My SQL Server Ent 2005 64Bit Active / Passive Cluster is using 16.3GB of RAM
and there is only 16GB in the server.
I have the max memory for SQL server set at 12582912 (12GB) but the process
is running at 15,388,052 ignoring the maximum settings.
Thus the server is swapping memory to disk.
How can i make sure the SQL server is limited in its memory usgage if it is
ignoring the setting.
Regards
TobyDid you change the setting after the server was already running? Decreasing
memory won't necessarily release reserved mem without a reboot.
--
Kevin G. Boles
Indicium Resources, Inc.
SQL Server MVP
kgboles a earthlink dt net
"TobiR" <TobiR@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:147CE1A0-1D90-431F-960A-E44BF36B695F@.microsoft.com...
> My SQL Server Ent 2005 64Bit Active / Passive Cluster is using 16.3GB of
> RAM
> and there is only 16GB in the server.
> I have the max memory for SQL server set at 12582912 (12GB) but the
> process
> is running at 15,388,052 ignoring the maximum settings.
> Thus the server is swapping memory to disk.
> How can i make sure the SQL server is limited in its memory usgage if it
> is
> ignoring the setting.
> Regards
> Toby
>|||Also note that max memory setting applies to the buffer pool only. The SQL
Server process consumes more memory than just its buffer pool, although the
buffer pool is often the largest, or at least should be, memory consumer.
Linchi
"TobiR" wrote:
> My SQL Server Ent 2005 64Bit Active / Passive Cluster is using 16.3GB of RAM
> and there is only 16GB in the server.
> I have the max memory for SQL server set at 12582912 (12GB) but the process
> is running at 15,388,052 ignoring the maximum settings.
> Thus the server is swapping memory to disk.
> How can i make sure the SQL server is limited in its memory usgage if it is
> ignoring the setting.
> Regards
> Toby
>|||On Jan 23, 2:12 am, TobiR <To...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> My SQL Server Ent 2005 64Bit Active / Passive Cluster is using 16.3GB of RAM
> and there is only 16GB in the server.
> I have the max memory for SQL server set at 12582912 (12GB) but the process
> is running at 15,388,052 ignoring the maximum settings.
> Thus the server is swapping memory to disk.
> How can i make sure the SQL server is limited in its memory usgage if it is
> ignoring the setting.
> Regards
> Toby
12GB is 12288MB (which is what the max memory setting is in). Where
are you seeing max memory set to 12582912?|||Thanks for spotting my math issues! I had it set to 12TB instead of 12GB,
noticed it the other day, no wonder it was using eything it could get.
Thanks
Toby
"Jeffrey Williams" wrote:
> On Jan 23, 2:12 am, TobiR <To...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > My SQL Server Ent 2005 64Bit Active / Passive Cluster is using 16.3GB of RAM
> > and there is only 16GB in the server.
> >
> > I have the max memory for SQL server set at 12582912 (12GB) but the process
> > is running at 15,388,052 ignoring the maximum settings.
> >
> > Thus the server is swapping memory to disk.
> >
> > How can i make sure the SQL server is limited in its memory usgage if it is
> > ignoring the setting.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Toby
> 12GB is 12288MB (which is what the max memory setting is in). Where
> are you seeing max memory set to 12582912?
>
Showing posts with label passive. Show all posts
Showing posts with label passive. Show all posts
Monday, March 19, 2012
Memory Usage on 64bit Cluster
My SQL Server Ent 2006 64Bit Active / Passive Cluster is using 16.3GB of RAM
and there is only 16GB in the server.
I have the max memory for SQL server set at 12582912 (12GB) but the process
is running at 15,388,052 ignoring the maximum settings.
Thus the server is swapping memory to disk.
How can i make sure the SQL server is limited in its memory usgage if it is
ignoring the setting.
Regards
TobySorry SQL 2005 (typeo)
"TobiR" wrote:
> My SQL Server Ent 2006 64Bit Active / Passive Cluster is using 16.3GB of RAM
> and there is only 16GB in the server.
> I have the max memory for SQL server set at 12582912 (12GB) but the process
> is running at 15,388,052 ignoring the maximum settings.
> Thus the server is swapping memory to disk.
> How can i make sure the SQL server is limited in its memory usgage if it is
> ignoring the setting.
> Regards
> Toby
>
and there is only 16GB in the server.
I have the max memory for SQL server set at 12582912 (12GB) but the process
is running at 15,388,052 ignoring the maximum settings.
