Hi,
We have a publisher and 2 subsribers. The subscribers are spanning 2
transactions/sec. We have inplemented merge replication and it was
scheduled to occur every 5 min. When we start the replication, the
replications is going on without any problem for sometime(may be some
hours), but after that it fails with the message, "the process could
not deliver inserts at the publisher". That too we have 3 articles to
replicate. The first article is replicating fine.But the second article
fails with this error message "the process could not deliver inserts at
the publisher".We have SAN. When I searched for this error in google,
it asked me to increase the queytimeout value in agent profile. So I
increased it from 300 to 600, but in vain. If anybody could help me in
this, that would be great.
Thanks,
Preethi.
Preethi,
perhaps you could further increase the timeout? I'd also implement logging
(http://support.microsoft.com/?id=312292). After that, have a look at the
spid using dbcc inputbuffer to see what is happening on synchronization. You
might also want to run sp_who2 to look for any blocking occurring.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
sql
Showing posts with label sec. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sec. Show all posts
Monday, March 26, 2012
Friday, February 24, 2012
Memory Performance counter?
Can anyone tell me what is considered a bad number for the "Memory:
Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a small
amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"?
Thanks RichDBA wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what is considered a bad number for the "Memory:
> Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a small
> amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"?
> Thanks Rich
It depends - you first need to determine what is "normal" for your
server. A lot of paging activity usually, but not always, indicates
that something other than SQL is demanding memory. For instance, on my
servers, I have no page swapping during the majority of the day. During
the period of time when my tape backup agent is backing up the SQL
backups, then I'll get a flurry of paging activity. When backups
complete, the paging stops.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||The Memory:pages/sec counter indicates hard paging activities. On a box
dedicated to SQL Server, if its value is greater than zero for any sustained
period of time, you should look into it.
Linchi
"DBA" wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what is considered a bad number for the "Memory:
> Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a small
> amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"?
> Thanks Rich|||Those pages are actually the backup files being written. The write
mechanism used by SQL Backup triggers this counter. This happens both for
local file or tape writes and network file writes. It isn't caused by
memory pressure, it is just an artifact of writing backup files. As such,
you have to disregard the non-zero counters when a SQL is running an active
backup. Yet another operating complication with SQL.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Tracy McKibben" <tracy@.realsqlguy.com> wrote in message
news:enjwmcBsGHA.2240@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> DBA wrote:
>> Can anyone tell me what is considered a bad number for the "Memory:
>> Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a
>> small amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"? Thanks
>> Rich
> It depends - you first need to determine what is "normal" for your server.
> A lot of paging activity usually, but not always, indicates that something
> other than SQL is demanding memory. For instance, on my servers, I have
> no page swapping during the majority of the day. During the period of
> time when my tape backup agent is backing up the SQL backups, then I'll
> get a flurry of paging activity. When backups complete, the paging stops.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Geoff N. Hiten wrote:
> Those pages are actually the backup files being written. The write
> mechanism used by SQL Backup triggers this counter. This happens both for
> local file or tape writes and network file writes. It isn't caused by
> memory pressure, it is just an artifact of writing backup files. As such,
> you have to disregard the non-zero counters when a SQL is running an active
> backup. Yet another operating complication with SQL.
>
That was basically the point I was trying to make. Also, I don't see
excessive paging when *SQL* is running a backup, I see paging when my
tape backup agent is backing up the SQL backups. I dump SQL backups to
disk, then back those dumps up to tape.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||We're running sql 2000 on 64bit itanium server with 12gig ram. We have batch
processes that run all hours of the day as well internet users hitting the db
via a web application. The memory Pages/Sec are consistently between 3000 and
6000. Is this reasonable or excessive?
Thanks Rich
"Linchi Shea" wrote:
> The Memory:pages/sec counter indicates hard paging activities. On a box
> dedicated to SQL Server, if its value is greater than zero for any sustained
> period of time, you should look into it.
> Linchi
> "DBA" wrote:
> > Can anyone tell me what is considered a bad number for the "Memory:
> > Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a small
> > amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"?
