In SQL Server 2014, how big for the block size is better for performance? 64 KB? 4 KB?
For normal database files, best practise is 64 KB disk block size. Not sure if it is same for memory-optimized filegroup.
I'm just beginning to experiment with memory optimised tables.
I have two sets of near identical tables - one set normal, the other set memory optimised with DURABILITY=SCHEMA_ONLY - and am running test queries against these. When I say that the two sets are "near identical", I mean that they are the same except for the primary keys: for the normal tables these are defined as PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED whereas for the memory-optimed ones they are defined as PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED HASH WITH (BUCKET_COUNT=nnnn) as per the requirements for such tables.
I then run a pair of test queries, again identical but one referencing the normal tables and the other referencing the memory optimised ones.
(The query uses an inner join on three tables with row counts of approx 3m rows, 100000 rows and 5000 rows.)
The query against the normal tables runs noticeably faster than that against the memory optimised ones. To try to find out why, I examined the execution plans. the plan for the memory optimised query suggests that I have a missing index: but of course I can't create this againsty a memory optimised table. Is this a bug or am I missing something? Why the performance between the two should be so different?
We are planning to upgrade. We are using Sql 2008R2 now. Which is the better option migrating to SQL 2012 or migrating to 2014?I am thinking 2014 has memory optimized tables and updatable column stored index. So it is better option.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have the following setup:
- An MSSQL 2014 Standard server that houses multiple small databases (in excess of a hundred).
- These databases are frequently dropped and restored by an application that uses this SQL Server.
- There is a business need for this setup at this time, so I can't get away from it. Therefore answers like "don't have so many small databases that are frequently dropped and restored" would be somewhat unuseful
This is the problem I have:
- When I connect SSMS 2014 to the server and expand the "Databases" node, it takes forever to display. In comparison, SSMS 2008 connected to SQL 2008R2 server with the same number of databases displays the Databases tree very quickly.
I ran a trace to see what exactly SSMS 2014 is doing. When the "Databases" node is expanded, it runs a query that checks each database for Memory-Optimized Tables (new and wonderful feature of SQL 2014 for sure, but I'm not using it, at least yet). Naturally, when you have to loop through over a hundred DBs, it takes time. Worse yet, if one of these DBs is in process of being restored, the query sits and waits to time out before proceeding to the next DB. Sometimes this causes outright timeouts. Here is the query:
use [MyDatabase]
SELECT
ISNULL((select top 1 1 from sys.filegroups FG where FG.[type] = 'FX'), 0) AS [HasMemoryOptimizedObjects]
To be sure, this is NOT a SQL Server performance issue. This server processes a rather heavy workload and has been doing so for over a month, and the workload completes within expected time limits or better. Even so I've done some basic performance measuring, and the server itself is quite all right.
Moreover, if I connect SSMS 2008 to it, I get an error message (Index out of bounds or somesuch), but SSMS 2008 does connect, and displays the Databases tree much faster than SSMS 2014.
I'd like to turn off the option to check for Memory Optimized Objects altogether, as I'm not using the feature.
I try to load data into a memOpt table (INSERT INTO ... SELECT ... FROM ...). The source table has a size about 1 Gb and 13 Mio Rows. During this load the LDF File grows to size of 350 GB (until the space if the disk is run out of space). The Server has about 110 GB Memory for the SQL Server reserved. The tempdB doesn't grow. The Bucket Size in the create statement has a size of 262144. The Hash key as 4 fields`(2 fields have the datatype int,1 has smallint, 1 has varchar(200). ) The disk for the datafiles has still space for the datafiles (incl. the hekaton files).
How can I reduce the size of the ldf files during the load of the data ?
I've a database with a memory optimized filegroup on it. How can I remove it?I have removed the memory optimized table I had on it, but when I try to remove the filegroup I receive an error.
View 12 Replies View RelatedI have a question concerning where to put certain database files for the followinig RAID configurations. The server has 2 RAID configs: 2 hds in a RAID 1 and 4 hds in a RAID 10. The server will host 4 database instances: A replicated db, a Reporting Services db (which technically constitutes 2 db instances) and an application db.
