Merge Metadata Cleanup

Hello Everyone,
I am running SQL2K with sp3, continuous merge replication, only one
subscriber.
My current setting for Subscription expiration is the default of 7, I
have just recently changed this from the default of 14 days, as our
Subscriber is basically always available.
I am still trying to figure out how to cleanup my merge metadata. From
what I have read and from what I understand ,
sp_mergemetadataretentioncleanup is automatically run, if the agent
running Merge has the Parameter for MetadataRententionCleanup set to 1
I am under the assumption that if I have has the Parameter for
MetadataRententionCleanup set to 1 it should automatically be cleaning
up my metadata. Even though I have it set to 1 it does not appear
like it is actually cleaning out MSmerge_contents or MSmerge_tombstone.
These tables just keep growing.
Now if I had this parameter set to 0 then I would need to use
sp_mergecleanupmetadata to clean up MSmerge_contents or
MSmerge_tombstone.
Would there ever be a reason for running both?
I did go to BOL but I read the following about using
sp_mergecleanupmetadata:
If you want to run sp_mergecleanupmetadata without the subscriptions
being marked for reinitialization:
Stop all updates to the publication and subscription databases.
Unfortunately, I cannot stop all updates as our servers need to be
available 24/7.
Does anyone run this without stopping replication first? And if you do
run it do you have MetadataRententionCleanup set to 0?
If anyone can help I truly would appreciate it.
Thanks,
Barbara
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
are you using anonymous subscribers? Merge replication does not clean
up the metadata as efficiently with anonymous subscrptions as opposed
to named subscriptions.
|||Thanks Hilary.
Unfortunately no, we do not have any anonymous subscriptions only one
named subscriptions.
Any other ideas?
Barbara
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
|||I believe I have my answer:
1) sp_mergecleanupmetadata
2) sp_mergemetadataretentioncleanup
The First should be used for topologies with SQL Server 2000 SP1 or less
(which is not my case)
The Second one is the one to control the process manually for SQL Server
> SP1 which is your case and when the MetadataretentionCleanup is set to
0 (not automatic)
There is also a catch though the second sp is executed automatically by
merge Agent at at startup! when MetadataretentionCleanup is set to 1
therefore when in continuous mode it will be called only once.
So I'll need to manually run sp_mergemetadataretentioncleanup or setup a
job that will do it for me on a scheduled basis.
Thanks for your help Hilary.
Barbara
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***

merge and managed auto id

"The identity range managed by replication is
full and must be updated by a replication agent."
my merge replication agent is constantly running and syncing.
why isn't it re-seeding the values in the ident. cols ?
You have blown your range on the subscriber. You need to select a range
which will not be blown between syncs. This is rather difficult to recover
from. Check out this article for more info.
http://www.simple-talk.com/sql/database-administration/the-identity-crisis-in-replication/
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Tony B." <Test@.spam.ca> wrote in message
news:u8XhNLnDHHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> "The identity range managed by replication is
> full and must be updated by a replication agent."
> my merge replication agent is constantly running and syncing.
> why isn't it re-seeding the values in the ident. cols ?
>

Merge Agents Don't "Retry" After SQL Server Error 8645?

During a memory- and CPU-intensive nightly database update process, the
merge agents (running on the server) for two subscribers failed with
SQL Server Error 8645 (A time out occurred while waiting for memory
resources to execute the query). It's not surprising to see this error,
but the fact that the agents did not retry as configured is surprising.
I discovered that this message is listed as a "severity" of 17 - is
there some threshold that prevents a retry by the agent? A restart of
the agent was successful.
Justin H.
How many merge agents do you have? Are you limiting the number of concurrent
merge agents?
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Justin H." <jhenry@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1134585801.416828.82300@.g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> During a memory- and CPU-intensive nightly database update process, the
> merge agents (running on the server) for two subscribers failed with
> SQL Server Error 8645 (A time out occurred while waiting for memory
> resources to execute the query). It's not surprising to see this error,
> but the fact that the agents did not retry as configured is surprising.
>
> I discovered that this message is listed as a "severity" of 17 - is
> there some threshold that prevents a retry by the agent? A restart of
> the agent was successful.
> Justin H.
>
|||There are only two subscribers, so two merge agents with no concurrency
limit configured. I'm not so concerned about the error as long as a
retry happens as configured.

merge Agent-login failure

I have 2 servers running on workgroups; merge replication
running SQL Server 2005 on each, snapshot running ok, start merge agent and
get this.
Error messages:
The merge process could not connect to the Publisher 'XXUSSHU18UT:Process'.
Check to ensure that the server is running. (Source: MSSQL_REPL, Error
number: MSSQL_REPL-2147198719)
Get help: http://help/MSSQL_REPL-2147198719
The process could not connect to Publisher 'XXUSSHU18UT'. (Source:
MSSQL_REPL, Error number: MSSQL_REPL20084)
Get help: http://help/MSSQL_REPL20084
Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON'. (Source: MSSQLServer,
Error number: 18456)
Get help: http://help/18456
The easiest solution if you don't want to investigate the trust issue is to
switch the merge agent to be running under a SQL Server Login.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com .
|||Hi,
I had similar problem few years ago when I was new to merge replication on
SQL Server 2000.
Create same windows account on both servers with same user name and same
password, run sql server end sql server agent on it and use this security
option for merge agent:
1. Run under SQL Server Agent service account
2. By impersonating the process account.
"bt7403" wrote:

