Hi all,
Our Production server has 4GB RAM and is running SQL Server 7.0. By default since SQL Server 7.0 Standard Edition can take up only less than 2GB, our SQL Server is now using only 1.8GB (leaving the rest for the OS, Windows 2000 Server).
Inorder for SQL Server to take advantage of more than 2GB of RAM it is suggested that boot.ini be modified to include the switch, /3GB
Has anyone seen any issues with doing this? Is it safe to do so on the Standard Edition of SQL Server 7.0?
Would anyone have any suggestions/advice on how to determine what is causing the memory usage for sqlserver.exe to increase a dramatic pace in windows task manager? What would be a good resolution to slow down this memory usage? Thanks!
I'm hoping that some might have an answer for me after much net searching.
I have a server (200GB disk space, Dual 3.8 GHZ processors, 4GB memory) that hosts 6, very small, SharePoint sites (WSS 2.0) and SQL 2005 express handling 1 config DB and 7 content DB's. The biggest DB at the moment is only 300 MB and the sites are not actively being used yet, they are only open to a select number of users (+ - 25 in total) who are using them as reference "areas" at the moment. Each site is running in it's own application pool as well.
I find that the sqlserv.exe process increases in memory usage and does not seem to decrease. It gets to the point of 960 MB usage and then databases cannot be used (SQL 2005 Express max memory is 1GB). SQL seems to "close" them down and site errors being received are "site is not in configuration database". When the SQL service is restarted the memory usage idles around 70 - 80 MB, the sites are 100% again but after an hour or 2 the memory usage is sitting at 560 MB again and doesn't seem to decrease.
Is there a way I can bring this memory usage down?
today I've put in production a big database accessed by 200 concurrent users, this database has READ_COMMITTED_SNAPHOT set to ON.I know that RCSI set to ON is very aggressive on tempDB so I'm monitoring it.I've noticed that the Transaction log space usage (%) on TempDB is slowly but ever increasing, I mean in the last 24 hours I've started from a 99% space free, now we are 37% space free...is it normal? TempDB log is 35GB in size.
I have a client program that writes to sql server database 10 records per second . i want to compute the CPU usage and the memory usage for the whole program or CPU usage,memory usage for the insert statement in the program .
I've received conflicting information from Microsoft personnel so thought I'd see what some thoughts here are.
In summary, we upgraded a server from SQL Server 2000 SP4 Standard to SQL Server 2005 SP2 Standard. This servers main purpose is to handle alot of merge replication to anonymous pull subscribers. We have some Transactional replication also occurring. There are 8GB memory on the server.
During the upgrade we ran into memory pressure on MemToLeave. We put the /3GB parameter in boot.ini and -g512 on the startup per Microsoft's suggestions. This got us past the upgrade process.
After the upgrade, we took off the boot.ini setting and the -g512. We enabled AWE and assigned 6GB to SQL Server. Then once in a while when the merge snapshots were running, we'd receive some "system out of memory" errors. I went ahead and put -g512 back on and haven't received the error since.
My question to Microsoft then was if we go to say 16GB of memory on the box and give say 14GB to SQL Server, would it be beneficial to set the -g option to a higher number. That's when I got into a discussion with the Microsoft person that SQL Server 2005 Standard would not use anything above 4GB, which is opposite what the Microsoft site says, others have said, and opposite to what I'm seeing for memory usage with DBCC MEMORYSTATUS showing the 6GB being used We'll be talking to our TAM about our suppport, specifically on Replication topics, as we've had some problems getting knowledgable support on this topic. If anyone knows of support outside of Microsoft on Replication topics, I'd love to hear about it.
Any thoughts on the tweaking of memory related to our environment? I know it may be site-specific and we may have to do some trial and error, but with:
1. Doing heavy merge replication processing on the server(1,500 subscribers). 2. say we get 16GB on the box(server is Windows 2003 SP2 Enterprise)
are there some suggestions on a -g setting to best utilize Buffer Pool and MemToLeave ? Some other things to do? Is there some process/method to help determine how best to define the memory settings? If there a way to see how much BPOOL and/or MemToLeave the system is using at a given moment? DBCC MEMORYSTATUS gives alot of info, but I'll be the first to admit that I don't know what alot of the info there is really telling me. If there some white paper, etc that would help determine what the system is doing memory-related, that'd be great to know.