In order to get the best performance, should I put the OS, SQL binary and log files on the RAID 1 config with the data and tempdb on the RAID 10? If not, please explain the best solution. Thank you!
1. I need to make use of in memory engine for my pr-existed develop procedures ,tables ,index. do I need and code changes for application and how to store tables /indexes in OLTP memory
Assume table index may have primary key index as well.
2. If table with one primary index and 2 foreign constraints, 3 non clusters indexed. which one able o load to memory area and how t do that.
3. In memory is lock free zone. usually locks will happpen in RDMS context . how this works without locks.
Our development organization has created an application employing FILESTREAM, which through the pilot has been incorporated into a schema within our Data Warehouse Staging database. Going to production, the development and BI teams have determined that they want it separated out into a separate database, and they'd like to separate it in the current pilot environment (DEV). How can I best move (or at least copy) the existing FILESTREAM data from the current database into a new one?
View 6 Replies View RelatedI get "there was an unknown error applying the filestream settings("0x800710dc ") configuring my sql clustered instance with configuration manager. Not clear for me what I have to set for "Windows shared name".. Is it just an aliases or do I have to give the name of a shared disk ??
Get the same issue with SQL2012 and SQL2014..
-- Initialize Control Mechanism
DECLARE@Drive TINYINT,
@SQL VARCHAR(100)
SET@Drive = 97
-- Setup Staging Area
DECLARE@Drives TABLE
(
Drive CHAR(1),
Info VARCHAR(80)
)
WHILE @Drive <= 122
BEGIN
SET@SQL = 'EXEC XP_CMDSHELL ''fsutil volume diskfree ' + CHAR(@Drive) + ':'''
INSERT@Drives
(
Info
)
EXEC(@SQL)
UPDATE@Drives
SETDrive = CHAR(@Drive)
WHEREDrive IS NULL
SET@Drive = @Drive + 1
END
-- Show the expected output
SELECTDrive,
SUM(CASE WHEN Info LIKE 'Total # of bytes : %' THEN CAST(REPLACE(SUBSTRING(Info, 32, 48), CHAR(13), '') AS BIGINT) ELSE CAST(0 AS BIGINT) END) AS TotalBytes,
SUM(CASE WHEN Info LIKE 'Total # of free bytes : %' THEN CAST(REPLACE(SUBSTRING(Info, 32, 48), CHAR(13), '') AS BIGINT) ELSE CAST(0 AS BIGINT) END) AS FreeBytes,
SUM(CASE WHEN Info LIKE 'Total # of avail free bytes : %' THEN CAST(REPLACE(SUBSTRING(Info, 32, 48), CHAR(13), '') AS BIGINT) ELSE CAST(0 AS BIGINT) END) AS AvailFreeBytes
FROM(
SELECTDrive,
Info
FROM@Drives
WHEREInfo LIKE 'Total # of %'
) AS d
GROUP BYDrive
ORDER BYDrive
E 12°55'05.25"
N 56°04'39.16"
I read this: [URL] ....
Which says you must drop the database to remove the filegroup.
I deleted all the objects and then backed up the DB and restored it and the filegroup is still there.
I was skeptical but some of the comments made me think this might work.
Do I really have to restore from a pre-memory optimized state?
Using SQL 2012R2 Enterprise. I am unable to get the Size of the FILESTREAM data using the query below. The FileStreamSizeMB column is always Zero, but the other columns for log and data sizes are ok. The FileStream data directory has 2GB of data on the file system... Everything is working perfect, except I can not calculate size for FILESTREAM. My database is using the following Hard Disks.
D: = data files.
E: = log files.
F: = FILESTREAM data
with fs
[code]....
I have this table
CREATE TABLE [Sales].[Test_inmem]
(
[c1] [int] NOT NULL,
[c2] [nvarchar](20) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NOT NULL,
[ModifiedDate] [datetime2](7) NOT NULL CONSTRAINT [IMDF_Test_ModifiedDate] DEFAULT (sysdatetime()),
[Code] ....
I have to generate 1000000 random records into it. I tried various ways to insert records, but not being a developer could not do it. I hope to make the C1 as a serial number, C2 can be anything, C3 I want to be the timestamp.
