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 RepliesI 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?
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'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 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.
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 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.
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 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 am looking to test this feature - and the "Transaction Performance Collector" has recommended me a table to port to In-Memory OLTP.
I have now tried the "Table Memory Optimization Advisor" tool.
After a couple of tweaks to the table design - the tool is now passing validation but the tool is not allowing to progress to the next step:
Could it be down to not having enough memory? But would this not show in the advisor?
Hi i am using MS SQL 2000 db ,while executing following prepared statement query its working fine ...BUT when i remove "top 300" then tomcat giving OUT OF MEMORY ERROR!!
i think that its because of the cross join....So i want to optimize this query in such a way that it will not give "Out of memory error"
How can i re write this query?
Query :-
"select top 300 haw.DeviceID as deviceid,haw.Description as Description,haw.SerialNo as SerialNo,haw.Suffix as Suffix,haw.HWRev as HWRev,haw.Type as Type,dev.Status as Status from Hardware_PlaceHolder haw,Device_PlaceHolder dev ,Accounts ac where dev.siteId = ac.siteId and ac.CustID = ? ";
thanks in advance..
Hello. I have received the follwoing error upon an attempt to Browse the Cube. All other tabs are functional, including the Calculations tab. We are running Windows Server 2003 SP2 and SQL Server 2005 SP2. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!
**EDIT** - Have confirmed SP1 for VS2005 is installed both locally and on server, also.
Attempted to read or write protected memory. This is often an indication that other memory is corrupt. (Microsoft Visual Studio)
------------------------------
Program Location:
at Microsoft.Office.Interop.Owc11.PivotView.get_FieldSets()
at Microsoft.AnalysisServices.Controls.PivotTableFontAdjustor.TransformFonts(Font font)
at Microsoft.AnalysisServices.Browse.CubeBrowser.UpdatePivotTable(Boolean translate)
at Microsoft.AnalysisServices.Browse.CubeBrowser.UpdateAll(Boolean translate)
at Microsoft.AnalysisServices.Browse.CubeBrowser.InitialUpdate()
at Microsoft.AnalysisServices.Browse.CubeBrowser.SupportFunctionWhichCanFail(FunctionWhichCanFail function)
I've been researching AWE to determine if we should enable this for our environment.
Currently we have a quad core box with 4 gb of RAM (VMware). OS: Windows 2003 std, SQL Server 2005 std. 3GB is not set but will be as soon as we can perform maintenance on the server.
I have read mixed feedback on AWE, either it works great or grinds you to a hault. I would assume that the grinding to a hault is due to not setting the min/max values correctly or not enabling the lock page in memory setting.
We only have one instance of SQL on the server and this box won't be used for anything else aside from hosting SQL services. We do plan on running SSRS off of this server as well.
1. Will running SSRS and enabling AWE cause me problems? Will I have to reduce the max setting by the SSRS memory usage or will it share and play nice?
2. How do I go about setting the Max value? Should it be less than the physical RAM in the box? Right now its set to the default of 214748364, even if I don't enable AWE should this default value be changed?
3. It seems that even at idle the SQL server holds a lot of memory and the page file grows. If I restart the process in the morning, memory usage in taskmon is at 600mb or so. By the end of the day, its up around 2gb. How can I track down whats causing this, should this even concern me?
4. The lock Page in memory setting worries me. Everything I've read on this seems to give a warning about serious OS and other program support degradation. In some cases to the point where they have to restore the settings on the server before they can bring it back up. What are your thoughts on this.
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.
View 10 Replies View RelatedHello, I understand that we should use SSMS -> Server Properties -> Memory to put a cap on the SQL server memory usage, therefore it gives some space memory for OS, this is based on the fact if the max memory is not specified, SQL will use whatever available memory and eventually crash the system.
My question is that when a server has SSIS and SSAS services installed along with the SQL service. Would the max memory setting covers the SSIS and SSAS memory usage, or the SSIS and SSAS has to shared the memory with OS?
Thanks,
fshguo.
I am running Visual Studio 2005. I have an SSIS Package which is consuming a huge amount of memory. During the execution of the package the memory keeps increasing. Until finally i get an Out of Memory exception. I have run this package using dtexec, and in the BIDS. No difference. I do have some script components and have added some code to get the assemblies in the current appdomain. I do see that one particular assembly is increasing on every loop. VBAssembly every time it hits the script component is increasing by 6, and along with it the memory is climbing. What is this VBAssembly being used for is there an update to SQL Server Integration Services that I need?
