much memory is being
> assigned and how much in use from MemToLeave area by looking at above
> mentioned counters or any other perfmon or dbcc counters?
> I really appreciate any input on this matter.|||James,
The unit of measure in the message you list is bytes, not KB. Basically,
the memory mgr is failing to reserve 64KB of memory.
The numbers you report from the various monitoring tools don't sound
surprising -- they all measure different things. For example,
Process:Private Bytes is a measure of _committed_ virtual memory, not
reserved. -G controls the region set aside for MTL, not committed or
reserved -- free. That virtual memory is reserved and committed as needed
by the various memory consumers running inside the SQL Server process.
Also, on SS2K, AWE can't be used for anything except caching data and index
pages. Regular MTL allocations never come from AWE.
Keep in mind that the MTL region is really not a region at all but just
refers to the memory left over once the BPool takes what it needs. It's the
unused virtual memory in the process's virtual address space. -G can grow
or shrink this area, but it basically only amounts to unused memory within
the process.
Allocations by external consumers (COM objects, xprocs (usually), OLEDB
providers, etc.) come from MTL. Also, allocations by the server itself that
are >8KB are serviced from MTL rather than the BPool. This just means that,
at some level, they call VirtualAlloc to allocate VM directly from Windows
rather than using pages already allocated to the BPool.
Accompanying the error message you list should be the equivalent of DBCC
MEMORYSTATUS output. This is more relevant than running the command
yourself because it's taken at the exact moment the error occurred. If I
were you, I'd have a look at the various buckets listed in that report to
see if any of them seem high. Keep in mind that many of them are page
counts, not byte counts, so you need to multiply them by 8KB to get the
exact byte count in use.
Also keep in mind that this error can be caused by extreme fragmentation as
well as over-allocation of memory. IOW, you could have well more than 64KB
available within the process, but no single contiguous block of that size or
larger.
If, after you've worked through the above, you still can't figure out why
the reservation is failing, you might want to contact PSS to help you
troubleshoot it further. They deal with these all the time and should be
able to get you fixed up in no time.
HTH,
-kh
"james" <kush@.brandes.com> wrote in message
news:%23hTPNHLPGHA.720@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Ivan. I had already checked that article and also few other google
> search but didn't get the answer.
> <ivanpe@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:OenNh9IPGHA.3840@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
Friday, February 24, 2012
memory on 2005
Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
not, why not?
Darin
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
> For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
No, not because people "logs out". Because reading pages from disk and creating execution plans are
expensive operations. This is why SQL Server caches plans and pages. How would SQL Server know when
to release something? SQL Server will release memory when the OS becomes pressured for memory, but
not until then. You can set a cap on memory, of course (sp_configure and max server memory).
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
> maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
> the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
> Darin
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
|||SQL Server won't release memory unless it detects memory pressure. The bulk
of SQL memory is used for buffer cache, which is needed to reduce I/O and
improve performance. Even if everyone logs out now, cached data is still
valid and can be used again later for subsequent requests.
If you have other memory-intensive applications running on a box with
limited memory resources, you can set SQL Server max memory to prevent
thrashing.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message
news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
> maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
> the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
> Darin
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
|||If the OS doesn't signal that it needs more memory for some other process or
sql server doesn't interally determine that some other sql server
functionality needs more memory, whatever RAM is acquired for the various
buffers will simply stay there indefinitely.
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OLJOsWmiHHA.688@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> No, not because people "logs out". Because reading pages from disk and
> creating execution plans are expensive operations. This is why SQL Server
> caches plans and pages. How would SQL Server know when to release
> something? SQL Server will release memory when the OS becomes pressured
> for memory, but not until then. You can set a cap on memory, of course
> (sp_configure and max server memory).
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message
> news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
not, why not?
Darin
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
> For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
No, not because people "logs out". Because reading pages from disk and creating execution plans are
expensive operations. This is why SQL Server caches plans and pages. How would SQL Server know when
to release something? SQL Server will release memory when the OS becomes pressured for memory, but
not until then. You can set a cap on memory, of course (sp_configure and max server memory).
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
> maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
> the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
> Darin
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
|||SQL Server won't release memory unless it detects memory pressure. The bulk
of SQL memory is used for buffer cache, which is needed to reduce I/O and
improve performance. Even if everyone logs out now, cached data is still
valid and can be used again later for subsequent requests.
If you have other memory-intensive applications running on a box with
limited memory resources, you can set SQL Server max memory to prevent
thrashing.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message
news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
> maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
> the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
> Darin
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
|||If the OS doesn't signal that it needs more memory for some other process or
sql server doesn't interally determine that some other sql server
functionality needs more memory, whatever RAM is acquired for the various
buffers will simply stay there indefinitely.
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OLJOsWmiHHA.688@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> No, not because people "logs out". Because reading pages from disk and
> creating execution plans are expensive operations. This is why SQL Server
> caches plans and pages. How would SQL Server know when to release
> something? SQL Server will release memory when the OS becomes pressured
> for memory, but not until then. You can set a cap on memory, of course
> (sp_configure and max server memory).
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message
> news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
memory on 2005
Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
not, why not?
Darin
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***> For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
No, not because people "logs out". Because reading pages from disk and creating execution plans are
expensive operations. This is why SQL Server caches plans and pages. How would SQL Server know when
to release something? SQL Server will release memory when the OS becomes pressured for memory, but
not until then. You can set a cap on memory, of course (sp_configure and max server memory).
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
> maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
> the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
> Darin
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***|||SQL Server won't release memory unless it detects memory pressure. The bulk
of SQL memory is used for buffer cache, which is needed to reduce I/O and
improve performance. Even if everyone logs out now, cached data is still
valid and can be used again later for subsequent requests.
If you have other memory-intensive applications running on a box with
limited memory resources, you can set SQL Server max memory to prevent
thrashing.
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message
news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
> maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
> the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
> Darin
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***|||If the OS doesn't signal that it needs more memory for some other process or
sql server doesn't interally determine that some other sql server
functionality needs more memory, whatever RAM is acquired for the various
buffers will simply stay there indefinitely.
--
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OLJOsWmiHHA.688@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
>> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
>> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
>> not, why not?
> No, not because people "logs out". Because reading pages from disk and
> creating execution plans are expensive operations. This is why SQL Server
> caches plans and pages. How would SQL Server know when to release
> something? SQL Server will release memory when the OS becomes pressured
> for memory, but not until then. You can set a cap on memory, of course
> (sp_configure and max server memory).
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message
> news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
>> maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
>> the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
>> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
>> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
>> not, why not?
>> Darin
>> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
>
maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
not, why not?
Darin
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***> For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
No, not because people "logs out". Because reading pages from disk and creating execution plans are
expensive operations. This is why SQL Server caches plans and pages. How would SQL Server know when
to release something? SQL Server will release memory when the OS becomes pressured for memory, but
not until then. You can set a cap on memory, of course (sp_configure and max server memory).
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
> maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
> the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
> Darin
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***|||SQL Server won't release memory unless it detects memory pressure. The bulk
of SQL memory is used for buffer cache, which is needed to reduce I/O and
improve performance. Even if everyone logs out now, cached data is still
valid and can be used again later for subsequent requests.
If you have other memory-intensive applications running on a box with
limited memory resources, you can set SQL Server max memory to prevent
thrashing.
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message
news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
> maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
> the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
> Darin
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***|||If the OS doesn't signal that it needs more memory for some other process or
sql server doesn't interally determine that some other sql server
functionality needs more memory, whatever RAM is acquired for the various
buffers will simply stay there indefinitely.
--
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OLJOsWmiHHA.688@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
>> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
>> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
>> not, why not?
> No, not because people "logs out". Because reading pages from disk and
> creating execution plans are expensive operations. This is why SQL Server
> caches plans and pages. How would SQL Server know when to release
> something? SQL Server will release memory when the OS becomes pressured
> for memory, but not until then. You can set a cap on memory, of course
> (sp_configure and max server memory).
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message
> news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
>> maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
>> the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
>> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
>> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
>> not, why not?
>> Darin
>> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
>
memory on 2005
Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
not, why not?
Darin
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***> For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
No, not because people "logs out". Because reading pages from disk and creat
ing execution plans are
expensive operations. This is why SQL Server caches plans and pages. How wou
ld SQL Server know when
to release something? SQL Server will release memory when the OS becomes pre
ssured for memory, but
not until then. You can set a cap on memory, of course (sp_configure and max
server memory).
