I am new to this so I hope I'm doing it right.
We are in the process of replacing a computer that currently has SQL 2005 Management Studio Express installed. We are looking at a Intel Core 2 Quad processor (Q6700) and want to know if SQL will be able to make full use of a quad core. Thanks
hi all,
I was under the impression that SQL Server 2005 can install on dual processor, quad core Intel machines.
Here's what we have: Intel Quad Core Xeon (E7340) @ 2.4Ghz. (8 way)
Has anyone encountered any issues w/ this setup -- particularly on this Intel CPU version?
thank you,
Cosmin
The number of data files within a single filegroup should equal to the number of CPU cores. So for a quad core CPU there should be 4 data files. Is there anything that one need to take care besides creating the data files for a filegroup. I belieev SQL takes care of itself how to update data files .
View 5 Replies View RelatedDoes SQL 2005 Enterprise utilize Xeon Quad Cores? or should i go with Dual Cores?
if it DOESNT, any idea if they plan on releasing a service back to allow it to?
With two 64 bit quad core processors on the server, we have 8 processor cores. Does this mean that we'll need Windows Server 2003 x64 Enterprise edition because Standard only supports up to 4-way SMP?
Thanks!
We are in process of moving to 64 bit HP servers with sql2005 standard edition. We were just wondering which is better option, to get a server with 2 dual core processor or to get a srver with just 4 processor? How does SQL2005 handle the hypertheading of dual processor?
Thanks,
Carlos
ok i have intel dual core i have a conflict only in playing a game black hawk down it gives me a run stop error. locks up and has to be restarted. microsoft gave me a fix but when i do the fix it causes me to get a system dump error on the game. i can update my web site do anything else let daughter play her games or do her school work and nothing happens. i was told i needed to set up the dual core so that my programs dont conflict i am a moron when it comes to computers is there a fix for this or i am i just going to have to go back to single core processor for now thanks
View 1 Replies View RelatedHello,
Is performance of web application (ASP.NET + SQL Server 2005 Wrg edition + Win Server 2003 Web edition) running on server with one core duo/4 CPU generally comparable to the performance of the same application running on the same server with 2/4 physical CPU’s?
Thank you for your ideas!
Jan
My SQL Server 2000 does not use the accent insensitive collation setting(collation containing _AI) in full-text serches:While SELECT * FROM <table> WHERE <column> LIKE '%a%' returns 'Mäuse',SELECT * FROM <table> WHERE CONTAINS(*, 'a') does not.Setting 'default full-text language' to neutral (0) does not help.How can I make full-text searches accent insensitive?Thanks for any ideas!Matthias
View 3 Replies View RelatedDoes anyone know what microsoft means when it claims that SQL 2005 inprocessor licensing mode is optimized for web use?Stuart
View 2 Replies View Related
Hi there
Every once in a while (every couple weeks or so) one of our SQL Server 2005 servers will have its performance take a dive. Response time on applications will slow way down. In checking €˜Task Manager€™ the CPU utilization will be up to 50 to 70 percent for the SQL server service. We have tried looking at €˜Perf Mon€™ there doesn€™t seem to be any consistent performance item that is out of whack. On occasion, it may appear to be a lot of paging going on, but I don€™t know what application is causing it. We€™ve looked at SP_who2 to see if there are any blocks, but there do not appear to be any. Though on occasion we will see a €˜Killed/roll-back€™ entry on €˜SP_who2€™ that has a lot of CPU cycles that, at least at one point in time, had a lot of counts against it.
In looking at a trace that we have set up, we don€™t see anything glaring that is held up or even a recurring theme (application) on the list that would point to a problem.
We find that by restarting the SQL Server service, this resolves the issue for another couple of weeks.
Is there something that I can look at that would tell me at least, what PC name is doing all of the IO against the database. I could then at least call the user and say €˜Hey, what are you doing€™ so that we can start to narrow down what is going on.
Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
We are in the process of installing SQL 2005 Standard Edition on Servers with two Intel Xeon 2.6Ghz processors. We want to buy a processor licence for each server rather than CAL's, but do we have to buy two processor licences or is it possible to configure SQL 2005 to only use one processor on a dual processor server and thus only need to buy a single processor licence.
View 5 Replies View RelatedI was browsing Microsoft's SQL Server site, looking forsome details about SQL Server 2005. Didn't find whatI was looking for...I'm thinking about moving an existing SQL Server 2000workload to a new box, using SQL Server 2005, andmaybe the 64-bit version.My questions are:1. What is the current target date for release of SQL Server 2005?Will 64-bit ship when 32-bit ships?2. Will 64-bit SQL Server 2005 require a special versionof Windows Server 2003 (e.g. Windows Server 2003 Enterprise x64)?Will it work with both Intel and AMD processors?3. How many CPUs, and how much memory, will be supported bySQL Server 2005, 32-bit and 64-bit, on each OS that can runSQL Server 2005.I'm looking for a chart here, something like the chart onpage 117 of Kalen Delaney's "Inside SQL Server 2000" book.SQL Server 2005 SQL Server 2005Feature Enterprise 32-bit Enterprise 64-bit------------------- ----------------- -----------------CPUs supportedWin Srvr 2003:Win Srvr 2003 Adv:Win Srvr 2003 Ent x64:Physical memorysupportedWin Srvr 2003:Win Srvr 2003 Adv:Win Srvr 2003 Ent x64:Has Microsoft published this info, and I just can find it?
View 1 Replies View RelatedHi,
We have recently tested upgrading our web service from sql 2000 to 2005 sp1. The upgrade went smoothly enough, however we now have the problem of the sqlserver.exe process taking 90-100 % of the processors time, but using only 100 MB of memory.
We have 6GB available and we are running the enterprise editions of Windows 2003 and SQL 2005.
Machine specs,
DL380 G2, 2 X 2.8 Ghz Zeon, 6GB ram, Raid 5, database partition of 140 GB, Log partition of 35 GB.
Db is 25 GB, Log is 12 GB. Largest table has 32 million rows.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Rob
Hi,
I'm trying to install SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition 64-bit on a 64-bit instance of Windows 2008 running as Server Core. I read about an issue in KB article 920201, but I don't even get that far. The setup first tries to install .NET Framework 2.0, which fails with error message:
Error 70243 installing .NET Framework 2.0
I tried installing .NET Framework separately, which indicates that I need to install Internet Explorer 5.01. I'm reluctant to try that, so I'd like to know if the people that actually got to the issue in KB920201 installed IE first (is that even possible?).
Michiel
I am looking at running SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition in a clustered environment (2 nodes) and am not sure if the 4 processor limit applies to the number of processors per node or the number of processors it will run on in the entire cluster. Could someone please clarify this for me?
View 4 Replies View RelatedHi.
I am not able to install "SQL 2005 Server Express Edition " on my AMD64 bit Pc..
My OS is: Windows XP Pro (SP 2)
Plz help me as soon as possible..
Mandar
Hello all,
We've had a problem for a few months now that has completely stumped us. We are running a heavily cursored massive data manipulation process on a 32 bit SQL Server instance running on a virtual machine, running ontop of VMWare, with the following specs
Processors: 2x2674MHz processors
Memory: 4GB
RAID 10 disk config
When we run our process on this machine, in total it runs in 30 hours.
When this process is run on another 32 bit server with the following specs
Processors: 8x3658MHx processors
Memory: 8 GB
SAN w/ RAID 5 disk config
It runs 25% slower
But here is the real kicker. When this process is run on a 64 bit server with the following specs
Processors: 8x3658MHz processors
Memory: 8 GB
SAN w/ RAID 5 disk config
It runs 75% slower.