One of the production box running only sql server application, is showing 80% memory usage on the task manager-memory usage history right now.
We are running sql server 2000 standard version-sp3 with 2GB memory on this box. Server is not on the scheduled reboot at this point.
We have seen this behavior for this box last month that after task manager showing 90% memory usage contantly for several days, when server was manually rebooted, memory usage dropped to 35%. Now it's back to 80%.
Our DBA thinks that server should be rebooted on a regular schedule regardless of memory problem. Our network admin doesn't seem to agree with this. He is not ready to reboot the machine even with this high memory usage.
There is no noticable difference performancewise yet.
My questions are: Is it bad that memory usage reaches from 35% constant to 80-90% or is it common? Should sql server be rebooted immediately to take care of it? Should sql server 2000 rebooted on regular basis regardless of any problems? Shouldn't sql server be releasing memory back to the OS even without rebooting? How do I find out whether server actually is going through memory problems and what is causing it?
Currently I have an application that uses SQL 2000. The SQL server service tends to take up as much of the physical memory as possible. The problem is I also have other services relating to this application running that are very important.
What tends to happen after a period of time is SQL takes up all of the physical memory, so that the other services are using the paging file (virtual memory). This causes extremely slow response time over the network as these other services are having to parse the paging file.
Upgrading the memory is currently not an option :(
I know there is an option to set memory usage for SQL but I am unsure how this would respond in a production environment. What would happen if SQL would require more memory than what was allocated to it?
Can SQL release the memory and still act as normal?
I am using SQL Server 7.0 on a Windows NT machine. We have been having problems with SQL Server not releasing the memory after it has utilized it.
Currently it is configured to allow a max of 511MB memory (1024 is total on the machine). I had some advice that my best solution would be to reduce the Max Memory to a lower value (say 400 MB) to help reduce the problem.
Is this not counter-intuitive? Or is this the correct solution?
Hello all,How can I tell how much memory SQL Server is using on a server. OnWindows 2000, whenever I go to Task manager/processes/memory usage SQLServer seems to be showing 1,744,124K. On all of my servers withvarious size, usage of databases, all of them show SQL Server to beusing about the same amount of memory. Can someone explain this to me?Shouldn't it use more for larger databases, heavy hitting databases?Also, I normally check Dynamically configure SQL Server memory and putthe maximum threshold to a little bit less than the max on the server.The minimum query memory is set to 1024. Is that 1024 a subset of thememory used by SQL Server, or is this additional that can be used?Thanks,Raziq.*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
I'm wondering about the memory usage of SQL Server Ce and the Compact Framework.
I've heard I can use only 32 MB per process. SQL Server Ce runs in process and my database file is about 60 MB big.
1. Does that means, I can only use for my application: 32 MB - CLR - SQL-Server Runtime - parts of my database file hold in memory
2. Is SQL Server Ce swapping parts of my database file into my process memory? If so, is there a chance to group some tables, that they are swapped together to increase performance?
3. Means big databases big memory usage in my process memory?
Out techs informed me that they are getting reports of a system slow down. When they look, they find sqlserver.exe has lots of memory allocated to it. They reboot the server and then it runs okay for a few weeks. They tell me this just started happening recently.
SQLServer itself has not been touched in months. They are, however, starting to use one of the databases heavier.
I found a setting where you can set max_server_memory. Any problems if I set this to a value?
Good day to all of you I am faced SQL SERVER 2000 Memory usage problem. I am using Windows 2000 Server SP4 and SQL SERVER 2000 SP4. When User running some in-house application software, the memory for sqlservr.exe was increased . But, when user logout from the software. The sqlservr.exe did not decrease the memory. I have around 100 Users in my company. SQL Memory will countinues increase till max memory usage in CPU.
May i know how to order SQL SERVER need to purge memory when USER was log off from the Program? Or my SQL SERVER was corrupted /missing file?
Hi AllSome my SQL Server are experience high memory usage.1. How can I detect which process which process cause the big memoryusage and not released?2. Which sql server components in this memory, and what are their usagedistribution?Any help will be appreciated.ThanksWillie
I'm new at SQL Server, I decided to use it in order to get all the advantages of using Vb.net and Sql. My server is a SQL standard version. I'm using a relational DB most of the time for complex select queries, everytime the server is used it performs 30 or 40 queries at the time, and I have recently realized that server consumes a lot of memory after one or two days of beign up.