> >
> > Thanks Rich
Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a small
amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"?
Thanks RichDBA wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what is considered a bad number for the "Memory:
> Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a small
> amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"?
> Thanks Rich
It depends - you first need to determine what is "normal" for your
server. A lot of paging activity usually, but not always, indicates
that something other than SQL is demanding memory. For instance, on my
servers, I have no page swapping during the majority of the day. During
the period of time when my tape backup agent is backing up the SQL
backups, then I'll get a flurry of paging activity. When backups
complete, the paging stops.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||The Memory:pages/sec counter indicates hard paging activities. On a box
dedicated to SQL Server, if its value is greater than zero for any sustained
period of time, you should look into it.
Linchi
"DBA" wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what is considered a bad number for the "Memory:
> Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a small
> amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"?
> Thanks Rich|||Those pages are actually the backup files being written. The write
mechanism used by SQL Backup triggers this counter. This happens both for
local file or tape writes and network file writes. It isn't caused by
memory pressure, it is just an artifact of writing backup files. As such,
you have to disregard the non-zero counters when a SQL is running an active
backup. Yet another operating complication with SQL.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Tracy McKibben" <tracy@.realsqlguy.com> wrote in message
news:enjwmcBsGHA.2240@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> DBA wrote:
>> Can anyone tell me what is considered a bad number for the "Memory:
>> Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a
>> small amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"? Thanks
>> Rich
> It depends - you first need to determine what is "normal" for your server.
> A lot of paging activity usually, but not always, indicates that something
> other than SQL is demanding memory. For instance, on my servers, I have
> no page swapping during the majority of the day. During the period of
> time when my tape backup agent is backing up the SQL backups, then I'll
> get a flurry of paging activity. When backups complete, the paging stops.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Geoff N. Hiten wrote:
> Those pages are actually the backup files being written. The write
> mechanism used by SQL Backup triggers this counter. This happens both for
> local file or tape writes and network file writes. It isn't caused by
> memory pressure, it is just an artifact of writing backup files. As such,
> you have to disregard the non-zero counters when a SQL is running an active
> backup. Yet another operating complication with SQL.
>
That was basically the point I was trying to make. Also, I don't see
excessive paging when *SQL* is running a backup, I see paging when my
tape backup agent is backing up the SQL backups. I dump SQL backups to
disk, then back those dumps up to tape.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||We're running sql 2000 on 64bit itanium server with 12gig ram. We have batch
processes that run all hours of the day as well internet users hitting the db
via a web application. The memory Pages/Sec are consistently between 3000 and
6000. Is this reasonable or excessive?
Thanks Rich
"Linchi Shea" wrote:
> The Memory:pages/sec counter indicates hard paging activities. On a box
> dedicated to SQL Server, if its value is greater than zero for any sustained
> period of time, you should look into it.
> Linchi
> "DBA" wrote:
> > Can anyone tell me what is considered a bad number for the "Memory:
> > Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a small
> > amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"?
> >
> > Thanks Rich
Memory Performance counter?
Can anyone tell me what is considered a bad number for the "Memory:
Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a smal
l
amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"?
Thanks RichDBA wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what is considered a bad number for the "Memory:
> Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a sm
all
> amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"?
> Thanks Rich
It depends - you first need to determine what is "normal" for your
server. A lot of paging activity usually, but not always, indicates
that something other than SQL is demanding memory. For instance, on my
servers, I have no page swapping during the majority of the day. During
the period of time when my tape backup agent is backing up the SQL
backups, then I'll get a flurry of paging activity. When backups
complete, the paging stops.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||The Memory:pages/sec counter indicates hard paging activities. On a box
dedicated to SQL Server, if its value is greater than zero for any sustained
period of time, you should look into it.
Linchi
"DBA" wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what is considered a bad number for the "Memory:
> Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a sm
all
> amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"?