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.
gbl...
> Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
> maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
> the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
> Darin
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***|||SQL Server won't release memory unless it detects memory pressure. The bulk
of SQL memory is used for buffer cache, which is needed to reduce I/O and
improve performance. Even if everyone logs out now, cached data is still
valid and can be used again later for subsequent requests.
If you have other memory-intensive applications running on a box with
limited memory resources, you can set SQL Server max memory to prevent
thrashing.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message
news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
> maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
> the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
> Darin
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***|||If the OS doesn't signal that it needs more memory for some other process or
sql server doesn't interally determine that some other sql server
functionality needs more memory, whatever RAM is acquired for the various
buffers will simply stay there indefinitely.
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OLJOsWmiHHA.688@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> No, not because people "logs out". Because reading pages from disk and
> creating execution plans are expensive operations. This is why SQL Server
> caches plans and pages. How would SQL Server know when to release
> something? SQL Server will release memory when the OS becomes pressured
> for memory, but not until then. You can set a cap on memory, of course
> (sp_configure and max server memory).
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message
> news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
not, why not?
Darin
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***> For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
No, not because people "logs out". Because reading pages from disk and creat
ing execution plans are
expensive operations. This is why SQL Server caches plans and pages. How wou
ld SQL Server know when
to release something? SQL Server will release memory when the OS becomes pre
ssured for memory, but
not until then. You can set a cap on memory, of course (sp_configure and max
server memory).
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.
gbl...
> Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
> maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
> the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
> Darin
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***|||SQL Server won't release memory unless it detects memory pressure. The bulk
of SQL memory is used for buffer cache, which is needed to reduce I/O and
improve performance. Even if everyone logs out now, cached data is still
valid and can be used again later for subsequent requests.
If you have other memory-intensive applications running on a box with
limited memory resources, you can set SQL Server max memory to prevent
thrashing.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message
news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Running SQL 2005 SP2, the memory (RAM) that SQL is using can have a
> maximum set in the Management Studio. DOes it ever release and free up
> the memory. For example, thought the day SQL needs more memory and at
> the end of the day has 1 gig RAM used - if everyone logs out of our
> application so nothing is hitting SQL, will the memory be released? If
> not, why not?
> Darin
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***|||If the OS doesn't signal that it needs more memory for some other process or
sql server doesn't interally determine that some other sql server
functionality needs more memory, whatever RAM is acquired for the various
buffers will simply stay there indefinitely.
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OLJOsWmiHHA.688@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> No, not because people "logs out". Because reading pages from disk and
> creating execution plans are expensive operations. This is why SQL Server
> caches plans and pages. How would SQL Server know when to release
> something? SQL Server will release memory when the OS becomes pressured
> for memory, but not until then. You can set a cap on memory, of course
> (sp_configure and max server memory).
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "Darin" <darin_nospam@.nospamever> wrote in message
> news:u7f%23mEmiHHA.1624@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
Monday, February 20, 2012
Memory Mgt in SQL SERVER
I have a performance and memory management issues with SQL SERVER. I
feel SQL server does not releases the unused memory back to the OS. I
have been monitoring that at the end of the day the SQL SERVER
performance gets really bad. And it this point it has acquired all the
Cache it could. I have abt 4 GB of RAM on my server and out of it SQL
SERVER uses almost 2.7 GB whether there is load on the machine or not.
If there any way or tool to monitor this. Also is there any way to Free
memory from SQL server back to OS.Hi
feel SQL server does not releases the unused memory back to the OS. I
have been monitoring that at the end of the day the SQL SERVER
performance gets really bad. And it this point it has acquired all the
Cache it could. I have abt 4 GB of RAM on my server and out of it SQL
SERVER uses almost 2.7 GB whether there is load on the machine or not.
If there any way or tool to monitor this. Also is there any way to Free
memory from SQL server back to OS.Hi
If you have SQL Server configured to use memory dynamically, (Which is
the default and usually best left unless you have a speciffic reason to
change it) SQL Server will take as much memory as it needs. It then
does not release that memory unless another process needs it. It is
designed to work that way. I believe the only way to reset the memory
usage is to stop and start the SQL Server service. If it is not causing
a problem don't worry about it.
If it does cause a problem, set a limit on the amount of memory that
SQL Server can use.
Regards
John|||Take a look at:
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;321363
-Andy
"smileydip" <dipeshn.shah@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1112793252.056543.6430@.f14g2000cwb.googlegrou ps.com...
>I have a performance and memory management issues with SQL SERVER. I
> feel SQL server does not releases the unused memory back to the OS. I
> have been monitoring that at the end of the day the SQL SERVER
> performance gets really bad. And it this point it has acquired all the
> Cache it could. I have abt 4 GB of RAM on my server and out of it SQL
> SERVER uses almost 2.7 GB whether there is load on the machine or not.
> If there any way or tool to monitor this. Also is there any way to Free
> memory from SQL server back to OS.|||"smileydip" <dipeshn.shah@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1112793252.056543.6430@.f14g2000cwb.googlegrou ps.com...
> I have a performance and memory management issues with SQL SERVER. I
> feel SQL server does not releases the unused memory back to the OS.
Unless you're using AWE, it does release memory to the OS if the OS request.
However, as SQL is faster with as much memory as possible, it normally will
grab as much as it can and keep it as long as itcan.
> I
> have been monitoring that at the end of the day the SQL SERVER
> performance gets really bad. And it this point it has acquired all the
> Cache it could. I have abt 4 GB of RAM on my server and out of it SQL
> SERVER uses almost 2.7 GB whether there is load on the machine or not.
Sounds about right.
> If there any way or tool to monitor this. Also is there any way to Free
> memory from SQL server back to OS.
Why do you think this will help your performance issue? Almost certainly
the performance issue is related to something else.
Memory Management: SQL Enterprise, 2000 Adv. Srv.
Questions
A) If I have the /3GB /PAE variables in the Win 2k Server boot.ini and only have 2 gig of memory will this cause issues with memory readings I am seeing in Performance Monitor? (I know it doesn't make sense to have but happened out of circumstance
B) From what I am reading if "SQLServer: Memory Manager -- Target Server Memory (KB)" provides the same value as "SQLServer: Memory Manager -- Total Server Memory (KB)" then SQL is content and has as much memory as it needs. What I am seeing on my SQL server is that the two numbers match but are using all the memory on the server which is 2 GB. I assume that this means increase the amount of memory on the box. Am I correct in this assumption
C) Again from reading my understanding is that when using AWE (under 16 GB), SQL at startup will grab the specified chunk of RAM you have alotted to it. I was wondering if there are any counters within Performance Monitor that will tell me exactly how much of that RAM (AWE) SQL Server is using
Thanks...Anyone?
A) If I have the /3GB /PAE variables in the Win 2k Server boot.ini and only have 2 gig of memory will this cause issues with memory readings I am seeing in Performance Monitor? (I know it doesn't make sense to have but happened out of circumstance
B) From what I am reading if "SQLServer: Memory Manager -- Target Server Memory (KB)" provides the same value as "SQLServer: Memory Manager -- Total Server Memory (KB)" then SQL is content and has as much memory as it needs. What I am seeing on my SQL server is that the two numbers match but are using all the memory on the server which is 2 GB. I assume that this means increase the amount of memory on the box. Am I correct in this assumption
C) Again from reading my understanding is that when using AWE (under 16 GB), SQL at startup will grab the specified chunk of RAM you have alotted to it. I was wondering if there are any counters within Performance Monitor that will tell me exactly how much of that RAM (AWE) SQL Server is using
Thanks...Anyone?
Memory Management on cluster
I have an active/active two node cluster, each node runs Windows 2000
Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition. Each node has 3.7 GB
of memory. The 3GB switch is enabled on both nodes.
When SQL Server on nodeA fails over to nodeB, will this instance only
have .7 GB of memory to use? Or can the two SQL instances share the 3
GB?<emnova@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149780738.792282.241150@.j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I have an active/active two node cluster, each node runs Windows 2000
> Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition. Each node has 3.7 GB
> of memory. The 3GB switch is enabled on both nodes.
> When SQL Server on nodeA fails over to nodeB, will this instance only
> have .7 GB of memory to use? Or can the two SQL instances share the 3
> GB?
>
SQL Server will yield memory when the system is under memory pressrure.
