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?
I am always not sure whether to consider create another DB for Logging usage.
As my habit, i love to create 2 DBs for one apllication, for example the applaication name is HHH, i would love to create two DBs named HHH and HHHLog. For HHH, recoording any transaction , for HHHLog, it's only for log alll knids message and archive some transaction tables monthly.
I have been told that I need to setup a crossover cable between a Server that has an application to have a dedicated NIC (using a crossover cable) to a server that has SQL 2005 Sp2 for fast access. How is htis done as far as SQL Properties, and NIC Settings, How do I make sure SQL will transmit using that 2nd NIC?
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)) ?
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 .
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?
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?
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.
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 ?
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
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
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
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?
When Standard Edition says it supports 4 processors, is this just the physical processor or do we have to factor in multiple cores?
If SE supports 4 physical quad-core processors, is it written to optimally utilize the quad-core technology or would I be better off using Enterprise Edition?
I've just started getting this EXCEPTION_ACCESS_VIOLATION (0xc0000005) on machines using Windows 2000 sp4 connecting to SQLServer. This is crashing JVMs (multiple Sun versions and BEA also) in the Java VM frame (outside our code). This has just started recently - perhaps with the last set of patches? Has anyone else seen this or know what I could do to get more information? Could this be related to updates to named pipes?
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?).