> I have 2 servers running on workgroups; merge replication
> running SQL Server 2005 on each, snapshot running ok, start merge agent and
> get this.
> Error messages:
> The merge process could not connect to the Publisher 'XXUSSHU18UT:Process'.
> Check to ensure that the server is running. (Source: MSSQL_REPL, Error
> number: MSSQL_REPL-2147198719)
> Get help: http://help/MSSQL_REPL-2147198719
> The process could not connect to Publisher 'XXUSSHU18UT'. (Source:
> MSSQL_REPL, Error number: MSSQL_REPL20084)
> Get help: http://help/MSSQL_REPL20084
> Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON'. (Source: MSSQLServer,
> Error number: 18456)
> Get help: http://help/18456
|||connect to the publisher in SQL Server Management Studio, expand the local
publication folder, expand your publication, right click on the Subscriber
and select properties. In the Security Agent process account section click
on the three ellipses and enter a windows account which has in the dbo role
on the publication database or is in the PAL.
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"bt7403" <bt7403@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:717FD769-249F-40EC-9425-116738AA1740@.microsoft.com...
>I have 2 servers running on workgroups; merge replication
> running SQL Server 2005 on each, snapshot running ok, start merge agent
> and
> get this.
> Error messages:
> The merge process could not connect to the Publisher
> 'XXUSSHU18UT:Process'.
> Check to ensure that the server is running. (Source: MSSQL_REPL, Error
> number: MSSQL_REPL-2147198719)
> Get help: http://help/MSSQL_REPL-2147198719
> The process could not connect to Publisher 'XXUSSHU18UT'. (Source:
> MSSQL_REPL, Error number: MSSQL_REPL20084)
> Get help: http://help/MSSQL_REPL20084
> Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON'. (Source:
> MSSQLServer,
> Error number: 18456)
> Get help: http://help/18456
|||Problem solved:
under SQL Security, I had to create a GUEST acct. and map this user to the
PUB db. Under Subscription Properties-Removed use of SQL Server Agent
service acct. and used Windows acct-maintained SQL Server Auth for Subscriber
connection.
Merge ran fine.
A side note:
Snapshot security settings do not require fine-tuning like Merge does.
I run this under SQL Server Agent service acct. and use SQL Server login for
connection to PUB.
thx. for your replies.
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> connect to the publisher in SQL Server Management Studio, expand the local
> publication folder, expand your publication, right click on the Subscriber
> and select properties. In the Security Agent process account section click
> on the three ellipses and enter a windows account which has in the dbo role
> on the publication database or is in the PAL.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
> RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
> This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
> positions, strategies or opinions.
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "bt7403" <bt7403@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:717FD769-249F-40EC-9425-116738AA1740@.microsoft.com...
>
>
sql

merge agent running a job on a different server.

I have a database working with Merge replication, there could possibly be a
audit database associated with this replicated database. After talking about
it we decided it would be better to have each subscriber database have a copy
of both the replication database and the audit database without setting up
the audit database for replication.
I’m trying to accomplish the following tasks.
1)After merging the data from the subscriber to the publisher the merge
agent would kick off a job to run a BCP command moving the audit data to txt
file. The audit triggers will have the not for replication attribute to
prevent firing these triggers when data is merged.
2)Truncate the subscriber’s server audit data.
3)Do a bulk insert onto the publisher servers audit database.
How can I kick off a job on the subscriber’s server when the merge agent
resides on the publisher’s server? I would really like this to all work off
of one job; I don’t want to create a scheduled job to run on each subscriber
to move this data. Any suggestions?
I’m also trying not to replicate this database, this is a heavily
distributed app and I’m trying to limit the amount of potential issues.
Thank you in advance.
Pauly C
Pauly,
why not use snapshot replication for this - it would seem to do exactly what
you reauire, and synchronization could be initiated at the publisher
immediately after the merge synchronization.
If you really don't want to use replication, then I'd still control the
system from the publisher. Using linked servers you could truncate the audit
table and transfer the table on each subscriber.
Rgds,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
|||Paul,
Thank you once again for you help, I will check out both options.
Thank you,
Pauly C
"Paul Ibison" wrote:

> Pauly,
> why not use snapshot replication for this - it would seem to do exactly what
> you reauire, and synchronization could be initiated at the publisher
> immediately after the merge synchronization.
> If you really don't want to use replication, then I'd still control the
> system from the publisher. Using linked servers you could truncate the audit
> table and transfer the table on each subscriber.
> Rgds,
> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
> (recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
>
>

Merge Agent retrying forever

We have a Merge Replication with Publisher and Distributor on SQL Server 2000 SP3 and Subscribers running Personal SQL Server 2000 SP2 synchronizing through VPN phone lines.
From time to time one or more subscribers can't reconnect to the Publisher. By inspecting their Merge Agents (through the Replication Monitor) in the Publisher Server we see that they are marked as retrying forever. In the distribution database MSmerge_hi
story table these agents have the "runstatus" column marked with 5 (retry).
We are not able to stop the agents. We have shut down the Publisher server but still the agents show the same status. We have noticed that in order to solve the problem we must synchronize those subscribers through UTP fast cables.
Any help will be appreciated
Righth click on the merge agent and click on Agent Properties. Click on the
Steps tab and double click on a step. On the Edit Step window, click on
the Advanced tab and change the number of retry attempts to a number other
than the default (usually 10 for the run Agent step and 0 for the other
two). I put 2 for all of my steps. You should also change the retry
interval, I put 1 for mine. Click apply and next to set the next step.
Hope this helps.
"Tony2000" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F71724A8-457A-4B2F-BB8D-B92B0EC3ADD2@.microsoft.com...
> We have a Merge Replication with Publisher and Distributor on SQL Server
2000 SP3 and Subscribers running Personal SQL Server 2000 SP2 synchronizing
through VPN phone lines.
> From time to time one or more subscribers can't reconnect to the
Publisher. By inspecting their Merge Agents (through the Replication
Monitor) in the Publisher Server we see that they are marked as retrying
forever. In the distribution database MSmerge_history table these agents
have the "runstatus" column marked with 5 (retry).
> We are not able to stop the agents. We have shut down the Publisher server
but still the agents show the same status. We have noticed that in order to
solve the problem we must synchronize those subscribers through UTP fast
cables.
> Any help will be appreciated
sql