Let's say that if I restart the SQL Server memory usage is about 650 Mb, but after two days memory is 1.4Mb, I have used Sql Profiler and Tunning Assistant where it recommended me to create some indexes, which indeed I created them, but that did not solved the memory problem, although some queries run faster.
My questions are:
is this memory usage is normal ? if not, what should I check out to reduce memory usage?
We have an application that we currently run on SQL Server 2000 that works by creating a DTS package that it then executes.
Due to performance reasons, we have been considering switching to 2005, for a few reasons. Can anyone confirm clarify the following?
1) SQL Server 2000 caps RAM usage at 2GB, whereas SQL Server 2005 is only limited by the OS - RAM usage is a big current issue for us, so if upgrading to 2005 would solve this it would help a lot. Can anyone confirm my understanding of this? 2) Would using the legacy DTS in SQL Server 2005 take advantage of this RAM difference, or is it running on the old 2000 engine and only able to use the 2GB?
I have a Windows sever 2012 with sql server 2012 enterprise. Ram size is 22GB. Sometimes SQL sever takes 95% memory.My question, How to reduce memory size without killing any process because it's production server.So there are many background process is running. And,Is there any guides to learn why Memory is raise d so high and how to reduce it.
I'm having a problem with memory and cpu increasing after I enable the broker on my database. Before I enable the broker, my memory will be at 70 mb, but after I enable broker, memory increases to 100, 200, and keeps rising even until 700 mb; plus the sql server process uses more of the CPU, ranging between 30-40 percent.
Any ideas what could be going on, and possible solutions? Thanks
Hi, On the last Sunday 26/12/04 on 20:00 I got on one of our applications in the customer site this error: "There is insufficient system memory to run this query."
Details:
Computer: IBM XSERIES_345, dual CPU 2.8 Intel xeo, 1,047,952 KB ram, windows 2000 server sp4. Disk space: 4395 MB, Virtual memory: initial size 1536 MB, Max size 3072 MB. Registry size: current 14 MB, Max 90 MB.
SQL Server 2000 SP 3, two production databases (1) Data size 100 MB, log size 15 MB (2) Data size 500 MB, log size 125 MB All the memory options are configured as default i.e. dynamically configure for memory and not changes in any sp_configure options.
SQL server is the only major application running on the machine.
Facts: On that evening the I've checked the Task Manager and found that SQL Server use 500 MB in Mem Usage and 1200 MB in VM size. In the query analyzer I execute the select query which results the "…insufficient system memory…" error on both databases and on the one with more data it failed with this error, but on the other database it completed successfully. I restart SQL Server service to solve it, and as for today 28/12/04 at 08:00 it use 590 MB in Mem Usage and 590 MB in VM size.
I have checked the system with Performance monitor and didn't find any problems I use the Memory: Pages/sec, Memory: Available Bytes, Physical Disk: % Disk Time, Processor: % Processor Time, SQL Server Buffer: Buffer Cache Hit Ratio.
We have 8 user connections for one of the database and 16 for the other one. Our system runs with this configuration for 2 months, I backup the databases FULL, DIFF and LOG backup. It's not real time system, and the load on the SQL is medium, but we use bad queries as update for all fields in one query (please don't ask…)
I know that SQL server is greedy with the memory and released memory only if other process needs it.
we are working on a release 2.0 mobile solution right now. In our version 1.0 we did not have to worry about memory issues as our application was the only application running on our target devices (e.g. T-Mobile MDA Compact II Pocket PCs, WM2005). Now we need to share the available memory with others. As our application relies on its SQL Server 2005 Mobile Edition database we are wondering about memory usage of that server.
We know that a Pocket PC divides its memory into Storage and Program. If our application uses a 5 MB database and 1.5 MB for DLLs and it's exe-file. These files reside in the storage space when not loaded. When the application starts up it is loaded in the program memory. What happens to the 5 MB database file? Is is loaded into Program memory as well? Are only portions of that file loaded? Or is nothing loaded at all?
Does anyone have a deeper insight into that server an can answer my questions.
I have around 100 packages (all [packages run at same time) each package calls a stored Procedure once the Stored proc Execution is completed the package will write the log information into a log table, here how can i capture the CPU and Memory usage for execution of each stored proc.
I have been having issues with our SQL server for awhile now. It seems to run out of memory every few days and when I look at the memory dump, the MEMORYCLERK_SQLOPTIMIZER seem to take over memory and eventually cause the server to crash.