However the process is slow, and will be painful in case of a failover. If
you really want to guarantee good performance on failover, you should add
memory or trim the max memory size of each virtual server.
David|||<emnova@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149780738.792282.241150@.j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I have an active/active two node cluster, each node runs Windows 2000
> Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition. Each node has 3.7 GB
> of memory. The 3GB switch is enabled on both nodes.
> When SQL Server on nodeA fails over to nodeB, will this instance only
> have .7 GB of memory to use? Or can the two SQL instances share the 3
> GB?
They're share it (I'm assuming you don't have PAE enabled also, which you
shouldn't in this case.)
I'd probably test this though and see if I could limit say nodeB to 1.5 gig
and see what that does to performance.
Ideally, if you can, upgrade the RAM in both machines.
>
Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition. Each node has 3.7 GB
of memory. The 3GB switch is enabled on both nodes.
When SQL Server on nodeA fails over to nodeB, will this instance only
have .7 GB of memory to use? Or can the two SQL instances share the 3
GB?<emnova@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149780738.792282.241150@.j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I have an active/active two node cluster, each node runs Windows 2000
> Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition. Each node has 3.7 GB
> of memory. The 3GB switch is enabled on both nodes.
> When SQL Server on nodeA fails over to nodeB, will this instance only
> have .7 GB of memory to use? Or can the two SQL instances share the 3
> GB?
>
SQL Server will yield memory when the system is under memory pressrure.
However the process is slow, and will be painful in case of a failover. If
you really want to guarantee good performance on failover, you should add
memory or trim the max memory size of each virtual server.
David|||<emnova@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149780738.792282.241150@.j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I have an active/active two node cluster, each node runs Windows 2000
> Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition. Each node has 3.7 GB
> of memory. The 3GB switch is enabled on both nodes.
> When SQL Server on nodeA fails over to nodeB, will this instance only
> have .7 GB of memory to use? Or can the two SQL instances share the 3
> GB?
They're share it (I'm assuming you don't have PAE enabled also, which you
shouldn't in this case.)
I'd probably test this though and see if I could limit say nodeB to 1.5 gig
and see what that does to performance.
Ideally, if you can, upgrade the RAM in both machines.
>
Memory Management on cluster
I have an active/active two node cluster, each node runs Windows 2000
Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition. Each node has 3.7 GB
of memory. The 3GB switch is enabled on both nodes.
When SQL Server on nodeA fails over to nodeB, will this instance only
have .7 GB of memory to use? Or can the two SQL instances share the 3
GB?<emnova@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149780738.792282.241150@.j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I have an active/active two node cluster, each node runs Windows 2000
> Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition. Each node has 3.7 GB
> of memory. The 3GB switch is enabled on both nodes.
> When SQL Server on nodeA fails over to nodeB, will this instance only
> have .7 GB of memory to use? Or can the two SQL instances share the 3
> GB?
>
SQL Server will yield memory when the system is under memory pressrure.
However the process is slow, and will be painful in case of a failover. If
you really want to guarantee good performance on failover, you should add
memory or trim the max memory size of each virtual server.
David|||<emnova@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149780738.792282.241150@.j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I have an active/active two node cluster, each node runs Windows 2000
> Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition. Each node has 3.7 GB
> of memory. The 3GB switch is enabled on both nodes.
> When SQL Server on nodeA fails over to nodeB, will this instance only
> have .7 GB of memory to use? Or can the two SQL instances share the 3
> GB?
They're share it (I'm assuming you don't have PAE enabled also, which you
shouldn't in this case.)
I'd probably test this though and see if I could limit say nodeB to 1.5 gig
and see what that does to performance.
Ideally, if you can, upgrade the RAM in both machines.
>
Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition. Each node has 3.7 GB
of memory. The 3GB switch is enabled on both nodes.
When SQL Server on nodeA fails over to nodeB, will this instance only
have .7 GB of memory to use? Or can the two SQL instances share the 3
GB?<emnova@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149780738.792282.241150@.j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I have an active/active two node cluster, each node runs Windows 2000
> Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition. Each node has 3.7 GB
> of memory. The 3GB switch is enabled on both nodes.
> When SQL Server on nodeA fails over to nodeB, will this instance only
> have .7 GB of memory to use? Or can the two SQL instances share the 3
> GB?
>
SQL Server will yield memory when the system is under memory pressrure.
However the process is slow, and will be painful in case of a failover. If
you really want to guarantee good performance on failover, you should add
memory or trim the max memory size of each virtual server.
David|||<emnova@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149780738.792282.241150@.j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I have an active/active two node cluster, each node runs Windows 2000
> Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition. Each node has 3.7 GB
> of memory. The 3GB switch is enabled on both nodes.
> When SQL Server on nodeA fails over to nodeB, will this instance only
> have .7 GB of memory to use? Or can the two SQL instances share the 3
> GB?
They're share it (I'm assuming you don't have PAE enabled also, which you
shouldn't in this case.)
I'd probably test this though and see if I could limit say nodeB to 1.5 gig
and see what that does to performance.
Ideally, if you can, upgrade the RAM in both machines.
>
Memory management (fixed memory, AWE)
Hi,
I am going to install SQL Server 2000 (then SQL 2K5) on a Win Server 2K3 with 8 GB of ram, but it will be 16 GB in the near future.
I would like to reserve a fixed memory (for momemt less than 3-4 GB) for SQL Server and the rest for application (virtualization).
Without AWE enabled, max memory for SQL Server 2K5 is 4GB as for SQL Server 2000?
How can I manage and optimize memory keeping in mind AWE. (any doc, website available?)
Thank
I forgot to write that SQL server is 2000 Standard Ed:
On Windows Server 2003, max memory is 2 or 4 GB
And in the case of SQL Server 2K5?
Thank
|||I am a bit confused by your questions but I can tell you that SQL 2005 Std. edition UNLIKE 2000's max memory is only bound by the OS it runs on. Thus I have deployed sql 2005 std on 2003 server ent. with 16GBs of memory in them.
Derek
|||fasttrack, did this solve your problems? Can you update thread?|||Thank,
how to solve:
/PAE for win server 2003 Enterprise edition.
If SQL server 2000 Std, not enable AW, because max memory is 4 gb.
If SQL server 2000 Ent AWE enable to take advantage of all memory available. Setted max memory for other applications.
If SQL server 2005, both std and Ent AWE is enable. Max memory setted for others applications
Memory management (fixed memory, AWE)
Hi,
I am going to install SQL Server 2000 (then SQL 2K5) on a Win Server 2K3 with 8 GB of ram, but it will be 16 GB in the near future.
I would like to reserve a fixed memory (for momemt less than 3-4 GB) for SQL Server and the rest for application (virtualization).
Without AWE enabled, max memory for SQL Server 2K5 is 4GB as for SQL Server 2000?
How can I manage and optimize memory keeping in mind AWE. (any doc, website available?)
Thank
I forgot to write that SQL server is 2000 Standard Ed:
On Windows Server 2003, max memory is 2 or 4 GB
And in the case of SQL Server 2K5?
Thank
|||I am a bit confused by your questions but I can tell you that SQL 2005 Std. edition UNLIKE 2000's max memory is only bound by the OS it runs on. Thus I have deployed sql 2005 std on 2003 server ent. with 16GBs of memory in them.
Derek
|||fasttrack, did this solve your problems? Can you update thread?|||Thank,
how to solve:
/PAE for win server 2003 Enterprise edition.
If SQL server 2000 Std, not enable AW, because max memory is 4 gb.
If SQL server 2000 Ent AWE enable to take advantage of all memory available. Setted max memory for other applications.
If SQL server 2005, both std and Ent AWE is enable. Max memory setted for others applications
memory management
Hi all,
I'm probably missing something here but I need to know why AS2005 is not using the maximum memory available on our production server.
I have a 3.5 GB cube on our server and the process msmdsrv.exe is only using around 100 mb currently. When multiple users are hitting the server at the same time, msmdsrv.exe goes up to around 650 mb but will eventually return to 100mb.
There is actually 4 GB of memory available on the server, is there any way to maximize the memory used by AS2005 on this box and cach almost the whole cube ? AS2005 is the only thing running on this server.
Currently, we see a lot of disk access when users are querying the cubes.
Thanks,
By default Analysis Server allowed to use 80% of the physical memory avaliable on your machine. This controlled by TotalMemoryLimit server property ( set to 80).
For your users to see improved query performance you need to try and define aggregations. See this post: http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=348980&SiteID=1 for discussion about cube performance.