How do i find Total allocated space and used space of a memory optimized filegroup?
use memory_optimized_db
Go
select (SUM(size)*8.0)/1024.0 as Space,
FILEGROUP_NAME ( data_space_id ) , type_desc from sys.database_files
group by data_space_id,type_desc;
above query gives "current used size of the container " of memory optimized file group but doesn't give Total space detail.
I've been having some trouble getting a single-column "varchar(5)" field to reliably use a table seek instead of a table scan. The production table in this case contains 25 million rows. As impressive as it is to scan 25 million rows in 35 seconds, the query should run much faster.
Here's a partial table description:
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Summaries_MO]
(
[SummaryId] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL,
[zipcode] [char](5) COLLATE Latin1_General_100_BIN2 NOT NULL,
[Golf] [bit] NULL,
[Homeowner] [bit] NULL,
[Code] .....
Typically, this table is accessed with a query that includes:
SELECT ...
FROM SummaryTable
WHERE ixZIP IN (SELECT ZipCode FROM @ZipCodesForMO)
This query insists on using a table scan. I've tried WITH (FORCESEEK) for example, but that just makes the query fail.
As I've investigated this issue I also tried:
SELECT * FROM Summaries WHERE ZipCode IN ('xxxxx', 'xxxxx', 'xxxxx')
When I run this query with 64 or fewer (actual, valid) ZIP codes, the query uses a table seek.But when I give it 65 or more ZIP codes it uses a table scan.
To summarize, the production query always uses a table scan, and when I specify 65 or more ZIP codes the query also uses a table scan. I'm wondering if the data type of the indexed column (Latin1_General_100_BIN2) is somehow the problem. I'll likely try converting the ZIP codes to an integer to see what happens.
I have a sharepoint content database in sql 2008 R2 (WSS_Content) that is at 230Gb size, but has 40% of it is empty space. This is because we have removed a large amount of old content from sharepoint. The log file is fine. I have 60GB left in my drive that host the database files. I would like to shrink the datafile to get disk space back. I found that under the files property, the WSS_Content data file's initial size is 228702 MB (220 Gb or so).
When i try to do a shrink file (data file) from management studio, i see the 60 GB of drive space keep dropping. So i have to kill the process. what i should do to reduce this data file.
why it keep using up all the free space in the drive when i try to shrink the data file?
We have a reporting job that will query the mainDB and do so come calculation and insert into reportingDB, there are a lot of blocking and performance issue when it query the mainDB so we have plan to read the secondary replica and do the processing there later to insert back into primaryDB (reportingDB).. for this we have implemented linked server but it gets timeout, I do not want to change the remote query timeout on server level so is there anyway to do this, Any one making use of secondary replica to do get the data by job?
View 4 Replies View RelatedThe Tabular model is showing 19 GB on disk, but it is acquiring around 40 GB in memory.
View 3 Replies View RelatedI try to find some feedback regarding setting the TempDB files on a RAM disk.Specifically I am looking for "production results" that could show the difference/benefit of such an usage.The tests on physical server and VM I already made have shown a boost in overall SQL Server 2012 performance on SQL Server instances housing data for SharePoint 2013 and Dynamics AX 2012 R2.Graphic below show differences between 5 different configuration on the same physical server:
- Physical HD: Server with local HD
- Physical SANEX1PRD: Server with TempDB files stored on a low-end SAN
- Physical SAN1: Server with TempDB files stored on a high-end SAN (around 100000 IOps)
- Physical SAN1 Jumbo: same setup with Jumbo Frame activated on NIC and DB engine
- Physical RAMdrive: with TempDB files stored on a 16 GB soft RAM drive within OS memory
Results were really impressive for the DB engine housing Dynamics AX data. My colleagues from the SharePoint team told me it also boosted a bit overall SharePoint performances but they did not have any baseline comparison to show.If you have some feedback, results, links, whatever I am interested.Indeed before setting this to all our SQL Server 2012 instances I y rather collect some *real world* feedback.
i need to display variables from one textbox to 2 or more tables in database, how do i do that?
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have a report where in I have a combination of matrix ,table data regions.