Thus the server is swapping memory to disk.
How can i make sure the SQL server is limited in its memory usgage if it is
ignoring the setting.
Regards
TobySorry SQL 2005 (typeo)
"TobiR" wrote:
> My SQL Server Ent 2006 64Bit Active / Passive Cluster is using 16.3GB of RAM
> and there is only 16GB in the server.
> I have the max memory for SQL server set at 12582912 (12GB) but the process
> is running at 15,388,052 ignoring the maximum settings.
> Thus the server is swapping memory to disk.
> How can i make sure the SQL server is limited in its memory usgage if it is
> ignoring the setting.
> Regards
> Toby
>
Friday, February 24, 2012
Memory Pressure Question
SQL Server 2000 SP4 w/ build 2187 running on OS Windows 2003 SP1.
Active/Passive cluster with two nodes. AWE enabled.
We are experiencing memory pressure problems with errors such as
"unable to reserve contiguous memory" and "insufficient memory
available" which lead to fail over. I've researched causes and
applied corrections and/or recommendations accordingly. However,
there are questions regarding linked servers that I cannot find an
answer to. I've identified two queries in object cache using linked
server whose compiled plan exceeds 8K which overflows into the
MemToLeave and on to the linked server whereby linked server is known
to have memory leaks for plans exceeding 8K.
Question 1: Is the linked server 8K limitation for the query plan only
or does this mean the result set is also affected by the 8K
limitation?
Question 2: Will setting the packet size in the provider string
control the size of the query plan passed to linked server and if
applicable, control the size of the result set?
You mention a fialover , so on the other node it workes fine?
Or do you have the same problem.
Sorry , not a direct answer to youre question.
I drank alot of beer and ended up in the police department database.
Drank more beer and learned SQL in the dark hours.
DELETE FROM offenders WHERE Title=''MrAA'' AND Year=2006;
I love SQL
"Patricia" wrote:
> SQL Server 2000 SP4 w/ build 2187 running on OS Windows 2003 SP1.
> Active/Passive cluster with two nodes. AWE enabled.
> We are experiencing memory pressure problems with errors such as
> "unable to reserve contiguous memory" and "insufficient memory
> available" which lead to fail over. I've researched causes and
> applied corrections and/or recommendations accordingly. However,
> there are questions regarding linked servers that I cannot find an
> answer to. I've identified two queries in object cache using linked
> server whose compiled plan exceeds 8K which overflows into the
> MemToLeave and on to the linked server whereby linked server is known
> to have memory leaks for plans exceeding 8K.
> Question 1: Is the linked server 8K limitation for the query plan only
> or does this mean the result set is also affected by the 8K
> limitation?
> Question 2: Will setting the packet size in the provider string
> control the size of the query plan passed to linked server and if
> applicable, control the size of the result set?
>
|||Both nodes are affected.
Active/Passive cluster with two nodes. AWE enabled.
We are experiencing memory pressure problems with errors such as
"unable to reserve contiguous memory" and "insufficient memory
available" which lead to fail over. I've researched causes and
applied corrections and/or recommendations accordingly. However,
there are questions regarding linked servers that I cannot find an
answer to. I've identified two queries in object cache using linked
server whose compiled plan exceeds 8K which overflows into the
MemToLeave and on to the linked server whereby linked server is known
to have memory leaks for plans exceeding 8K.
Question 1: Is the linked server 8K limitation for the query plan only
or does this mean the result set is also affected by the 8K
limitation?
Question 2: Will setting the packet size in the provider string
control the size of the query plan passed to linked server and if
applicable, control the size of the result set?
You mention a fialover , so on the other node it workes fine?
Or do you have the same problem.
Sorry , not a direct answer to youre question.
I drank alot of beer and ended up in the police department database.
Drank more beer and learned SQL in the dark hours.
DELETE FROM offenders WHERE Title=''MrAA'' AND Year=2006;
I love SQL
"Patricia" wrote:
> SQL Server 2000 SP4 w/ build 2187 running on OS Windows 2003 SP1.
> Active/Passive cluster with two nodes. AWE enabled.
> We are experiencing memory pressure problems with errors such as
> "unable to reserve contiguous memory" and "insufficient memory
> available" which lead to fail over. I've researched causes and
> applied corrections and/or recommendations accordingly. However,
> there are questions regarding linked servers that I cannot find an
> answer to. I've identified two queries in object cache using linked
> server whose compiled plan exceeds 8K which overflows into the
> MemToLeave and on to the linked server whereby linked server is known
> to have memory leaks for plans exceeding 8K.