Edward.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
This is the reason why I'm asking this question...
If I have 3 GB of memory and AS2005 is allowed to use 80% of it... I would expect AS to be using around 2.4 GB of memory.
In our environment it is using 100 mb when idle and 650 mb when multiple users are querying the cubes...
This is what I need to understand.
BTW i really think that our aggregations are defined properly
Thanks,
Eric
|||Analysis Server will go to the disk and will try to retrieve results if it cannot find any answers in a cache already. Analysis Server will always cache results from queries. But whether new query can be answered from the cache very much depends on several facts:
1. Queries are similar to the previous queries.
2. Calculation involved in a queries do not require going to the lowest level of granularity.
3. Attribute relationships defined correctly and new query can benefit from not exactly matching cache. ( for example you get answers from Months cache if you asked for Years )
You ultimate goal is not increase Analysis Server's memory footprint, but make your caches more effcient.
Edward.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
I'm having the same problem. When querying the OLAP by using ProClarity or SSMS (Management Studio), the response time is very low the CPU Utilization is below 10% and Memory Usage not more than 50%. When I check in the performance monitor, the I/O access is very high continuously 100% utilization when I are running query from ProClarity Analytics Server. Is there anything I can do to reduce I/O disk time ?
Thanks in advance.
memory management
Hi all,
I'm probably missing something here but I need to know why AS2005 is not using the maximum memory available on our production server.
I have a 3.5 GB cube on our server and the process msmdsrv.exe is only using around 100 mb currently. When multiple users are hitting the server at the same time, msmdsrv.exe goes up to around 650 mb but will eventually return to 100mb.
There is actually 4 GB of memory available on the server, is there any way to maximize the memory used by AS2005 on this box and cach almost the whole cube ? AS2005 is the only thing running on this server.
Currently, we see a lot of disk access when users are querying the cubes.
Thanks,
By default Analysis Server allowed to use 80% of the physical memory avaliable on your machine. This controlled by TotalMemoryLimit server property ( set to 80).
For your users to see improved query performance you need to try and define aggregations. See this post: http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=348980&SiteID=1 for discussion about cube performance.
Edward.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|||
This is the reason why I'm asking this question...
If I have 3 GB of memory and AS2005 is allowed to use 80% of it... I would expect AS to be using around 2.4 GB of memory.
In our environment it is using 100 mb when idle and 650 mb when multiple users are querying the cubes...
This is what I need to understand.
BTW i really think that our aggregations are defined properly
Thanks,
Eric
|||Analysis Server will go to the disk and will try to retrieve results if it cannot find any answers in a cache already. Analysis Server will always cache results from queries. But whether new query can be answered from the cache very much depends on several facts:
1. Queries are similar to the previous queries.
2. Calculation involved in a queries do not require going to the lowest level of granularity.
3. Attribute relationships defined correctly and new query can benefit from not exactly matching cache. ( for example you get answers from Months cache if you asked for Years )
You ultimate goal is not increase Analysis Server's memory footprint, but make your caches more effcient.
Edward.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|||Dear All,
I'm having the same problem. When querying the OLAP by using ProClarity or SSMS (Management Studio), the response time is very low the CPU Utilization is below 10% and Memory Usage not more than 50%. When I check in the performance monitor, the I/O access is very high continuously 100% utilization when I are running query from ProClarity Analytics Server. Is there anything I can do to reduce I/O disk time ?
Thanks in advance.
Memory management
I have 12 gigs of memory on each server in a cluster. Each server carries
about the same load. In
this case I should allot 5.5 gigs to each server and leave 1 gig for the
OS? Is 1 gig enough for the OS?
I should use the /3GB switch and set the max server memory to 5.5 for
each server. Is that correct?
thanks
You need to leave enough memory in case all instances land on the same node,
enough for the OS, and enough for other processes and services running on
that node.
An easy way to tell how much you should leave for other processes is to see
how much memory is consumed when SQL Server is not running on that node.
To use up to 3 GB User Mode space, you need to enable the /3GB switch. If
you enable the AWE configuration setting, you can use up to 4 GB. To use
more than 4 GB, you will also need to enable the /PAE switch, unless you are
running Win2K3, which enables that by default.
Keep in mind that the User mode/Kernel mode balance of the first 4 GB is
VIRTUAL, not physical memory, and is for each process; so, by using the /3GB
switch, you've reduced the Kernel mode space from 2 GB to 1 GB. However,
this is VIRTUAL, it can page. So, it says nothing about how much space the
OS will consume.
Typically, the OS will not use much more than 384 to 512 GB of RAM; it is
typically the other User Mode processes that will request memory. If it is
not available in physical RAM, then it will page, including any Kernel mode
allocations. You should make all attempts to keep paging to a minimum. So,
you might have to tweak the settings a little bit.
Also, be aware that if you are addressing more than 3 GB of memory by
enabling the AWE configuration, the memory is physically acquired at startup
and will not be preempted by other processes: the AWE region will be static.
The Buffer Pool will still be dynamic however.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8D9275F7-A6A7-4BC9-8DCE-2F2AE8E7FA26@.microsoft.com...
> I have 12 gigs of memory on each server in a cluster. Each server carries
> about the same load. In
> this case I should allot 5.5 gigs to each server and leave 1 gig for the
> OS? Is 1 gig enough for the OS?
> I should use the /3GB switch and set the max server memory to 5.5 for
> each server. Is that correct?
> thanks
>
|||Thank you for your response. I have only one instance of SQL running on each
box with no other applications. I have 12 gig of memory on each box. I am
going to have each server use half of its available memory in case of a
failover. My question is 12 gigs of memory total per server, is 1 gig enough
for the OS?
"Anthony Thomas" wrote:
> You need to leave enough memory in case all instances land on the same node,
> enough for the OS, and enough for other processes and services running on
> that node.
> An easy way to tell how much you should leave for other processes is to see
> how much memory is consumed when SQL Server is not running on that node.
> To use up to 3 GB User Mode space, you need to enable the /3GB switch. If
> you enable the AWE configuration setting, you can use up to 4 GB. To use
> more than 4 GB, you will also need to enable the /PAE switch, unless you are
> running Win2K3, which enables that by default.
> Keep in mind that the User mode/Kernel mode balance of the first 4 GB is
> VIRTUAL, not physical memory, and is for each process; so, by using the /3GB
> switch, you've reduced the Kernel mode space from 2 GB to 1 GB. However,
> this is VIRTUAL, it can page. So, it says nothing about how much space the
> OS will consume.
> Typically, the OS will not use much more than 384 to 512 GB of RAM; it is
> typically the other User Mode processes that will request memory. If it is
> not available in physical RAM, then it will page, including any Kernel mode
> allocations. You should make all attempts to keep paging to a minimum. So,
> you might have to tweak the settings a little bit.
> Also, be aware that if you are addressing more than 3 GB of memory by
> enabling the AWE configuration, the memory is physically acquired at startup
> and will not be preempted by other processes: the AWE region will be static.
> The Buffer Pool will still be dynamic however.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> --
> "RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:8D9275F7-A6A7-4BC9-8DCE-2F2AE8E7FA26@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||There is only one virtual server even though you have two host nodes.
Memory is reserved for instances, not nodes. With 12GB and no non-SQL
applications, I would set SQL to 10GB memory and leave it there.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F1276980-01D7-4F2D-8C02-A7EDA0A0CB05@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thank you for your response. I have only one instance of SQL running on
> each
> box with no other applications. I have 12 gig of memory on each box. I
> am
> going to have each server use half of its available memory in case of a
> failover. My question is 12 gigs of memory total per server, is 1 gig
> enough
> for the OS?
> "Anthony Thomas" wrote:
|||I may have misstated - I have one instance running on each server (basically
a standard setup) in the cluster. If a failover occurs and I have set each
to 5.5 gigs, I would have enough memory on one server to cover the 2 servers
combined. But my question is, 5.5 + 5.5 = 11, is the remaining 1 gig enough
for the OS?
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> There is only one virtual server even though you have two host nodes.