The problem what I am facing is that the data tables don't remain fixed in their position and they tend to move down.
E.g. table 1 and table 2 are on the same page in design time side by side (right and left)however during the runtime the table1 is pushed down and table2 is at its position .
Now how can I keep them all fixed in their same position. Most of the tables have fixed size rows and some who have high size of rows have been put at the end . What settings we can set?
OS: Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard
SQL Server: 2008 SP1 Standard
We have a database with about 500 GB of free disk space on data file and the database is being set to read only mode for the fore-see-able future. We would like to release this unused disk space. We know that we could shrink the data file and then work on re-indexing to remove fragmentation.we wanted to check if some other method like backup and restore of the database could free up unused disk space in the data file. if someone was able to release unused disk space on data file by implementing a backup and restore.
1. How to estimate how many free RAM I need. If I plan to create five 2 Gb memory optimized tables...10 Gb RAM for data and how many additional memory?
2. How to prevent memory overflow if there will be too much data in those tables? I dont want that my server down entirely
Can you please tell me what the largest disk partition size is for a clustered SQL Server 2005 installation (64 bit edition)? I have been told it is 2 Terabytes - can anyone confirm this?
Many thanks
Shirley
I'm using MS SQL Server 2008R2, Is there a way to find size on disk for view(s) ?
View 3 Replies View RelatedFellas!!This is a very complicated one and it took me a few days to figure outexactly what's going on, but here's the final story:I have a production environment running on .NET with a SQL Server(2000, SP3). The SQL Server is on a dedicated Proliant computer with2GB RAM (the actual SQLServer.exe process has dynamic memoryassignment and can reach up to 1.6GB RAM). Nothing else is running onthat specific computer.Once the SQLServer is started, it hits 300MB RAM (the minimum that wasset in the configuration of the server - remember, it is dynamicallyaquired).Then there is a .NET program that requests just about all the data theSQL Server contains (apart from a single table that contains roughly1.6 million rows and another table that contains about 10000 rowswhich are all of type IMAGE).Once all the data is retrieved, the RAM is at about 400MB. From thereon, every update I make to the data on the server causes the RAM to goup by a bit (that updates are done in a Transaction which of course iscommitted at the end). It seems that BLOB updates are the majorproblem in all of this. For some reason, uploading a blob of size 9MBcauses the RAM to go up by roughly 20MB and after commit it gose down10MB (total gain of roughly 10MB RAM). Eventually the SQLServerprocess hits its upper limit (1.6GB) and at this point it startsslowing down.Some performance checks showed me the SQLServer has a lot of diskactivity, it seems it is reading and writing pages of data from/to theHD all the time (which causes the queries to be much much muchslower).We have a development environment running the exact same code (it isthe exact same in everything, except for the amount of data stored inthe DB). This does not happen there at all.I have a few questions:1. Why is the RAM going up after BLOB updates?2. Why is the RAM going up at all?3. How can I tell the DB which tables should remain in the RAM at alltime (never swapped back to the HD?) - DBCC PINTABLE does not seem todo the job.It does not seem to have anything to do with the .NET code.Thank you very much,M Yamo.
View 4 Replies View RelatedWe can find free space on disks with 'xp_fixeddrives'.
I need script to find all disk size(total sizecapacity) in the servers?
Is there a way of creating an alert on free disk size?
I mean by using WMI event alert
Hello, everyone:
There are a lot of Access and Excel tables linked to my SQL Server (SQL2K SP3 on W2K). The end users update those likned tables. I am wondering if there is the block problem. If yes, how to prevent that? Thanks.
ZYT
our sql server databases are on a window cluster server.how to correct this issue or why would this happen? FILESTREAM data container 'M:TessituraDB DataDocuments' is corrupted. Database cannot recover.
View 0 Replies View RelatedHow to fix this SQL error event logg 17204 and 17207 ?
View 8 Replies View RelatedI found it pretty interesting. I checked the size of a database, before implementing database compression across all the user tables in a database. And Post implementation of compression too I checked the size of the database.
I did not find any difference. But if I expand the table and check propetires->storage and I can see that PAGE compression is implemented across all the tables, but no compaction in the size of the db. It still remains the same.