merge agent not started - Start Synchronizing disabled

i'm running a SQL Server 2000 SP42000.8.00.2039, developer.
i'm trying to setup a merge replication between the default istance and a named one of the same machine, using the same domain account for both publisher and subscriber.
when it comes to "start synchronizing" (right click on the subscriber merge agent), i found it disabled, just like it is running, but it is not (the icon shows a stop sign, even refreshing.)
The state is "disactivated". When i stop sync and start it again things don't change.
If i setup a "pull" subscription, i get a sequence of a message like "interface not supported" (a translation from italian "Interfaccia non supportata"): after 10 attempts, it stops.
i cannot find this error searching in internet, could you address me?
thanks in advance!How did you set up replication, using scripts or Wizards?|||i used wizards.
i noticed a difference: while in this SQL Server installation the replication won't start at all, it works seamlessly on the SQL Server installed in the domain server.
Maybe it's a matter of DNS.sql

Merge ActiveX component removes subscriber records

Hi,
I am trying to synchronize data between a publisher running in SQL Server 2000 enterprise edition and a subscriber running in MSDE 2000 using DMO with Merge ActiveX component. My program is in VB.NET.
Now, everytime I try to synchronize data, the changes at subscriber don't get reflected at publisher. Here is the code segment:
objMerge.ReinitializeSubscription(true)
objMerge.Initialize()
objMerge.Run()
objMerge.Terminate()
We are using dynamic filters with SUSER_SNAME(). However, the data for specific users filtered by SUSER_SNAME works fine while getting data from publisher to the subscriber.
Thanks.
You shouldn't be reinitializing. This is one way you can guarantee you will loose your Subscriber records.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
If you want to upload the Subscriber changes to the Publisher before the initialization runs use the bUploadBeforeReinit property of the ReInitializeSubscription method to true.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
|||Hi,
I didn't get your answer. It says not to use ReinitializeSubscription and again it says use ReinitializeSubscription with bUploadBeforeReinit parameter set to true.
Please explain.
Thanks.
|||Hmm.. Sorry I seem to have missed that you were using objMerge.ReinitializeSubscription(true) in your first post. I somehow was under the impression you were doing this objMerge.ReinitializeSubscription() or objMerge.ReinitializeSubscription(false)
Basically what I was trying to ask you is why are you doing a reinitialization? You normally only do this if there has been a schema/publication change.
If there is no need to do a reinitialization I would not use this statement.
If you are doing a objMerge.ReinitializeSubscription(true) then transactions that occur on the Subscriber should not be deleted unless there are some conflicts. Does conflict viewer reveal anything?
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
|||Thanks Hilary for the suggestion. You are right. There were actually conflicts as we didn't find the Identity Range tab for articles enabled and hence could not set the proper identity range. We generated the publication script, manually set the identity
range to sp_addmergearticle and then created publication by running this script - now everything worked just fine even without using ReinitializeSubscription(True).
Now the question is why the identity range tab for the artcles were not active in the first place?
sql

Merge - Pull Snapshot Error

I'm struggling with this error with one of my subscribers. Both the
publisher and subscriber have the services running under the same account &
password. My subscribers use a dial-up connection. To help
troubleshoot, I had the subscriber get connected to the publisher via RAS
and had them run a directory listing on the snapshot location. They
received an error: Logon failure: unknown user name or bad password.
The RAS user account has full access to the snapshot location. This is the
first subscriber out of 15 that I'm experiencing this problem with. The
difference between this one and the other 14 is that this subscriber is
running a full version of SQL Server where as the rest are running MSDE.
The process could not deliver the snapshot to the Subscriber.
(Source: Merge Replication Provider (Agent); Error number: -2147201001)
The process could not bulk copy into table '"dbo"."sysmergesubsetfilters"'.
(Source: cookieland (Agent); Error number: 20037)
Unable to open BCP host data-file
(Source: ODBC SQL Server Driver (ODBC); Error number: 0)
This is not a replication problem. It is a problem relating to network connectivity or RAS.
Unfortunately my NT/RAS/dialup skills aren't good enough to help you. I suggest you open a ticket with PSS for Win2k networking, or post this question in one of the networking newsgroups.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"Tina Smith" wrote:

> I'm struggling with this error with one of my subscribers. Both the
> publisher and subscriber have the services running under the same account &
> password. My subscribers use a dial-up connection. To help
> troubleshoot, I had the subscriber get connected to the publisher via RAS
> and had them run a directory listing on the snapshot location. They
> received an error: Logon failure: unknown user name or bad password.
> The RAS user account has full access to the snapshot location. This is the
> first subscriber out of 15 that I'm experiencing this problem with. The
> difference between this one and the other 14 is that this subscriber is
> running a full version of SQL Server where as the rest are running MSDE.
> The process could not deliver the snapshot to the Subscriber.
> (Source: Merge Replication Provider (Agent); Error number: -2147201001)
> ----
> The process could not bulk copy into table '"dbo"."sysmergesubsetfilters"'.
> (Source: cookieland (Agent); Error number: 20037)
> ----
> Unable to open BCP host data-file
> (Source: ODBC SQL Server Driver (ODBC); Error number: 0)
>
>
|||Thanks Hilary. I have since learned the credentials are cached in XP and
used when you try to access any
resources in the remote network. The same feature is not present pre XP.
"Hilary Cotter" <hilaryk@.att.net> wrote in message
news:8BE474D2-F7A1-414E-9B35-5DD6239B8833@.microsoft.com...
> This is not a replication problem. It is a problem relating to network
connectivity or RAS.
> Unfortunately my NT/RAS/dialup skills aren't good enough to help you. I
suggest you open a ticket with PSS for Win2k networking, or post this
question in one of the networking newsgroups.[vbcol=seagreen]
> --
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
>
>
> "Tina Smith" wrote:
account &[vbcol=seagreen]
RAS[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
The
> ----
--[vbcol=seagreen]
'"dbo"."sysmergesubsetfilters"'.
> ----
--[vbcol=seagreen]