> Memory is reserved for instances, not nodes. With 12GB and no non-SQL
> applications, I would set SQL to 10GB memory and leave it there.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:F1276980-01D7-4F2D-8C02-A7EDA0A0CB05@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Maybe. I would watch the performance counters and see. If the system
starts paging, you know you have trimmed it too close. Also, you don't have
to run identical memory settings between instances. If one instance has a
lower average page life expectancy, you can increase performance by giving
more memory to one instance. You would end up running a 7-5 or an 8-4 GB
memory allocation split.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:45D22865-05C7-4ABA-96E9-834D7E9A3D2E@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
>I may have misstated - I have one instance running on each server
>(basically
> a standard setup) in the cluster. If a failover occurs and I have set
> each
> to 5.5 gigs, I would have enough memory on one server to cover the 2
> servers
> combined. But my question is, 5.5 + 5.5 = 11, is the remaining 1 gig
> enough
> for the OS?
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
|||One more question, if I set the 3GB switch will that automatically limit the
OS to using 1 gig of memory? If that is the case and I do not configure the
sum of the max memory on both servers in the cluster to equal 11 gigs (12 gig
on each server minus 1 gig OS) I would be wasting whatever is less than 11
gigs. Is that correct?
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> Maybe. I would watch the performance counters and see. If the system
> starts paging, you know you have trimmed it too close. Also, you don't have
> to run identical memory settings between instances. If one instance has a
> lower average page life expectancy, you can increase performance by giving
> more memory to one instance. You would end up running a 7-5 or an 8-4 GB
> memory allocation split.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:45D22865-05C7-4ABA-96E9-834D7E9A3D2E@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||The switch covers Virtual memory for each SQL instance, not necessarily
physical memory from the system.
12GB is the absolute upper limit for /3GB. I would be very careful using it
in your situation.
Again, I would start conservative (2GB for the OS and the rest split between
the SQL instances) and watch what happens. You should be recording
performance monitor counters anyway for long term system analysis. These
records will tell you whether or not you have overcommitted memory.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A93EB02F-913E-4B62-9738-6D2989B4FA5C@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> One more question, if I set the 3GB switch will that automatically limit
> the
> OS to using 1 gig of memory? If that is the case and I do not configure
> the
> sum of the max memory on both servers in the cluster to equal 11 gigs (12
> gig
> on each server minus 1 gig OS) I would be wasting whatever is less than 11
> gigs. Is that correct?
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
|||I think you need to go back and read my initial response again. All memory
is virtual except that allocated exclusively for AWE space. That space MUST
be backed by physical RAM, but all else, 1 GB Kernel space, 2 GB Kernel
space, 2 GB User mode space, or 3 GB User mode space is ALL virtual and is
allocated to EACH process. How much is in physical RAM is dependent on what
is active and what is available, all else is paged.
Since SQL Server wants to keep the Buffer Cache in memory, although it may
scale it back, it will NEVER page it. SQL Server will, however, page
sections from the other four memory managers.
Again, run the OS and other processes without SQL Server running to get an
estimate of how much PHYSICAL RAM those pieces would consume if not
constrained by SQL Server.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A93EB02F-913E-4B62-9738-6D2989B4FA5C@.microsoft.com...
> One more question, if I set the 3GB switch will that automatically limit
the
> OS to using 1 gig of memory? If that is the case and I do not configure
the
> sum of the max memory on both servers in the cluster to equal 11 gigs (12
gig[vbcol=seagreen]
> on each server minus 1 gig OS) I would be wasting whatever is less than 11
> gigs. Is that correct?
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
have[vbcol=seagreen]
a[vbcol=seagreen]
giving[vbcol=seagreen]
GB[vbcol=seagreen]
non-SQL[vbcol=seagreen]
running[vbcol=seagreen]
box.[vbcol=seagreen]
of a[vbcol=seagreen]
gig[vbcol=seagreen]
same[vbcol=seagreen]
running[vbcol=seagreen]
is[vbcol=seagreen]
switch.[vbcol=seagreen]
To[vbcol=seagreen]
unless[vbcol=seagreen]
GB[vbcol=seagreen]
using[vbcol=seagreen]
RAM; it[vbcol=seagreen]
If[vbcol=seagreen]
Kernel[vbcol=seagreen]
by[vbcol=seagreen]
at[vbcol=seagreen]
be[vbcol=seagreen]
server[vbcol=seagreen]
for[vbcol=seagreen]
5.5[vbcol=seagreen]
about the same load. In
this case I should allot 5.5 gigs to each server and leave 1 gig for the
OS? Is 1 gig enough for the OS?
I should use the /3GB switch and set the max server memory to 5.5 for
each server. Is that correct?
thanks
You need to leave enough memory in case all instances land on the same node,
enough for the OS, and enough for other processes and services running on
that node.
An easy way to tell how much you should leave for other processes is to see
how much memory is consumed when SQL Server is not running on that node.
To use up to 3 GB User Mode space, you need to enable the /3GB switch. If
you enable the AWE configuration setting, you can use up to 4 GB. To use
more than 4 GB, you will also need to enable the /PAE switch, unless you are
running Win2K3, which enables that by default.
Keep in mind that the User mode/Kernel mode balance of the first 4 GB is
VIRTUAL, not physical memory, and is for each process; so, by using the /3GB
switch, you've reduced the Kernel mode space from 2 GB to 1 GB. However,
this is VIRTUAL, it can page. So, it says nothing about how much space the
OS will consume.
Typically, the OS will not use much more than 384 to 512 GB of RAM; it is
typically the other User Mode processes that will request memory. If it is
not available in physical RAM, then it will page, including any Kernel mode
allocations. You should make all attempts to keep paging to a minimum. So,
you might have to tweak the settings a little bit.
Also, be aware that if you are addressing more than 3 GB of memory by
enabling the AWE configuration, the memory is physically acquired at startup
and will not be preempted by other processes: the AWE region will be static.
The Buffer Pool will still be dynamic however.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8D9275F7-A6A7-4BC9-8DCE-2F2AE8E7FA26@.microsoft.com...
> I have 12 gigs of memory on each server in a cluster. Each server carries
> about the same load. In
> this case I should allot 5.5 gigs to each server and leave 1 gig for the
> OS? Is 1 gig enough for the OS?
> I should use the /3GB switch and set the max server memory to 5.5 for
> each server. Is that correct?
> thanks
>
|||Thank you for your response. I have only one instance of SQL running on each
box with no other applications. I have 12 gig of memory on each box. I am
going to have each server use half of its available memory in case of a
failover. My question is 12 gigs of memory total per server, is 1 gig enough
for the OS?
"Anthony Thomas" wrote:
> You need to leave enough memory in case all instances land on the same node,
> enough for the OS, and enough for other processes and services running on
> that node.
> An easy way to tell how much you should leave for other processes is to see
> how much memory is consumed when SQL Server is not running on that node.
> To use up to 3 GB User Mode space, you need to enable the /3GB switch. If
> you enable the AWE configuration setting, you can use up to 4 GB. To use
> more than 4 GB, you will also need to enable the /PAE switch, unless you are
> running Win2K3, which enables that by default.
> Keep in mind that the User mode/Kernel mode balance of the first 4 GB is
> VIRTUAL, not physical memory, and is for each process; so, by using the /3GB
> switch, you've reduced the Kernel mode space from 2 GB to 1 GB. However,
> this is VIRTUAL, it can page. So, it says nothing about how much space the
> OS will consume.
> Typically, the OS will not use much more than 384 to 512 GB of RAM; it is
> typically the other User Mode processes that will request memory. If it is
> not available in physical RAM, then it will page, including any Kernel mode
> allocations. You should make all attempts to keep paging to a minimum. So,
> you might have to tweak the settings a little bit.
> Also, be aware that if you are addressing more than 3 GB of memory by
> enabling the AWE configuration, the memory is physically acquired at startup
> and will not be preempted by other processes: the AWE region will be static.
> The Buffer Pool will still be dynamic however.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> --
> "RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:8D9275F7-A6A7-4BC9-8DCE-2F2AE8E7FA26@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||There is only one virtual server even though you have two host nodes.
Memory is reserved for instances, not nodes. With 12GB and no non-SQL
applications, I would set SQL to 10GB memory and leave it there.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F1276980-01D7-4F2D-8C02-A7EDA0A0CB05@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thank you for your response. I have only one instance of SQL running on
> each
> box with no other applications. I have 12 gig of memory on each box. I
> am
> going to have each server use half of its available memory in case of a
> failover. My question is 12 gigs of memory total per server, is 1 gig
> enough
> for the OS?