> Question 1: Is the linked server 8K limitation for the query plan only
> or does this mean the result set is also affected by the 8K
> limitation?
> Question 2: Will setting the packet size in the provider string
> control the size of the query plan passed to linked server and if
> applicable, control the size of the result set?
>
|||Both nodes are affected.
Memory Pressure Question
SQL Server 2000 SP4 w/ build 2187 running on OS Windows 2003 SP1.
Active/Passive cluster with two nodes. AWE enabled.
We are experiencing memory pressure problems with errors such as
"unable to reserve contiguous memory" and "insufficient memory
available" which lead to fail over. I've researched causes and
applied corrections and/or recommendations accordingly. However,
there are questions regarding linked servers that I cannot find an
answer to. I've identified two queries in object cache using linked
server whose compiled plan exceeds 8K which overflows into the
MemToLeave and on to the linked server whereby linked server is known
to have memory leaks for plans exceeding 8K.
Question 1: Is the linked server 8K limitation for the query plan only
or does this mean the result set is also affected by the 8K
limitation?
Question 2: Will setting the packet size in the provider string
control the size of the query plan passed to linked server and if
applicable, control the size of the result set?You mention a fialover , so on the other node it workes fine?
Or do you have the same problem.
Sorry , not a direct answer to youre question.
I drank alot of beer and ended up in the police department database.
Drank more beer and learned SQL in the dark hours.
DELETE FROM offenders WHERE Title=''MrAA'' AND Year=2006;
I love SQL
"Patricia" wrote:
> SQL Server 2000 SP4 w/ build 2187 running on OS Windows 2003 SP1.
> Active/Passive cluster with two nodes. AWE enabled.
> We are experiencing memory pressure problems with errors such as
> "unable to reserve contiguous memory" and "insufficient memory
> available" which lead to fail over. I've researched causes and
> applied corrections and/or recommendations accordingly. However,
> there are questions regarding linked servers that I cannot find an
> answer to. I've identified two queries in object cache using linked
> server whose compiled plan exceeds 8K which overflows into the
> MemToLeave and on to the linked server whereby linked server is known
> to have memory leaks for plans exceeding 8K.
> Question 1: Is the linked server 8K limitation for the query plan only
> or does this mean the result set is also affected by the 8K
> limitation?
> Question 2: Will setting the packet size in the provider string
> control the size of the query plan passed to linked server and if
> applicable, control the size of the result set?
>|||Both nodes are affected.
Active/Passive cluster with two nodes. AWE enabled.
We are experiencing memory pressure problems with errors such as
"unable to reserve contiguous memory" and "insufficient memory
available" which lead to fail over. I've researched causes and
applied corrections and/or recommendations accordingly. However,
there are questions regarding linked servers that I cannot find an
answer to. I've identified two queries in object cache using linked
server whose compiled plan exceeds 8K which overflows into the
MemToLeave and on to the linked server whereby linked server is known
to have memory leaks for plans exceeding 8K.
Question 1: Is the linked server 8K limitation for the query plan only
or does this mean the result set is also affected by the 8K
limitation?
Question 2: Will setting the packet size in the provider string
control the size of the query plan passed to linked server and if
applicable, control the size of the result set?You mention a fialover , so on the other node it workes fine?
Or do you have the same problem.
Sorry , not a direct answer to youre question.
I drank alot of beer and ended up in the police department database.
Drank more beer and learned SQL in the dark hours.
DELETE FROM offenders WHERE Title=''MrAA'' AND Year=2006;
I love SQL
"Patricia" wrote:
> SQL Server 2000 SP4 w/ build 2187 running on OS Windows 2003 SP1.
> Active/Passive cluster with two nodes. AWE enabled.
> We are experiencing memory pressure problems with errors such as
> "unable to reserve contiguous memory" and "insufficient memory
> available" which lead to fail over. I've researched causes and
> applied corrections and/or recommendations accordingly. However,
> there are questions regarding linked servers that I cannot find an
> answer to. I've identified two queries in object cache using linked
> server whose compiled plan exceeds 8K which overflows into the
> MemToLeave and on to the linked server whereby linked server is known
> to have memory leaks for plans exceeding 8K.
> Question 1: Is the linked server 8K limitation for the query plan only
> or does this mean the result set is also affected by the 8K
> limitation?