MemToLeave and Thirdy Pary DLLs

Hi
I've been running into problems with a server that indicate that space in the
MemToLeave area is exhausted. The messages in the error log are along the
lines of 'Failed to reserve contigous memory', 'Clearing procedure cache to
free contigous memory' et cetera.
We do have a third party DLL in use and I've seen in a previous post a
recommendation to move third party DLLs out of the production server's
address space. The question is how to do this? My NT administrators don't
know. BOL tells me how to unload the DLL (DBCC dllname (FREE)), which I can
do once a problem has occurred, but is there a way of ensuring the DLL is
always out of the server's address space?
If I unload the DLL what is to stop it meing reloaded, as it is used by
database monitoring software that runs every two minutes?
I'm also a little confused by the -g startup setting.
One post I've seen says to set it to 384 to increase the space available to
the MEmToLeave. Another post states that you need 128M for the worker threads
and using the default -g will add another 256M, bringing the default to 384M.
BOL is woolly on the subject, as normal.
Thanks
Mark
Message posted via http://www.droptable.com
Hi Mark
Some .dll's are designed to be run either in-process or ex-process & some
are simply designed to run in-process, so some can be forced to run
ex-process & some can't.
The type that typically *can* be run ex-process from SQL Server are COM type
..dlls, typically developed in VB6.0 (but can also be developed in Delphi,
C++ or J++0). you know you're dealing with one of these if the calling code
uses the sp_OACreate syntax. To make these guys run ex-process, you
configure them to run within COM+ or (or MTS on older WinNT) context, which
requires registering them in COM+.
The type that typcially *cannot* be run ex-process from SQL Server are
Extended Stored procedures, which are typically written in C and simply
aren't designed to be run ex-process. So if you're talking about a .dll
which is registered as an Extended Stored Proc, you probably won't be able
to make it run ex-process.
The post about the -g switch is correct. SQL Server's allocation of memory
during startup is best documented in Ken Henderson's Internals Guru's Guide
book. He's also written articles on SQL Memory Management, one of which is
here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/data/defau...v_01262004.asp
But I dono't think this one specifically covers the -g switch in the detail
you're after. Try to get hold of the book, as it'd definitely covered in
detail in its Memory chapter.
HTH
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
"mpenfold via droptable.com" <u16092@.uwe> wrote in message
news:58090a9e28698@.uwe...
> Hi
> I've been running into problems with a server that indicate that space in
> the
> MemToLeave area is exhausted. The messages in the error log are along the
> lines of 'Failed to reserve contigous memory', 'Clearing procedure cache
> to
> free contigous memory' et cetera.
> We do have a third party DLL in use and I've seen in a previous post a
> recommendation to move third party DLLs out of the production server's
> address space. The question is how to do this? My NT administrators don't
> know. BOL tells me how to unload the DLL (DBCC dllname (FREE)), which I
> can
> do once a problem has occurred, but is there a way of ensuring the DLL is
> always out of the server's address space?
> If I unload the DLL what is to stop it meing reloaded, as it is used by
> database monitoring software that runs every two minutes?
> I'm also a little confused by the -g startup setting.
> One post I've seen says to set it to 384 to increase the space available
> to
> the MEmToLeave. Another post states that you need 128M for the worker
> threads
> and using the default -g will add another 256M, bringing the default to
> 384M.
> BOL is woolly on the subject, as normal.
> Thanks
> Mark
> --
> Message posted via http://www.droptable.com