> "Anthony Thomas" wrote:
|||I may have misstated - I have one instance running on each server (basically
a standard setup) in the cluster. If a failover occurs and I have set each
to 5.5 gigs, I would have enough memory on one server to cover the 2 servers
combined. But my question is, 5.5 + 5.5 = 11, is the remaining 1 gig enough
for the OS?
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> There is only one virtual server even though you have two host nodes.
> Memory is reserved for instances, not nodes. With 12GB and no non-SQL
> applications, I would set SQL to 10GB memory and leave it there.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:F1276980-01D7-4F2D-8C02-A7EDA0A0CB05@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Maybe. I would watch the performance counters and see. If the system
starts paging, you know you have trimmed it too close. Also, you don't have
to run identical memory settings between instances. If one instance has a
lower average page life expectancy, you can increase performance by giving
more memory to one instance. You would end up running a 7-5 or an 8-4 GB
memory allocation split.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:45D22865-05C7-4ABA-96E9-834D7E9A3D2E@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
>I may have misstated - I have one instance running on each server
>(basically
> a standard setup) in the cluster. If a failover occurs and I have set
> each
> to 5.5 gigs, I would have enough memory on one server to cover the 2
> servers
> combined. But my question is, 5.5 + 5.5 = 11, is the remaining 1 gig
> enough
> for the OS?
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
|||One more question, if I set the 3GB switch will that automatically limit the
OS to using 1 gig of memory? If that is the case and I do not configure the
sum of the max memory on both servers in the cluster to equal 11 gigs (12 gig
on each server minus 1 gig OS) I would be wasting whatever is less than 11
gigs. Is that correct?
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> Maybe. I would watch the performance counters and see. If the system
> starts paging, you know you have trimmed it too close. Also, you don't have
> to run identical memory settings between instances. If one instance has a
> lower average page life expectancy, you can increase performance by giving
> more memory to one instance. You would end up running a 7-5 or an 8-4 GB
> memory allocation split.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:45D22865-05C7-4ABA-96E9-834D7E9A3D2E@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||The switch covers Virtual memory for each SQL instance, not necessarily
physical memory from the system.
12GB is the absolute upper limit for /3GB. I would be very careful using it
in your situation.
Again, I would start conservative (2GB for the OS and the rest split between
the SQL instances) and watch what happens. You should be recording
performance monitor counters anyway for long term system analysis. These
records will tell you whether or not you have overcommitted memory.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A93EB02F-913E-4B62-9738-6D2989B4FA5C@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> One more question, if I set the 3GB switch will that automatically limit
> the
> OS to using 1 gig of memory? If that is the case and I do not configure
> the
> sum of the max memory on both servers in the cluster to equal 11 gigs (12
> gig
> on each server minus 1 gig OS) I would be wasting whatever is less than 11
> gigs. Is that correct?
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
|||I think you need to go back and read my initial response again. All memory
is virtual except that allocated exclusively for AWE space. That space MUST
be backed by physical RAM, but all else, 1 GB Kernel space, 2 GB Kernel
space, 2 GB User mode space, or 3 GB User mode space is ALL virtual and is
allocated to EACH process. How much is in physical RAM is dependent on what
is active and what is available, all else is paged.
Since SQL Server wants to keep the Buffer Cache in memory, although it may
scale it back, it will NEVER page it. SQL Server will, however, page
sections from the other four memory managers.
Again, run the OS and other processes without SQL Server running to get an
estimate of how much PHYSICAL RAM those pieces would consume if not
constrained by SQL Server.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"RomM" <RomM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A93EB02F-913E-4B62-9738-6D2989B4FA5C@.microsoft.com...
> One more question, if I set the 3GB switch will that automatically limit
the
> OS to using 1 gig of memory? If that is the case and I do not configure
the
> sum of the max memory on both servers in the cluster to equal 11 gigs (12
gig[vbcol=seagreen]
> on each server minus 1 gig OS) I would be wasting whatever is less than 11
> gigs. Is that correct?
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
have[vbcol=seagreen]
a[vbcol=seagreen]
giving[vbcol=seagreen]
GB[vbcol=seagreen]
non-SQL[vbcol=seagreen]
running[vbcol=seagreen]
box.[vbcol=seagreen]
of a[vbcol=seagreen]
gig[vbcol=seagreen]
same[vbcol=seagreen]
running[vbcol=seagreen]
is[vbcol=seagreen]
switch.[vbcol=seagreen]
To[vbcol=seagreen]
unless[vbcol=seagreen]
GB[vbcol=seagreen]
using[vbcol=seagreen]
RAM; it[vbcol=seagreen]
If[vbcol=seagreen]
Kernel[vbcol=seagreen]
by[vbcol=seagreen]
at[vbcol=seagreen]
be[vbcol=seagreen]
server[vbcol=seagreen]
for[vbcol=seagreen]
5.5[vbcol=seagreen]
Memory management
I am running MS sql 2005 workgroup on a SBS 2003 - R2 server. The only
databases are Sharepoint and Small Business Monitor. SQL is using over 3 gb
of the 4 gb installed in the server. How do I reduce the amount of memory
SQL is using?
MBS
Set the MAx Memory setting to the amount you want minus about 300MB and you
should be all set. You can do this via sp_configure or ssms.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"MBS" <who@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:H8CdnbIX_t1gHsvYnZ2dnUVZ_uednZ2d@.suscom.com.. .
>I am running MS sql 2005 workgroup on a SBS 2003 - R2 server. The only
>databases are Sharepoint and Small Business Monitor. SQL is using over 3 gb
>of the 4 gb installed in the server. How do I reduce the amount of memory
>SQL is using?
> MBS
>
databases are Sharepoint and Small Business Monitor. SQL is using over 3 gb
of the 4 gb installed in the server. How do I reduce the amount of memory
SQL is using?
MBS
Set the MAx Memory setting to the amount you want minus about 300MB and you
should be all set. You can do this via sp_configure or ssms.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"MBS" <who@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:H8CdnbIX_t1gHsvYnZ2dnUVZ_uednZ2d@.suscom.com.. .
>I am running MS sql 2005 workgroup on a SBS 2003 - R2 server. The only
>databases are Sharepoint and Small Business Monitor. SQL is using over 3 gb
>of the 4 gb installed in the server. How do I reduce the amount of memory
>SQL is using?
> MBS
>
Memory management
Hi,
I have a MS Sql server 7.0 running on Windows 2000 advanced server with 6GB
ram. The boot.ini contains the /3gb /pae options. The OS sees all of the
ram. But the sql server memory management tab shows false values (16MB and
0 values), and the sliders are disabled. Why is it? How can I check memory
usage for the sql server?
Thank you,
Chris
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
Hi
Run sp_configure 'max server memory' to see what is configured.
If you use SQL Server Standard Edition, all what it can use is 2GB as that
is an Edition limitation.
SQL Server Enterprise edition, IIRC is 8GB.
Regards
Mike
"Mary Poppins via SQLMonster.com" wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a MS Sql server 7.0 running on Windows 2000 advanced server with 6GB
> ram. The boot.ini contains the /3gb /pae options. The OS sees all of the
> ram. But the sql server memory management tab shows false values (16MB and
> 0 values), and the sliders are disabled. Why is it? How can I check memory
> usage for the sql server?
> Thank you,
> Chris
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
>
|||Do you have AWE enabled? If so then sql server does not dynamically manage
memory. It will grab all of what if there unless you set the max memory
setting to something less than the total available. In your case I recommend
around 5GB. You can use the Sql Memory counters in perfmon to see how much
it is actually using. Total memory and Target memory should be the same and
what ever you set your max memory setting to. Make sure you don't have the
Use Fixed Amount checked as that will disable the sliders.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Mary Poppins via SQLMonster.com" <forum@.SQLMonster.com> wrote in message
news:6ea9fff4366143f8b44320e5b0092e94@.SQLMonster.c om...
> Hi,
> I have a MS Sql server 7.0 running on Windows 2000 advanced server with
> 6GB
> ram. The boot.ini contains the /3gb /pae options. The OS sees all of the
> ram. But the sql server memory management tab shows false values (16MB and
> 0 values), and the sliders are disabled. Why is it? How can I check memory
> usage for the sql server?
> Thank you,
> Chris
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
|||AWE not enabled . (The extended memory option in SQL Server 7.0 is not
available on Windows 2000 Advanced Server). Sp_configure shows that the
min, max and the run server memories are 2147483647. In the server
properties memory tab the "Use fixed memory size" are checked, and I can
not change it, and it shows only min 16MB and max 0MB. However the in the
performance monitor the Target server memory shows 2082896KB, and the Total
server memory 144150 KB.