Here is the SQL verison we are using: Microsoft SQL Server 2012 (SP1) - 11.0.3460.0 (X64) Jul 22 2014 15:22:00 Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation Enterprise Edition (64-bit) on Windows NT 6.2 (Build 9200: ) (Hypervisor)..It is on a VM on Windows 2012 server. It has 20gb of RAM allocated to it and the MAX Server Memory is set to 16.5gb.
I have seen the MEMORYCLERK_SQLOPTIMIZER grow to about 11gb at the time of the server crash. Why that is happening? What is causing the memoryclerk_sqloptimizer to get so high? I have looked it up and it looks like it has to do with ad hoc requests, but is there something I can do to bring that memory down when it gets so high so that I can prevent a server crash?Do we just need to add more memory or is there a memory leak somewhere?
Good day to all, I'm new here, so I don't know if this is the right forum to post my problem. I have a web application written using C# .net 2005 (W/ajax). The application has a module that uploads data from excel file to the sql server 2005 database. w/c is by the way, i'm using SQL 2005 Express Edition, the app can upload up to more than 10,000 records from an excel file. Everything is ok until it was deployed in a test environment, while having a run through with the system, the application encounter an error after which, we cannot log in to the system anymore. I restarted the server (web and sql server in 1 machine running winxp) then I can log-in again in the system. When I'm tracing where the problem came from, I noticed that the memory usage of sqlservr.exe increases everytime the app connects to the server. I already fix some code to close some objects that might have caused the high memory usage, then I run sp_who in the management studio and there are still connections used by the app AWAITING COMMAND. Then I manually kill (using kill spid) connection that are left opened by the application. But the mem usage of sqlservr did no decrease. Is there a way to release the memory usage of sqlservr.exe? In ASP.Net ? I have a hint that this has been causing the error. Thanks a lot.
Hi, it seems that every day SQL Server 2000 has some kind of memory leak, the memory usage creeps above 150000 approximately 3 times per day. Is this normal? It starts at about 13000.
Is there any way that I can monitor what is causing the memory usage to be so high and maybe rectify it?
I was on my friend's server earlier and I checked his system stats. Between sqlservr.exe and msftesql.exe he was using 2.9gb of ram. This is not a high traffic server so I felt that was just a wee bit high. What are some usage experiences you have seen? I have not worked with 2005 so I don't know what the usage should be like for a low to medium usage server. The guy that admins the db is kinda a moron anyway. He said he has said to the server admin it has been optimized, but I dont believe it one bit at 2.9gb of usage. Any comments would help.
I need to know which of the following two methods do need less RAM.
There are 2 big tables, each about 9 M rows, and 6 small dimension tables with each about 10 to 100 Rows. The dimension tables are joined by their id's with one of the big table.
The Structure of a dimension Table looks like
CarID (tinyint), Description (varchar(20)) 1 BMW 2 Porsche
I want to join the 2 Big Tables in a materialized view. Later i will run queries like select * into #temp from dbo.vw_materialized_view where Car = 'BMW'
So, back to my question, will such a query take less memory (ram) when i joined all 8 tables before I created the mat. view or will it take less when I only join the 2 big tables in a mat.view and later join the mat.view with the 6 dimension tables?
Can some one tell me where can I get the CPU and Memory Usage of my server on the Sql Tables or a script or store proc that i could run to get the above. I need that and to store its results in history to show how are our servers perfoming
I have setup 2 x64 SQL boxes now that are having problems with memory. Both boxes were pretty much setup with the defaults on windows 2003 R2 64 bit server, only changes were file locations etc.
On both servers the memory usage continues to climb over the course of a few days until all physical and virtual memory is used and the server comes to it's knees. A reboot will stabilize it for a few days while the memory usage ramps up again.
The sqlservr.exe process does not report much memory but the commit charge in the performance tab of task manager shows the maxed out value. I thought the sqlservr.exe process only didn't report the correct memory figure when AWE is enabled which it isn't.
I thought as a default, SQL server would dynamically allocate memory as needed and had internal mechanisms that would not use more than the physical ram available. The one server has 16GB and I even set the max SQL memory usage to 12GB but still my total memory usage would get out of hand. SQL Server is the only application on these boxes.
Am I making some incorrect assumptions and need to change the way SQL is setup? Any suggestions?