MemToLeave and Thirdy Pary DLLs

Hi
I've been running into problems with a server that indicate that space in the
MemToLeave area is exhausted. The messages in the error log are along the
lines of 'Failed to reserve contigous memory', 'Clearing procedure cache to
free contigous memory' et cetera.
We do have a third party DLL in use and I've seen in a previous post a
recommendation to move third party DLLs out of the production server's
address space. The question is how to do this? My NT administrators don't
know. BOL tells me how to unload the DLL (DBCC dllname (FREE)), which I can
do once a problem has occurred, but is there a way of ensuring the DLL is
always out of the server's address space?
If I unload the DLL what is to stop it meing reloaded, as it is used by
database monitoring software that runs every two minutes?
I'm also a little confused by the -g startup setting.
One post I've seen says to set it to 384 to increase the space available to
the MEmToLeave. Another post states that you need 128M for the worker threads
and using the default -g will add another 256M, bringing the default to 384M.
BOL is woolly on the subject, as normal.
Thanks
Mark
--
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.comHi Mark
Some .dll's are designed to be run either in-process or ex-process & some
are simply designed to run in-process, so some can be forced to run
ex-process & some can't.
The type that typically *can* be run ex-process from SQL Server are COM type
.dlls, typically developed in VB6.0 (but can also be developed in Delphi,
C++ or J++0). you know you're dealing with one of these if the calling code
uses the sp_OACreate syntax. To make these guys run ex-process, you
configure them to run within COM+ or (or MTS on older WinNT) context, which
requires registering them in COM+.
The type that typcially *cannot* be run ex-process from SQL Server are
Extended Stored procedures, which are typically written in C and simply
aren't designed to be run ex-process. So if you're talking about a .dll
which is registered as an Extended Stored Proc, you probably won't be able
to make it run ex-process.
The post about the -g switch is correct. SQL Server's allocation of memory
during startup is best documented in Ken Henderson's Internals Guru's Guide
book. He's also written articles on SQL Memory Management, one of which is
here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/data/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnsqldev/html/sqldev_01262004.asp
But I dono't think this one specifically covers the -g switch in the detail
you're after. Try to get hold of the book, as it'd definitely covered in
detail in its Memory chapter.
HTH
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
"mpenfold via SQLMonster.com" <u16092@.uwe> wrote in message
news:58090a9e28698@.uwe...
> Hi
> I've been running into problems with a server that indicate that space in
> the
> MemToLeave area is exhausted. The messages in the error log are along the
> lines of 'Failed to reserve contigous memory', 'Clearing procedure cache
> to
> free contigous memory' et cetera.
> We do have a third party DLL in use and I've seen in a previous post a
> recommendation to move third party DLLs out of the production server's
> address space. The question is how to do this? My NT administrators don't
> know. BOL tells me how to unload the DLL (DBCC dllname (FREE)), which I
> can
> do once a problem has occurred, but is there a way of ensuring the DLL is
> always out of the server's address space?
> If I unload the DLL what is to stop it meing reloaded, as it is used by
> database monitoring software that runs every two minutes?
> I'm also a little confused by the -g startup setting.
> One post I've seen says to set it to 384 to increase the space available
> to
> the MEmToLeave. Another post states that you need 128M for the worker
> threads
> and using the default -g will add another 256M, bringing the default to
> 384M.
> BOL is woolly on the subject, as normal.
> Thanks
> Mark
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.comsql

MemToLeave and Thirdy Pary DLLs

Hi
I've been running into problems with a server that indicate that space in th
e
MemToLeave area is exhausted. The messages in the error log are along the
lines of 'Failed to reserve contigous memory', 'Clearing procedure cache to
free contigous memory' et cetera.
We do have a third party DLL in use and I've seen in a previous post a
recommendation to move third party DLLs out of the production server's
address space. The question is how to do this? My NT administrators don't
know. BOL tells me how to unload the DLL (DBCC dllname (FREE)), which I can
do once a problem has occurred, but is there a way of ensuring the DLL is
always out of the server's address space?
If I unload the DLL what is to stop it meing reloaded, as it is used by
database monitoring software that runs every two minutes?
I'm also a little confused by the -g startup setting.
One post I've seen says to set it to 384 to increase the space available to
the MEmToLeave. Another post states that you need 128M for the worker thread
s
and using the default -g will add another 256M, bringing the default to 384M
.
BOL is woolly on the subject, as normal.
Thanks
Mark
Message posted via http://www.droptable.comHi Mark
Some .dll's are designed to be run either in-process or ex-process & some
are simply designed to run in-process, so some can be forced to run
ex-process & some can't.
The type that typically *can* be run ex-process from SQL Server are COM type
.dlls, typically developed in VB6.0 (but can also be developed in Delphi,
C++ or J++0). you know you're dealing with one of these if the calling code
uses the sp_OACreate syntax. To make these guys run ex-process, you
configure them to run within COM+ or (or MTS on older WinNT) context, which
requires registering them in COM+.
The type that typcially *cannot* be run ex-process from SQL Server are
Extended Stored procedures, which are typically written in C and simply
aren't designed to be run ex-process. So if you're talking about a .dll
which is registered as an Extended Stored Proc, you probably won't be able
to make it run ex-process.
The post about the -g switch is correct. SQL Server's allocation of memory
during startup is best documented in Ken Henderson's Internals Guru's Guide
book. He's also written articles on SQL Memory Management, one of which is
here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/data/defa...ev_01262004.asp
But I dono't think this one specifically covers the -g switch in the detail
you're after. Try to get hold of the book, as it'd definitely covered in
detail in its Memory chapter.
HTH
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
"mpenfold via droptable.com" <u16092@.uwe> wrote in message
news:58090a9e28698@.uwe...
> Hi
> I've been running into problems with a server that indicate that space in
> the
> MemToLeave area is exhausted. The messages in the error log are along the
> lines of 'Failed to reserve contigous memory', 'Clearing procedure cache
> to
> free contigous memory' et cetera.
> We do have a third party DLL in use and I've seen in a previous post a
> recommendation to move third party DLLs out of the production server's
> address space. The question is how to do this? My NT administrators don't
> know. BOL tells me how to unload the DLL (DBCC dllname (FREE)), which I
> can
> do once a problem has occurred, but is there a way of ensuring the DLL is
> always out of the server's address space?
> If I unload the DLL what is to stop it meing reloaded, as it is used by
> database monitoring software that runs every two minutes?
> I'm also a little confused by the -g startup setting.
> One post I've seen says to set it to 384 to increase the space available
> to
> the MEmToLeave. Another post states that you need 128M for the worker
> threads
> and using the default -g will add another 256M, bringing the default to
> 384M.
> BOL is woolly on the subject, as normal.
> Thanks
> Mark
> --
> Message posted via http://www.droptable.com