Can I ignore the memory panel, or could you advise something to correct the
wrong values?
Thank you,
Chris
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
|||Ignore the memory panel. The important thing is the sp_configure setting. The memory dialog is
probably just some kind of UI bug.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Mary Poppins via SQLMonster.com" <forum@.SQLMonster.com> wrote in message
news:0b5fc3940c614ef79498116929c69874@.SQLMonster.c om...
> AWE not enabled . (The extended memory option in SQL Server 7.0 is not
> available on Windows 2000 Advanced Server). Sp_configure shows that the
> min, max and the run server memories are 2147483647. In the server
> properties memory tab the "Use fixed memory size" are checked, and I can
> not change it, and it shows only min 16MB and max 0MB. However the in the
> performance monitor the Target server memory shows 2082896KB, and the Total
> server memory 144150 KB.
> Can I ignore the memory panel, or could you advise something to correct the
> wrong values?
> Thank you,
> Chris
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
|||OK. Thank you.
Bye
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
I have a MS Sql server 7.0 running on Windows 2000 advanced server with 6GB
ram. The boot.ini contains the /3gb /pae options. The OS sees all of the
ram. But the sql server memory management tab shows false values (16MB and
0 values), and the sliders are disabled. Why is it? How can I check memory
usage for the sql server?
Thank you,
Chris
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
Hi
Run sp_configure 'max server memory' to see what is configured.
If you use SQL Server Standard Edition, all what it can use is 2GB as that
is an Edition limitation.
SQL Server Enterprise edition, IIRC is 8GB.
Regards
Mike
"Mary Poppins via SQLMonster.com" wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a MS Sql server 7.0 running on Windows 2000 advanced server with 6GB
> ram. The boot.ini contains the /3gb /pae options. The OS sees all of the
> ram. But the sql server memory management tab shows false values (16MB and
> 0 values), and the sliders are disabled. Why is it? How can I check memory
> usage for the sql server?
> Thank you,
> Chris
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
>
|||Do you have AWE enabled? If so then sql server does not dynamically manage
memory. It will grab all of what if there unless you set the max memory
setting to something less than the total available. In your case I recommend
around 5GB. You can use the Sql Memory counters in perfmon to see how much
it is actually using. Total memory and Target memory should be the same and
what ever you set your max memory setting to. Make sure you don't have the
Use Fixed Amount checked as that will disable the sliders.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Mary Poppins via SQLMonster.com" <forum@.SQLMonster.com> wrote in message
news:6ea9fff4366143f8b44320e5b0092e94@.SQLMonster.c om...
> Hi,
> I have a MS Sql server 7.0 running on Windows 2000 advanced server with
> 6GB
> ram. The boot.ini contains the /3gb /pae options. The OS sees all of the
> ram. But the sql server memory management tab shows false values (16MB and
> 0 values), and the sliders are disabled. Why is it? How can I check memory
> usage for the sql server?
> Thank you,
> Chris
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
|||AWE not enabled . (The extended memory option in SQL Server 7.0 is not
available on Windows 2000 Advanced Server). Sp_configure shows that the
min, max and the run server memories are 2147483647. In the server
properties memory tab the "Use fixed memory size" are checked, and I can
not change it, and it shows only min 16MB and max 0MB. However the in the
performance monitor the Target server memory shows 2082896KB, and the Total
server memory 144150 KB.
Can I ignore the memory panel, or could you advise something to correct the
wrong values?
Thank you,
Chris
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
|||Ignore the memory panel. The important thing is the sp_configure setting. The memory dialog is
probably just some kind of UI bug.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Mary Poppins via SQLMonster.com" <forum@.SQLMonster.com> wrote in message
news:0b5fc3940c614ef79498116929c69874@.SQLMonster.c om...
> AWE not enabled . (The extended memory option in SQL Server 7.0 is not
> available on Windows 2000 Advanced Server). Sp_configure shows that the
> min, max and the run server memories are 2147483647. In the server
> properties memory tab the "Use fixed memory size" are checked, and I can
> not change it, and it shows only min 16MB and max 0MB. However the in the
> performance monitor the Target server memory shows 2082896KB, and the Total
> server memory 144150 KB.
> Can I ignore the memory panel, or could you advise something to correct the
> wrong values?
> Thank you,
> Chris
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
|||OK. Thank you.
Bye
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
Memory management
I am running SQL 2000 Enterprise SP 3 with Windows 2000 . Our sql
server is running around 5 Databases .. we have Pentium IV and RAM 2 GB .
SQL Server it self takes more than 1.5 GB to 1.6 GB RAM .. it won't reduce m
emory consumption as on connection to sql goes down or no one is connected t
o sql server. SQL Server won't free this ram. we haven't allocated memory fo
r sql server. When we resta
rt the sql server services then the memory consumption goes down to 400 MB.
What may be the cause and what can be done to solve it?Once SQL Server acquires memory, it will retain it unless it is needed by
other applications running on the server. This maximizes performance
because data will remain in cache and memory allocation/deallocation is
costly.
If you routinely run other applications on the same server, consider setting
the max memory for SQL Server,
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Saleem Subhi" <saleemsubhi_mcs98@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:D02C548A-58EE-44CA-9D73-9ADFC9970942@.microsoft.com...
.
memory consumption as on connection to sql goes down or no one is connected
to sql server. SQL Server won't free this ram. we haven't allocated memory
for sql server. When we restart the sql server services then the memory
consumption goes down to 400 MB.
server is running around 5 Databases .. we have Pentium IV and RAM 2 GB .
SQL Server it self takes more than 1.5 GB to 1.6 GB RAM .. it won't reduce m
emory consumption as on connection to sql goes down or no one is connected t
o sql server. SQL Server won't free this ram. we haven't allocated memory fo
r sql server. When we resta
rt the sql server services then the memory consumption goes down to 400 MB.
What may be the cause and what can be done to solve it?Once SQL Server acquires memory, it will retain it unless it is needed by
other applications running on the server. This maximizes performance
because data will remain in cache and memory allocation/deallocation is
costly.
If you routinely run other applications on the same server, consider setting
the max memory for SQL Server,
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Saleem Subhi" <saleemsubhi_mcs98@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:D02C548A-58EE-44CA-9D73-9ADFC9970942@.microsoft.com...
quote:
> I am running SQL 2000 Enterprise SP 3 with Windows 2000 . Our sql
> server is running around 5 Databases .. we have Pentium IV and RAM 2 GB
.
quote:
>
> SQL Server it self takes more than 1.5 GB to 1.6 GB RAM .. it won't reduce
memory consumption as on connection to sql goes down or no one is connected
to sql server. SQL Server won't free this ram. we haven't allocated memory
for sql server. When we restart the sql server services then the memory
consumption goes down to 400 MB.
quote:
> What may be the cause and what can be done to solve it?
Memory management
Hi,
I have a MS Sql server 7.0 running on Windows 2000 advanced server with 6GB
ram. The boot.ini contains the /3gb /pae options. The OS sees all of the
ram. But the sql server memory management tab shows false values (16MB and
0 values), and the sliders are disabled. Why is it? How can I check memory
usage for the sql server?
Thank you,
Chris
Message posted via http://www.droptable.comHi
Run sp_configure 'max server memory' to see what is configured.
If you use SQL Server Standard Edition, all what it can use is 2GB as that
is an Edition limitation.
SQL Server Enterprise edition, IIRC is 8GB.
Regards
Mike
"Mary Poppins via droptable.com" wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a MS Sql server 7.0 running on Windows 2000 advanced server with 6G
B
> ram. The boot.ini contains the /3gb /pae options. The OS sees all of the
> ram. But the sql server memory management tab shows false values (16MB and
> 0 values), and the sliders are disabled. Why is it? How can I check memory
> usage for the sql server?
> Thank you,
> Chris
> --
> Message posted via http://www.droptable.com
>|||Do you have AWE enabled? If so then sql server does not dynamically manage
memory. It will grab all of what if there unless you set the max memory
setting to something less than the total available. In your case I recommend
around 5GB. You can use the Sql Memory counters in perfmon to see how much
it is actually using. Total memory and Target memory should be the same and
what ever you set your max memory setting to. Make sure you don't have the
Use Fixed Amount checked as that will disable the sliders.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Mary Poppins via droptable.com" <forum@.droptable.com> wrote in message
news:6ea9fff4366143f8b44320e5b0092e94@.SQ
droptable.com...