> Thanks Rich|||Those pages are actually the backup files being written. The write
mechanism used by SQL Backup triggers this counter. This happens both for
local file or tape writes and network file writes. It isn't caused by
memory pressure, it is just an artifact of writing backup files. As such,
you have to disregard the non-zero counters when a SQL is running an active
backup. Yet another operating complication with SQL.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Tracy McKibben" <tracy@.realsqlguy.com> wrote in message
news:enjwmcBsGHA.2240@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> DBA wrote:
> It depends - you first need to determine what is "normal" for your server.
> A lot of paging activity usually, but not always, indicates that something
> other than SQL is demanding memory. For instance, on my servers, I have
> no page swapping during the majority of the day. During the period of
> time when my tape backup agent is backing up the SQL backups, then I'll
> get a flurry of paging activity. When backups complete, the paging stops.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Geoff N. Hiten wrote:
> Those pages are actually the backup files being written. The write
> mechanism used by SQL Backup triggers this counter. This happens both fo
r
> local file or tape writes and network file writes. It isn't caused by
> memory pressure, it is just an artifact of writing backup files. As such,
> you have to disregard the non-zero counters when a SQL is running an activ
e
> backup. Yet another operating complication with SQL.
>
That was basically the point I was trying to make. Also, I don't see
excessive paging when *SQL* is running a backup, I see paging when my
tape backup agent is backing up the SQL backups. I dump SQL backups to
disk, then back those dumps up to tape.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||We're running sql 2000 on 64bit itanium server with 12gig ram. We have batch
processes that run all hours of the day as well internet users hitting the d
b
via a web application. The memory Pages/Sec are consistently between 3000 an
d
6000. Is this reasonable or excessive?
Thanks Rich
"Linchi Shea" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> The Memory:pages/sec counter indicates hard paging activities. On a box
> dedicated to SQL Server, if its value is greater than zero for any sustain
ed
> period of time, you should look into it.
> Linchi
> "DBA" wrote:
>
Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a smal
l
amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"?
Thanks RichDBA wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what is considered a bad number for the "Memory:
> Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a sm
all
> amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"?
> Thanks Rich
It depends - you first need to determine what is "normal" for your
server. A lot of paging activity usually, but not always, indicates
that something other than SQL is demanding memory. For instance, on my
servers, I have no page swapping during the majority of the day. During
the period of time when my tape backup agent is backing up the SQL
backups, then I'll get a flurry of paging activity. When backups
complete, the paging stops.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||The Memory:pages/sec counter indicates hard paging activities. On a box
dedicated to SQL Server, if its value is greater than zero for any sustained
period of time, you should look into it.
Linchi
"DBA" wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what is considered a bad number for the "Memory:
> Pages/sec" counter? Microsoft indicates a number greater than zero by a sm
all
> amount is acceptable, but what number is a "small amount"?
> Thanks Rich|||Those pages are actually the backup files being written. The write
mechanism used by SQL Backup triggers this counter. This happens both for
local file or tape writes and network file writes. It isn't caused by
memory pressure, it is just an artifact of writing backup files. As such,
you have to disregard the non-zero counters when a SQL is running an active
backup. Yet another operating complication with SQL.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Tracy McKibben" <tracy@.realsqlguy.com> wrote in message
news:enjwmcBsGHA.2240@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> DBA wrote:
> It depends - you first need to determine what is "normal" for your server.
> A lot of paging activity usually, but not always, indicates that something
> other than SQL is demanding memory. For instance, on my servers, I have
> no page swapping during the majority of the day. During the period of
> time when my tape backup agent is backing up the SQL backups, then I'll
> get a flurry of paging activity. When backups complete, the paging stops.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Geoff N. Hiten wrote:
> Those pages are actually the backup files being written. The write
> mechanism used by SQL Backup triggers this counter. This happens both fo
r
> local file or tape writes and network file writes. It isn't caused by
> memory pressure, it is just an artifact of writing backup files. As such,
> you have to disregard the non-zero counters when a SQL is running an activ
e
> backup. Yet another operating complication with SQL.