MemToLeave and ODBC

We are running SQL Server 2005, SP2, Standard Edition, 64bit.
We are considering an ODBC solution for client reporting, and have been
reading that the ODBC driver uses MemToLeave memory, up to 7MB per connection.
I was wondering if the queries sent via this ODBC connection, also utilize
MemToLeave, or if those queries use the Buffer Pool?
And then a separate question, not involving ODBC...does an adhoc query
executed from Management Studio utilize Buffer Pool memory, if it needs less
than 8K contiguous memory, or do all adhoc queries in general go directly
against MemToLeave?
As a side note, I have read some from Ken Hendersons blog, threads in this
discussion group, and other posts on the web. I cannot seem to find the
answer to the above questions. Thx.
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200710/1Still seeking for answers. Please help.
cbrichards wrote:
>We are running SQL Server 2005, SP2, Standard Edition, 64bit.
>We are considering an ODBC solution for client reporting, and have been
>reading that the ODBC driver uses MemToLeave memory, up to 7MB per connection.
>I was wondering if the queries sent via this ODBC connection, also utilize
>MemToLeave, or if those queries use the Buffer Pool?
>And then a separate question, not involving ODBC...does an adhoc query
>executed from Management Studio utilize Buffer Pool memory, if it needs less
>than 8K contiguous memory, or do all adhoc queries in general go directly
>against MemToLeave?
>As a side note, I have read some from Ken Hendersons blog, threads in this
>discussion group, and other posts on the web. I cannot seem to find the
>answer to the above questions. Thx.
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200710/1|||On a 64bit SQL instance, you should have little to worry about MemToLeave
because you have a huge virtual address space to go about. I might be wrong,
but my understanding is that whether MemToLeave is used depends on factors
such as memory allocation size, not on what database API is being used on the
client side.
Linchi
"cbrichards via SQLMonster.com" wrote:
> We are running SQL Server 2005, SP2, Standard Edition, 64bit.
> We are considering an ODBC solution for client reporting, and have been
> reading that the ODBC driver uses MemToLeave memory, up to 7MB per connection.
> I was wondering if the queries sent via this ODBC connection, also utilize
> MemToLeave, or if those queries use the Buffer Pool?
> And then a separate question, not involving ODBC...does an adhoc query
> executed from Management Studio utilize Buffer Pool memory, if it needs less
> than 8K contiguous memory, or do all adhoc queries in general go directly
> against MemToLeave?
> As a side note, I have read some from Ken Hendersons blog, threads in this
> discussion group, and other posts on the web. I cannot seem to find the
> answer to the above questions. Thx.
> --
> Message posted via SQLMonster.com
> http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200710/1
>|||So if I am running SQL Server 2005, SP2, Standard Edition, 64bit, with 16GB
RAM (14GB set as Max Server Memory), are you saying that just because I am
running 64bit, that I have a huge virtual address space? Where does this huge
virtual address space come from if 14Gb is dedicated to SQL Server? The disks?
Linchi Shea wrote:
>On a 64bit SQL instance, you should have little to worry about MemToLeave
>because you have a huge virtual address space to go about. I might be wrong,
>but my understanding is that whether MemToLeave is used depends on factors
>such as memory allocation size, not on what database API is being used on the
>client side.
>Linchi
>> We are running SQL Server 2005, SP2, Standard Edition, 64bit.
>[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>> discussion group, and other posts on the web. I cannot seem to find the
>> answer to the above questions. Thx.
--
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com|||Yes, SQL Server isn't even aware of what API is used by the client application.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Linchi Shea" <LinchiShea@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:76F3D546-8C00-4E8A-81A6-CDA22E1E0193@.microsoft.com...
> On a 64bit SQL instance, you should have little to worry about MemToLeave
> because you have a huge virtual address space to go about. I might be wrong,
> but my understanding is that whether MemToLeave is used depends on factors
> such as memory allocation size, not on what database API is being used on the
> client side.
> Linchi
> "cbrichards via SQLMonster.com" wrote:
>> We are running SQL Server 2005, SP2, Standard Edition, 64bit.
>> We are considering an ODBC solution for client reporting, and have been
>> reading that the ODBC driver uses MemToLeave memory, up to 7MB per connection.
>> I was wondering if the queries sent via this ODBC connection, also utilize
>> MemToLeave, or if those queries use the Buffer Pool?
>> And then a separate question, not involving ODBC...does an adhoc query
>> executed from Management Studio utilize Buffer Pool memory, if it needs less
>> than 8K contiguous memory, or do all adhoc queries in general go directly
>> against MemToLeave?
>> As a side note, I have read some from Ken Hendersons blog, threads in this
>> discussion group, and other posts on the web. I cannot seem to find the
>> answer to the above questions. Thx.
>> --
>> Message posted via SQLMonster.com
>> http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200710/1
>>|||MemToLeave is a virtual memory address space concept. It has nothing to do
with how mch physical memory you have.
Let's forget about performance and physical memory for now. When you write a
program in a high-level programming language, you may feel like you can just
keep allocating data structures. But eventually you'll run into out of memory
error because the compiler/OS knows that there is a limit to the number of
unique virtual memory addresses for a process. If those addresses are all
used up in the process, you are not allowed to allocate any more and it's the
OS' job to keep track of the usage of the virtual memeory addresses.
On a 32-bit system, the number of virtual memory addresses is limited.
Basically there are 2GB for a program to allocate its data structures (the
other 2GB are taken by the kernel). Since the SQL process' virtual address
space may get fragmented after it has been allocating data structures for a
while and fragmentation can get so bad so that it may not be able to find
contiguious virtual addrsses for larger data structures (i.e. larger than