> Hi,
> I have a MS Sql server 7.0 running on Windows 2000 advanced server with
> 6GB
> ram. The boot.ini contains the /3gb /pae options. The OS sees all of the
> ram. But the sql server memory management tab shows false values (16MB and
> 0 values), and the sliders are disabled. Why is it? How can I check memory
> usage for the sql server?
> Thank you,
> Chris
> --
> Message posted via http://www.droptable.com|||AWE not enabled . (The extended memory option in SQL Server 7.0 is not
available on Windows 2000 Advanced Server). Sp_configure shows that the
min, max and the run server memories are 2147483647. In the server
properties memory tab the "Use fixed memory size" are checked, and I can
not change it, and it shows only min 16MB and max 0MB. However the in the
performance monitor the Target server memory shows 2082896KB, and the Total
server memory 144150 KB.
Can I ignore the memory panel, or could you advise something to correct the
wrong values?
Thank you,
Chris
Message posted via http://www.droptable.com|||Ignore the memory panel. The important thing is the sp_configure setting. Th
e memory dialog is
probably just some kind of UI bug.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Mary Poppins via droptable.com" <forum@.droptable.com> wrote in message
news:0b5fc3940c614ef79498116929c69874@.SQ
droptable.com...
> AWE not enabled . (The extended memory option in SQL Server 7.0 is not
> available on Windows 2000 Advanced Server). Sp_configure shows that the
> min, max and the run server memories are 2147483647. In the server
> properties memory tab the "Use fixed memory size" are checked, and I can
> not change it, and it shows only min 16MB and max 0MB. However the in the
> performance monitor the Target server memory shows 2082896KB, and the Tota
l
> server memory 144150 KB.
> Can I ignore the memory panel, or could you advise something to correct th
e
> wrong values?
> Thank you,
> Chris
> --
> Message posted via http://www.droptable.com|||OK. Thank you.
Bye
Message posted via http://www.droptable.com
I have a MS Sql server 7.0 running on Windows 2000 advanced server with 6GB
ram. The boot.ini contains the /3gb /pae options. The OS sees all of the
ram. But the sql server memory management tab shows false values (16MB and
0 values), and the sliders are disabled. Why is it? How can I check memory
usage for the sql server?
Thank you,
Chris
Message posted via http://www.droptable.comHi
Run sp_configure 'max server memory' to see what is configured.
If you use SQL Server Standard Edition, all what it can use is 2GB as that
is an Edition limitation.
SQL Server Enterprise edition, IIRC is 8GB.
Regards
Mike
"Mary Poppins via droptable.com" wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a MS Sql server 7.0 running on Windows 2000 advanced server with 6G
B
> ram. The boot.ini contains the /3gb /pae options. The OS sees all of the
> ram. But the sql server memory management tab shows false values (16MB and
> 0 values), and the sliders are disabled. Why is it? How can I check memory
> usage for the sql server?
> Thank you,
> Chris
> --
> Message posted via http://www.droptable.com
>|||Do you have AWE enabled? If so then sql server does not dynamically manage
memory. It will grab all of what if there unless you set the max memory
setting to something less than the total available. In your case I recommend
around 5GB. You can use the Sql Memory counters in perfmon to see how much
it is actually using. Total memory and Target memory should be the same and
what ever you set your max memory setting to. Make sure you don't have the
Use Fixed Amount checked as that will disable the sliders.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Mary Poppins via droptable.com" <forum@.droptable.com> wrote in message
news:6ea9fff4366143f8b44320e5b0092e94@.SQ
droptable.com...
> Hi,
> I have a MS Sql server 7.0 running on Windows 2000 advanced server with
> 6GB
> ram. The boot.ini contains the /3gb /pae options. The OS sees all of the
> ram. But the sql server memory management tab shows false values (16MB and
> 0 values), and the sliders are disabled. Why is it? How can I check memory
> usage for the sql server?
> Thank you,
> Chris
> --
> Message posted via http://www.droptable.com|||AWE not enabled . (The extended memory option in SQL Server 7.0 is not
available on Windows 2000 Advanced Server). Sp_configure shows that the
min, max and the run server memories are 2147483647. In the server
properties memory tab the "Use fixed memory size" are checked, and I can
not change it, and it shows only min 16MB and max 0MB. However the in the
performance monitor the Target server memory shows 2082896KB, and the Total
server memory 144150 KB.
Can I ignore the memory panel, or could you advise something to correct the
wrong values?
Thank you,
Chris
Message posted via http://www.droptable.com|||Ignore the memory panel. The important thing is the sp_configure setting. Th
e memory dialog is
probably just some kind of UI bug.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Mary Poppins via droptable.com" <forum@.droptable.com> wrote in message
news:0b5fc3940c614ef79498116929c69874@.SQ
droptable.com...
> AWE not enabled . (The extended memory option in SQL Server 7.0 is not
> available on Windows 2000 Advanced Server). Sp_configure shows that the
> min, max and the run server memories are 2147483647. In the server
> properties memory tab the "Use fixed memory size" are checked, and I can
> not change it, and it shows only min 16MB and max 0MB. However the in the
> performance monitor the Target server memory shows 2082896KB, and the Tota
l
> server memory 144150 KB.
> Can I ignore the memory panel, or could you advise something to correct th
e
> wrong values?
> Thank you,
> Chris
> --
> Message posted via http://www.droptable.com|||OK. Thank you.
Bye
Message posted via http://www.droptable.com
Memory management
I am running MS sql 2005 workgroup on a SBS 2003 - R2 server. The only
databases are Sharepoint and Small Business Monitor. SQL is using over 3 gb
of the 4 gb installed in the server. How do I reduce the amount of memory
SQL is using?
MBSSet the MAx Memory setting to the amount you want minus about 300MB and you
should be all set. You can do this via sp_configure or ssms.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"MBS" <who@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:H8CdnbIX_t1gHsvYnZ2dnUVZ_uednZ2d@.su
scom.com...
>I am running MS sql 2005 workgroup on a SBS 2003 - R2 server. The only
>databases are Sharepoint and Small Business Monitor. SQL is using over 3 gb
>of the 4 gb installed in the server. How do I reduce the amount of memory
>SQL is using?
> MBS
>
databases are Sharepoint and Small Business Monitor. SQL is using over 3 gb
of the 4 gb installed in the server. How do I reduce the amount of memory
SQL is using?
MBSSet the MAx Memory setting to the amount you want minus about 300MB and you
should be all set. You can do this via sp_configure or ssms.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"MBS" <who@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:H8CdnbIX_t1gHsvYnZ2dnUVZ_uednZ2d@.su
scom.com...
>I am running MS sql 2005 workgroup on a SBS 2003 - R2 server. The only
>databases are Sharepoint and Small Business Monitor. SQL is using over 3 gb
>of the 4 gb installed in the server. How do I reduce the amount of memory
>SQL is using?
> MBS
>
Memory management
I am running MS sql 2005 workgroup on a SBS 2003 - R2 server. The only
databases are Sharepoint and Small Business Monitor. SQL is using over 3 gb
of the 4 gb installed in the server. How do I reduce the amount of memory
SQL is using?
MBSSet the MAx Memory setting to the amount you want minus about 300MB and you
should be all set. You can do this via sp_configure or ssms.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"MBS" <who@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:H8CdnbIX_t1gHsvYnZ2dnUVZ_uednZ2d@.suscom.com...
>I am running MS sql 2005 workgroup on a SBS 2003 - R2 server. The only
>databases are Sharepoint and Small Business Monitor. SQL is using over 3 gb
>of the 4 gb installed in the server. How do I reduce the amount of memory
>SQL is using?
> MBS
>
databases are Sharepoint and Small Business Monitor. SQL is using over 3 gb
of the 4 gb installed in the server. How do I reduce the amount of memory
SQL is using?
MBSSet the MAx Memory setting to the amount you want minus about 300MB and you
should be all set. You can do this via sp_configure or ssms.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"MBS" <who@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:H8CdnbIX_t1gHsvYnZ2dnUVZ_uednZ2d@.suscom.com...
>I am running MS sql 2005 workgroup on a SBS 2003 - R2 server. The only
>databases are Sharepoint and Small Business Monitor. SQL is using over 3 gb
>of the 4 gb installed in the server. How do I reduce the amount of memory
>SQL is using?
> MBS
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)