>
That was basically the point I was trying to make. Also, I don't see
excessive paging when *SQL* is running a backup, I see paging when my
tape backup agent is backing up the SQL backups. I dump SQL backups to
disk, then back those dumps up to tape.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||We're running sql 2000 on 64bit itanium server with 12gig ram. We have batch
processes that run all hours of the day as well internet users hitting the d
b
via a web application. The memory Pages/Sec are consistently between 3000 an
d
6000. Is this reasonable or excessive?
Thanks Rich
"Linchi Shea" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> The Memory:pages/sec counter indicates hard paging activities. On a box
> dedicated to SQL Server, if its value is greater than zero for any sustain
ed
> period of time, you should look into it.
> Linchi
> "DBA" wrote:
>
Memory Paging
I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
hour).
Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major paging
culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have to
have the MOM stuff on there.
What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
SQL?
Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?
The paging is really not that excessive. But in order to reduce paging you
need to ensure there is always enough memory for the apps other than SQL
Server as well as the OS. So 2GB might not be enough to satisfy these other
apps. I don't know how much MOM requires but I am suppressed the 2GB is not
enough for these.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Budman" <Budman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F55C30B9-B696-4303-8FF4-F9B51E0F49FF@.microsoft.com...
>I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
> that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
> hour).
> Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major
> paging
> culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have
> to
> have the MOM stuff on there.
> What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
> SQL?
> Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?
|||wmiprvse is a process that is an instance of a wmi provider
(there are some trojans/worms that hide in this proccess also)
but it is more likely mom is using this provider.
RemoteRegistry does what its name implies, it lets users access the registry
remotely....it is a service which CAN be disabled...but i dont know about
moms dependencies on this either.
"Budman" <Budman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F55C30B9-B696-4303-8FF4-F9B51E0F49FF@.microsoft.com...
>I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
> that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
> hour).
> Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major
> paging
> culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have
> to
> have the MOM stuff on there.
> What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
> SQL?
> Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?
that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
hour).
Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major paging
culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have to
have the MOM stuff on there.
What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
SQL?
Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?
The paging is really not that excessive. But in order to reduce paging you
need to ensure there is always enough memory for the apps other than SQL
Server as well as the OS. So 2GB might not be enough to satisfy these other
apps. I don't know how much MOM requires but I am suppressed the 2GB is not
enough for these.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Budman" <Budman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F55C30B9-B696-4303-8FF4-F9B51E0F49FF@.microsoft.com...
>I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
> that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
> hour).
> Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major
> paging
> culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have
> to
> have the MOM stuff on there.
> What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
> SQL?
> Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?
|||wmiprvse is a process that is an instance of a wmi provider
(there are some trojans/worms that hide in this proccess also)
but it is more likely mom is using this provider.
RemoteRegistry does what its name implies, it lets users access the registry
remotely....it is a service which CAN be disabled...but i dont know about
moms dependencies on this either.
"Budman" <Budman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F55C30B9-B696-4303-8FF4-F9B51E0F49FF@.microsoft.com...
>I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
> that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
> hour).
> Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major
> paging
> culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have
> to
> have the MOM stuff on there.
> What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
> SQL?
> Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?
Memory Paging
I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
hour).
Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major paging
culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have t
o
have the MOM stuff on there.
What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
SQL?
Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?The paging is really not that excessive. But in order to reduce paging you
need to ensure there is always enough memory for the apps other than SQL
Server as well as the OS. So 2GB might not be enough to satisfy these other
apps. I don't know how much MOM requires but I am suppressed the 2GB is not
enough for these.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Budman" <Budman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F55C30B9-B696-4303-8FF4-F9B51E0F49FF@.microsoft.com...
>I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
> that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
> hour).
> Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major
> paging
> culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have
> to
> have the MOM stuff on there.
> What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
> SQL?
> Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?|||wmiprvse is a process that is an instance of a wmi provider
(there are some trojans/worms that hide in this proccess also)
but it is more likely mom is using this provider.
RemoteRegistry does what its name implies, it lets users access the registry
remotely....it is a service which CAN be disabled...but i dont know about
moms dependencies on this either.
"Budman" <Budman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F55C30B9-B696-4303-8FF4-F9B51E0F49FF@.microsoft.com...
>I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
> that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
> hour).
> Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major
> paging
> culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have
> to
> have the MOM stuff on there.