8K), the strategy that SQL Server uses is to pre-allocate a chunk of virutal
addresses when it starts so that this chunk is available regardless of it
snormal allocation activities. This pre-allocated chunk of virtual memory
addresses is MemToLeave.
Now with a 64-bit system, the virutal address space is so large that there
is little to no danger that a SQL instance (primarily its buffer pool) will
ever use up so much of virtual addresses that its process will have no
contiguious virtual addresses left for larger data structures.
Again, this is all related virtual memory addresses, and has nothing to do
with how much physical memory you may have on a particular system. In
reality, of course if you don't have enough physical memory, you risk
swapping things to paging files and your performance will suffer.
Linchi
"cbrichards via SQLMonster.com" wrote:
> So if I am running SQL Server 2005, SP2, Standard Edition, 64bit, with 16GB
> RAM (14GB set as Max Server Memory), are you saying that just because I am
> running 64bit, that I have a huge virtual address space? Where does this huge
> virtual address space come from if 14Gb is dedicated to SQL Server? The disks?
>
> Linchi Shea wrote:
> >On a 64bit SQL instance, you should have little to worry about MemToLeave
> >because you have a huge virtual address space to go about. I might be wrong,
> >but my understanding is that whether MemToLeave is used depends on factors
> >such as memory allocation size, not on what database API is being used on the
> >client side.
> >
> >Linchi
> >
> >> We are running SQL Server 2005, SP2, Standard Edition, 64bit.
> >>
> >[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> >> discussion group, and other posts on the web. I cannot seem to find the
> >> answer to the above questions. Thx.
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
>|||I am really perplexed at this whole virtual address space with 64bit and I do
not seem to be getting a straight answer. It is probably the way I am
phrasing my questions. If so I apologize. If I have 16GB RAM, of which 14GB
is configured as MaxServerMemory, and I have 100GB carved out on the SAN for
my disks, then if the 14GB is being used by SQL Server, and then another
query comes along, and the 14GB is consumed, is the virtual address space the
2GB left for the operating system, plus the 100GB carved out on the SAN?
Tibor Karaszi wrote:
>Yes, SQL Server isn't even aware of what API is used by the client application.
>> On a 64bit SQL instance, you should have little to worry about MemToLeave
>> because you have a huge virtual address space to go about. I might be wrong,
>[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>> discussion group, and other posts on the web. I cannot seem to find the
>> answer to the above questions. Thx.
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200710/1|||First of all, virtual address space of a process has nothing to do with how
much physial memory or disk storage you may have on a system. On 32-bit
Windows, the user-mode virtual address space is 2GB (or 3GB with /3GB switch
in the boot.ini). On 64-bit Windows, the virtual address space of a process
is 8TB. These numbers don't change regardless how much RAM or disk storage
you have.
Secondly, the size of the virtual address space is a function of the width
of the address or the number of unique pointer values. So in theory, on
32-bit system, the virtual address space is 2^32, and if each address points
to a byte, that's 4GB. Also in theory, on a 64-bit system, the virtual
address space is 2^64, and if each points to a byte, that's more than 16
exabytes. But actual implementations often impose additional restriction. For
instance, 32-bit Windows gives 2GB to the kernel and leave 2GB to your app to
use. And since 16 exabytes are excessive, currently beyond reach anyway, and
costly to support, only 43 bits are actually used for user-mode virtual
addresses on current x64, and that's ~8TB.
Now, if you really end using this much virtual address space, they (i.e.
virtual memory allocated to represent your data structures) have to be
backed/supported with real stores, which can be physical memory or paging
files.
Linchi
"cbrichards via SQLMonster.com" wrote:
> I am really perplexed at this whole virtual address space with 64bit and I do
> not seem to be getting a straight answer. It is probably the way I am
> phrasing my questions. If so I apologize. If I have 16GB RAM, of which 14GB
> is configured as MaxServerMemory, and I have 100GB carved out on the SAN for
> my disks, then if the 14GB is being used by SQL Server, and then another
> query comes along, and the 14GB is consumed, is the virtual address space the
> 2GB left for the operating system, plus the 100GB carved out on the SAN?
> Tibor Karaszi wrote:
> >Yes, SQL Server isn't even aware of what API is used by the client application.
> >
> >> On a 64bit SQL instance, you should have little to worry about MemToLeave
> >> because you have a huge virtual address space to go about. I might be wrong,
> >[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> >> discussion group, and other posts on the web. I cannot seem to find the
> >> answer to the above questions. Thx.
> --
> Message posted via SQLMonster.com
> http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200710/1
>|||On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 01:49:25 GMT, "cbrichards via SQLMonster.com"
<u3288@.uwe> wrote:
>If I have 16GB RAM, of which 14GB
>is configured as MaxServerMemory, and I have 100GB carved out on the SAN for
>my disks, then if the 14GB is being used by SQL Server, and then another
>query comes along, and the 14GB is consumed, is the virtual address space the
>2GB left for the operating system, plus the 100GB carved out on the SAN?
There are, or so I heard at some time way in the past, computers with
the architecture where memory and disk are mapped with a common
address space, as if each was an extension of the other. That sounds
like what you are asking about. Microsoft SQL Server does not run on
any such architecture.
To oversimplify a bit... Most of SQL Server's memory is used for
caching database pages. If SQL Server needs a page that is already in
cache it is just referenced from that memory location. If it needs a
page that is not in cache it is read into cache. When there is no
room in memory for a new page a page that hasn't been used recently is
overwritten. When a page is updated it will be written to disk -
eventually. (Logs are handled a bit differently and always written
immediately.)
Sorry if I have misunderstood your statement.
Roy Harvey
Beacon Falls, CT