This process consists solely of stored procedures written in TSQL. The weird thing is that on our smaller server, the CPUs' % utilization are evenly balanced (at 20-30%) when this large data manipulation process is running. However on the bigger servers, SQL Server latches onto a single processor and doesn't load balance across other processors. Such that what we're seeing is that only one processor out of the eight will be utilized and it will be throttled at 90% while the other 7 are at zero.
The default configuration settings in all three places.
Has anyone ever seen any behavior like this, where only one processor gets used by SQL Server during processing? Granted our processes are single threaded b/c they are using cursors but, it seems that the single thread shouldn't be restricted to one processor.
Any thoughts?
I am using Full Text Index to index emails stored in BLOB column in a table. Index process parses stored emails, and, if there is one or more files attached to the email these documents get indexed too. In result when I'm querying the full text index for a word or phrase I am getting reference to the email containing the word of phrase if interest if the word was used in the email body OR if it was used in any document attached to the email.
How to distinguish in a Full Text query that the result came from an embedded document rather than from "main" document? Or if that's not possible how to disable indexing of embedded documents?
My goal is either to give a user an option if he or she wants to search emails (email bodies only) OR emails AND documents attached to them, or at least clearly indicate in the returned result the real source where the word or phrase has been found.
I am running a query on a SQL Server 2005 database and encounter the following error message
"Internal Query Processor Error: The query processor encountered an unexpected error during execution."
There is a join between a table on the 2005 database and another on a 2000 database. I have run DBCC CHECKTABLE and found no errors on the two tables.
Anybody with ideas?
Thanks
I have a SProc that runs across many clients without any problems. Every now and then, though, I get the following error:
Internal Query Processor Error: The query processor encountered an unexpected error during execution. [SQLSTATE 42000] (Error 8630).
All I am doing is populating Temp tables with some data and then joining them together to create a Global Temp table that is being BCP'd to a network share.
Has anyone come across this error in SQL Server 2005? I cannot find anything on Google or Microcsoft.
Thanks,
Robert
Hi Everyone:
*Before* I actually call up Microsoft SQL Customer Support Services and ask them, I wanted to ping other people to see if you have ever ran into this exact error
"Internal Query Processor Error: The query processor could not produce a query plan. For more information, contact Customer Support Services."
I would have searched the forums myself, but at this moment in time, search is broken :(
If anyone has run into this error before, what conditions would exist that this could happen? That is, if I can sniff this out with suggestions from the community, I would be happy to do so.
It is an oddity because if I alter a couple subqueries in the where clause [ i.e., where tab.Col = (select val from tab2 where id='122') ]to not have subqueries [hand coded values], then the t-sql result is fine. It's not as if subqueries are oddities... I've used them when appropriate.
fwiw - Not a newbie t-sql guy. ISV working almost daily with t-sql since MS SQL 2000. I have never seen this message before...at least I don't recall ever seeing it.
Thanks in advance for other suggested examination paths.
SQL Server 2005 9.0.3161 on Win 2k3 R2
I receive the following error:
"Error: 8624, Severity: 16, State: 1 Internal Query Processor Error: The query processor could not produce a query plan. For more information, contact Customer Support Services."
I have traced this to an insert statement that executes as part of a stored procedure.
INSERT INTO ledger (journal__id, account__id,account_recv_info__id,amount)
VALUES (@journal_id, @acct_id, @acct_recv_id, @amount)
There is also an auto-increment column called id. There are FK contraints on all of the columns ending in "__id". I have found that if I remove the contraint on account__id the procedure will execute without error. None of the other constraints seem to make a difference. Of course I don't want to remove this key because it is important to the database integrity and should not be causing problems, but apparently it confuses the optimizer.
Also, the strange thing is that I can get the procedure to execute without error when I run it directly through management studio, but I receive the error when executing from .NET code or anything using ODBC (Access).
Problem: We have a set of sql queries and one core duo processor. We want one subset of queries would be executed on first core of our CPU and the rest of queries would be executed on the second core of CPU. We are using MS SQL Server 2005 – Workgroup edition.