> What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
> SQL?
> Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?
that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
hour).
Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major paging
culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have t
o
have the MOM stuff on there.
What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
SQL?
Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?The paging is really not that excessive. But in order to reduce paging you
need to ensure there is always enough memory for the apps other than SQL
Server as well as the OS. So 2GB might not be enough to satisfy these other
apps. I don't know how much MOM requires but I am suppressed the 2GB is not
enough for these.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Budman" <Budman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F55C30B9-B696-4303-8FF4-F9B51E0F49FF@.microsoft.com...
>I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
> that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
> hour).
> Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major
> paging
> culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have
> to
> have the MOM stuff on there.
> What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
> SQL?
> Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?|||wmiprvse is a process that is an instance of a wmi provider
(there are some trojans/worms that hide in this proccess also)
but it is more likely mom is using this provider.
RemoteRegistry does what its name implies, it lets users access the registry
remotely....it is a service which CAN be disabled...but i dont know about
moms dependencies on this either.
"Budman" <Budman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F55C30B9-B696-4303-8FF4-F9B51E0F49FF@.microsoft.com...
>I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
> that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
> hour).
> Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major
> paging
> culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have
> to
> have the MOM stuff on there.
> What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
> SQL?
> Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?
Memory Paging
I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
hour).
Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major paging
culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have to
have the MOM stuff on there.
What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
SQL?
Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?The paging is really not that excessive. But in order to reduce paging you
need to ensure there is always enough memory for the apps other than SQL
Server as well as the OS. So 2GB might not be enough to satisfy these other
apps. I don't know how much MOM requires but I am suppressed the 2GB is not
enough for these.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Budman" <Budman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F55C30B9-B696-4303-8FF4-F9B51E0F49FF@.microsoft.com...
>I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
> that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
> hour).
> Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major
> paging
> culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have
> to
> have the MOM stuff on there.
> What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
> SQL?
> Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?|||wmiprvse is a process that is an instance of a wmi provider
(there are some trojans/worms that hide in this proccess also)
but it is more likely mom is using this provider.
RemoteRegistry does what its name implies, it lets users access the registry
remotely....it is a service which CAN be disabled...but i dont know about
moms dependencies on this either.
"Budman" <Budman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F55C30B9-B696-4303-8FF4-F9B51E0F49FF@.microsoft.com...
>I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
> that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
> hour).
> Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major
> paging
> culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have
> to
> have the MOM stuff on there.
> What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
> SQL?
> Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?
that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
hour).
Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major paging
culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have to
have the MOM stuff on there.
What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
SQL?
Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?The paging is really not that excessive. But in order to reduce paging you
need to ensure there is always enough memory for the apps other than SQL
Server as well as the OS. So 2GB might not be enough to satisfy these other
apps. I don't know how much MOM requires but I am suppressed the 2GB is not
enough for these.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Budman" <Budman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F55C30B9-B696-4303-8FF4-F9B51E0F49FF@.microsoft.com...
>I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
> that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
> hour).
> Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major
> paging
> culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have
> to
> have the MOM stuff on there.
> What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
> SQL?
> Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?|||wmiprvse is a process that is an instance of a wmi provider
(there are some trojans/worms that hide in this proccess also)
but it is more likely mom is using this provider.
RemoteRegistry does what its name implies, it lets users access the registry
remotely....it is a service which CAN be disabled...but i dont know about
moms dependencies on this either.
"Budman" <Budman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F55C30B9-B696-4303-8FF4-F9B51E0F49FF@.microsoft.com...
>I have a SQL Server 2000 running on Windows 2003 (both Enterprise Editions)
> that is almost constantly paging OS processes (>500pg/sec 6-10 times an
> hour).
> Its a 4 proc box, and I have 10GB RAM (8 to SQL; 2 to OS). The major
> paging
> culprits are MOM Hosts and Services, wmiprvse, and RemoteRegistry. I have
> to
> have the MOM stuff on there.
> What are the other 2, and do they need to be running on a box dedicated to
> SQL?
> Any other ideas for helping me lower my paging rate?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)