Memtoleave and -g-switch

hi out there
On our Windows 2003 servers w. sp1 and running MS SQL Server 2000 w. sp4 we
see from time to time that we get this error "cannot allocate 64k
continous memory" or "SQL Server could not spawn process_loginread thread"
which could be caused by nothing left in the "Memtoleave" pool - I have now
search for advice on how to determine the values for the -g-switch - but
without much success - and if I just go for the "try&error" concept my
sql-server just allocates less and less ? - ehh - in which units are the
parameters for the -g option specified - bytes, kilobytes, mbytes - 4k block
? Any suggestions for measuring the actual running value of this pool -
memtoleave ?

best regards /ti

The units for -g are MB. The default is 256.

Is this a 32 or 64 bit system?

How much memory is on the system?

Are you running SQL Server with AWE enabled?

|||

Could you run the following query (when you are having this problem) and gives us the results.

Code Snippet

SELECTtype, multi_pages_kb FROMsys.dm_os_memory_clerksWHERE multi_pages_kb > 0

ORDERBY multi_pages_kb DESC

WesleyB

Visit my SQL Server weblog @. http://dis4ea.blogspot.com

|||

SQL 2000 does not have DMVs. There's no easy way to profile memory usage in SQL 2000. See http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-US/library/aa175282(sql.80).aspx for more information

Thanks, Ron D.

|||Oops, I missed the 2000 part :-)

Memtoleave and -g-switch

hi out there
On our Windows 2003 servers w. sp1 and running MS SQL Server 2000 w. sp4 we
see from time to time that we get this error "cannot allocate 64k
continous memory" or "SQL Server could not spawn process_loginread thread"
which could be caused by nothing left in the "Memtoleave" pool - I have now
search for advice on how to determine the values for the -g-switch - but
without much success - and if I just go for the "try&error" concept my
sql-server just allocates less and less ? - ehh - in which units are the
parameters for the -g option specified - bytes, kilobytes, mbytes - 4k block
? Any suggestions for measuring the actual running value of this pool -
memtoleave ?

best regards /ti

The units for -g are MB. The default is 256.

Is this a 32 or 64 bit system?

How much memory is on the system?

Are you running SQL Server with AWE enabled?

|||

Could you run the following query (when you are having this problem) and gives us the results.

Code Snippet

SELECT type, multi_pages_kb FROM sys.dm_os_memory_clerks WHERE multi_pages_kb > 0

ORDER BY multi_pages_kb DESC

WesleyB

Visit my SQL Server weblog @. http://dis4ea.blogspot.com

|||

SQL 2000 does not have DMVs. There's no easy way to profile memory usage in SQL 2000. See http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-US/library/aa175282(sql.80).aspx for more information

Thanks, Ron D.

|||Oops, I missed the 2000 part :-)

Memory, Available Bytes

I'm using a performance console system monitor to observe memory performance
of a Win 2K server, running 2K SQL server.
The available bytes indicates less than half of the system's total physical
memory of
4 gig. Could this be a possible indication of a memory leak. What, if any
possible
solutions are available. Thanks to everyone for being there to help.Hi
If the Server has 4GB RAM, and is Enterprise Edition of Windows 2000, is the
/3GB flag set in boot.ini ?
If not, only 2GB of the possible 3GB is presented to applications. The other
1GB is always reserved for the OS.
If it is Standard Edition of Windows 2000, supported is only 2GB of the 4GB.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"coenzyme" wrote:

> I'm using a performance console system monitor to observe memory performan
ce
> of a Win 2K server, running 2K SQL server.
> The available bytes indicates less than half of the system's total physica
l
> memory of
> 4 gig. Could this be a possible indication of a memory leak. What, if any
> possible
> solutions are available. Thanks to everyone for being there to help.

Memory, Available Bytes

I'm using a performance console system monitor to observe memory performance
of a Win 2K server, running 2K SQL server.
The available bytes indicates less than half of the system's total physical
memory of
4 gig. Could this be a possible indication of a memory leak. What, if any
possible
solutions are available. Thanks to everyone for being there to help.
Hi
If the Server has 4GB RAM, and is Enterprise Edition of Windows 2000, is the
/3GB flag set in boot.ini ?
If not, only 2GB of the possible 3GB is presented to applications. The other
1GB is always reserved for the OS.
If it is Standard Edition of Windows 2000, supported is only 2GB of the 4GB.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"coenzyme" wrote:

> I'm using a performance console system monitor to observe memory performance
> of a Win 2K server, running 2K SQL server.
> The available bytes indicates less than half of the system's total physical
> memory of
> 4 gig. Could this be a possible indication of a memory leak. What, if any
> possible
> solutions are available. Thanks to everyone for being there to help.

Memory, Available Bytes

I'm using a performance console system monitor to observe memory performance
of a Win 2K server, running 2K SQL server.
The available bytes indicates less than half of the system's total physical
memory of
4 gig. Could this be a possible indication of a memory leak. What, if any
possible
solutions are available. Thanks to everyone for being there to help.Hi
If the Server has 4GB RAM, and is Enterprise Edition of Windows 2000, is the
/3GB flag set in boot.ini ?
If not, only 2GB of the possible 3GB is presented to applications. The other
1GB is always reserved for the OS.
If it is Standard Edition of Windows 2000, supported is only 2GB of the 4GB.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"coenzyme" wrote:
> I'm using a performance console system monitor to observe memory performance
> of a Win 2K server, running 2K SQL server.
> The available bytes indicates less than half of the system's total physical
> memory of
> 4 gig. Could this be a possible indication of a memory leak. What, if any
> possible
> solutions are available. Thanks to everyone for being there to help.sql

Memory Utilization

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

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

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

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

Memory Utilization

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

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

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

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