Is there any way how to do this with one instance of SQL Server or with two instances at least (is there any way how to force an instance A to use CPU1 (first core of core duo CPU) and instance B to use CPU2 (second core of core duo CPU)) ?
Thank you for your ideas!
Jan
We just purchased a Quad Core xeon server. It it my understanding that express can only utilize a single cpu/core. Is there a way I can setup windows or ms sql server to dedicate one particular core soley for ms sql?
View 3 Replies View RelatedHello,
I need change a SQL Server 2005 configuration, this service is placed in a server with 2 Physical processors dualcore and 4 processing nucleus.
I need that it´s use only one of the Physical Processors....How i do that?
TKS
Is it true that SQL Server treats it as 2 processors and Microsoft only charges 1 license?
That sounds VERY un-Microsoftish......but I'd better shut up....MS is probably in the process of figuing out how to nik me more for my license.)
I configured an SSIS package to collect information about servers in our environment and as a part of it the package collects the Physical and Logical CPU's. Since we are on per-core licensing for SQL Servers, i would need to get the exact core count. I can simply do Logical cpu / Physical CPU to get the Core count assuming that hyperthreading is turned on. What if the hyperthreading is not on, then i would end up getting the wrong Core count.
I query the registry to get this info. I would like to get your inputs for getting the exact core count on Windows servers with Intel and AMD processors.
Hi,
I am running MSSQL 2005 Standard edition on a two processor Intel Xeon 3GHz (dual-core) with 8GB RAM.
I notice in "Windows task manager CPU performance" while running a long SQL statement (takes 1.5 hours), only 1 logical (out of 4) is utilised at >70%. The remaining 3 logical processors hover around 10%
Using Performance monitor, the average read queue, write queue, and pages/sec also hovers around 25%, indicating no heavy physical disk/memory loading.
How can I set to utilise more physical/logical processor to improve the MSSQL performance ?
Thanks.
Hi all,
I am have database consist of 10 tables, I want to make log transactions for this tables, So any act happened on these tables, such as adding or modifying or deleting record, I want to put this information somewhere in the database, to determine the user who has done such acts on these tables.
I would high appreciate for any assistant.
Hi,
I have an ASPNETDB.MDF (asp.net membership/profile db) that was generated for SQL Express, it has user information I need to keep.
I have SQLExpress and full SQL Server 2005 running on the server. I want to remove SQL Express from the server.
So can I simply do a backup of the SQL Express membership db and restore it to full SQL and change the connection string in my app or
do i need to run the membership wizard on full sql and then do the backup / restore?
Or is there another way.
Thanks
We are trying to work with our developers to upgrade to SQL 2000 from SQL 7 for a critical applicaion and all looks good in testing for the most part. The concern that our developers have is that in order for the application to work on the test SQL 2000 server they had to delete a core data type (bigint) for the application to work. It doesn't appear to have any negative affects and we know for sure that the application database does not need that data type at all.
Can someone verify that there are no requirements for SQL 2000 needing to have this data type? They are worried that something within SQL may rely on it and we would find out the hard way in production possibly.
Hi,Is there a reason why we have to pay more for licensing for a differentkind of processor?Why are we not charged for the Hyperthreading on some processors also.If Oracle is really conserned about the low end business market (smalland medium), then they should drop their attitude on Dual Coreprocessors.If they start charging as if it was a normal processor, and ask thenormal price, then they would get more of this market coming in.As long as Oracle keeps on having the attitude of charging more,because Intel or some other cpu vendor decided to mprove theirprocessors because of overheating problems, I will have the attitudethat I will keep on reoccomending alternatives for Orcle like Mysql /Postgre sql / Sybase, etc to the small/medium sector.Microsoft's pricing model on double core processors suddenly soundallot better.Oracle are shooting themselves in the foot! Or am I the only personfeeling this way?Shaun O'Reilly
View 2 Replies View Related