> Question 2: Will setting the packet size in the provider string
> control the size of the query plan passed to linked server and if
> applicable, control the size of the result set?
>|||Both nodes are affected.
Memory Pressure Question
SQL Server 2000 SP4 w/ build 2187 running on OS Windows 2003 SP1.
Active/Passive cluster with two nodes. AWE enabled.
We are experiencing memory pressure problems with errors such as
"unable to reserve contiguous memory" and "insufficient memory
available" which lead to fail over. I've researched causes and
applied corrections and/or recommendations accordingly. However,
there are questions regarding linked servers that I cannot find an
answer to. I've identified two queries in object cache using linked
server whose compiled plan exceeds 8K which overflows into the
MemToLeave and on to the linked server whereby linked server is known
to have memory leaks for plans exceeding 8K.
Question 1: Is the linked server 8K limitation for the query plan only
or does this mean the result set is also affected by the 8K
limitation?
Question 2: Will setting the packet size in the provider string
control the size of the query plan passed to linked server and if
applicable, control the size of the result set?You mention a fialover , so on the other node it workes fine?
Or do you have the same problem.
Sorry , not a direct answer to youre question.
--
I drank alot of beer and ended up in the police department database.
Drank more beer and learned SQL in the dark hours.
DELETE FROM offenders WHERE Title=''MrAA'' AND Year=2006;
I love SQL :)
"Patricia" wrote:
> SQL Server 2000 SP4 w/ build 2187 running on OS Windows 2003 SP1.
> Active/Passive cluster with two nodes. AWE enabled.
> We are experiencing memory pressure problems with errors such as
> "unable to reserve contiguous memory" and "insufficient memory
> available" which lead to fail over. I've researched causes and
> applied corrections and/or recommendations accordingly. However,
> there are questions regarding linked servers that I cannot find an
> answer to. I've identified two queries in object cache using linked
> server whose compiled plan exceeds 8K which overflows into the
> MemToLeave and on to the linked server whereby linked server is known
> to have memory leaks for plans exceeding 8K.
> Question 1: Is the linked server 8K limitation for the query plan only
> or does this mean the result set is also affected by the 8K
> limitation?
> Question 2: Will setting the packet size in the provider string
> control the size of the query plan passed to linked server and if
> applicable, control the size of the result set?
>|||Both nodes are affected.
Active/Passive cluster with two nodes. AWE enabled.
We are experiencing memory pressure problems with errors such as
"unable to reserve contiguous memory" and "insufficient memory
available" which lead to fail over. I've researched causes and
applied corrections and/or recommendations accordingly. However,
there are questions regarding linked servers that I cannot find an
answer to. I've identified two queries in object cache using linked
server whose compiled plan exceeds 8K which overflows into the
MemToLeave and on to the linked server whereby linked server is known
to have memory leaks for plans exceeding 8K.
Question 1: Is the linked server 8K limitation for the query plan only
or does this mean the result set is also affected by the 8K
limitation?
Question 2: Will setting the packet size in the provider string
control the size of the query plan passed to linked server and if
applicable, control the size of the result set?You mention a fialover , so on the other node it workes fine?
Or do you have the same problem.
Sorry , not a direct answer to youre question.
--
I drank alot of beer and ended up in the police department database.
Drank more beer and learned SQL in the dark hours.
DELETE FROM offenders WHERE Title=''MrAA'' AND Year=2006;
I love SQL :)
"Patricia" wrote:
> SQL Server 2000 SP4 w/ build 2187 running on OS Windows 2003 SP1.
> Active/Passive cluster with two nodes. AWE enabled.
> We are experiencing memory pressure problems with errors such as
> "unable to reserve contiguous memory" and "insufficient memory
> available" which lead to fail over. I've researched causes and
> applied corrections and/or recommendations accordingly. However,
> there are questions regarding linked servers that I cannot find an
> answer to. I've identified two queries in object cache using linked
> server whose compiled plan exceeds 8K which overflows into the
> MemToLeave and on to the linked server whereby linked server is known
> to have memory leaks for plans exceeding 8K.
> Question 1: Is the linked server 8K limitation for the query plan only
> or does this mean the result set is also affected by the 8K
> limitation?
> Question 2: Will setting the packet size in the provider string
> control the size of the query plan passed to linked server and if
> applicable, control the size of the result set?
>|||Both nodes are affected.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)