Thanks! Aaron B.
sql server 2000 is running on windows server 2003 ... 4gb of memory on server .... 2003 was allocated 2.3gb nd sql server was allocated (and using all of it) 1.6gb for total of approx 4gb based on idera monitor software ... all memory allocated betweeen the OS and sql server .... then 4 more gb of memory added for total now of 8g ... now idera monitor shows 1.7gb for OS and 1.0 gb for sql server ..... 'system' info shows 8gb memory with PAE ... so I assume that the full 8gb can now be addressed .... why are less resources being used now with more total memory .... especially sql server ..... i thought about specifying a minimum memmry for sql server but i amnot convinced that would even work since it seems that this 1gb limit is artificial .... it it used 1.6 gb before why would it not use at least that much now ??
thank you
i want to create a lot of index for my database for performance.but i need find memory usage by indexes.
How to find memory usage by index in sql server?
Hi,
I am going to install SQL Server 2000 (then SQL 2K5) on a Win Server 2K3 with 8 GB of ram, but it will be 16 GB in the near future.
I would like to reserve a fixed memory (for momemt less than 3-4 GB) for SQL Server and the rest for application (virtualization).
Without AWE enabled, max memory for SQL Server 2K5 is 4GB as for SQL Server 2000?
How can I manage and optimize memory keeping in mind AWE. (any doc, website available?)
Thank
So I started a new job recently and have noticed a few strange configurations. Typically I would never mess with min memory per query option and index create memory option configuration because i just haven't seen any need to. My typical thought is that if it isn't broke... They have been modified on every single server in my environment.
From Books Online:
• This option is an advanced option and should be changed only by an experienced database administrator or certified SQL Server technician.
• The index create memory option is self-configuring and usually works without requiring adjustment. However, if you experience difficulties creating indexes, consider increasing the value of this option from its run value.
Hello frnds Can Anybody explai what does it mean by question itself and how to resole it ?
View 2 Replies View RelatedHi
I did a load testing and found the following observations:
1. The Memory:Pages/sec was crossing the limit beyond 20.
2. The Target Server Memory was always greater than Total Server Memory
Seeing the above data it seems to be memory pressure. But I found that AvailableMemory was always above 200 MB. Also Buffer Cache HitRatio was close to 99.99. What could be the reason for the above behavior?
Hi~, I have 3 questions about memory based bulk copy.
1. What is the limitation count of IRowsetFastLoad::InsertRow() method before IRowsetFastLoad::Commit(true)?
For example, how much insert row at below sample?(the max value of nCount)
for(i=0 ; i<nCount ; i++)
{
pIFastLoad->InsertRow(hAccessor, (void*)(&BulkData));
}
2. In above code sample, isn't there method of inserting prepared array at once directly(BulkData array, not for loop)
3. In OLE DB memory based bulk copy, what is the equivalent of below's T-SQL bulk copy option ?
BULK INSERT database_name.schema_name.table_name FROM 'data_file' WITH (ROWS_PER_BATCH = rows_per_batch, TABLOCK);
-------------------------------------------------------
My solution is like this. Is it correct?
// CoCreateInstance(...);
// Data source
// Create session
m_TableID.uName.pwszName = m_wszTableName;
m_TableID.eKind = DBKIND_NAME;
DBPROP rgProps[1];
DBPROPSET PropSet[1];
rgProps[0].dwOptions = DBPROPOPTIONS_REQUIRED;
rgProps[0].colid = DB_NULLID;
rgProps[0].vValue.vt = VT_BSTR;
rgProps[0].dwPropertyID = SSPROP_FASTLOADOPTIONS;
rgProps[0].vValue.bstrVal = L"ROWS_PER_BATCH = 10000,TABLOCK";
PropSet[0].rgProperties = rgProps;
PropSet[0].cProperties = 1;
PropSet[0].guidPropertySet = DBPROPSET_SQLSERVERROWSET;
if(m_pIOpenRowset)
{
if(FAILED(m_pIOpenRowset->OpenRowset(NULL,&m_TableID,NULL,IID_IRowsetFastLoad,1,PropSet,(LPUNKNOWN*)&m_pIRowsetFastLoad)))
{
return FALSE;
}
}
else
{
return FALSE;
}
I want to remove a filegroup.
ALTER DATABASE MyDBName
REMOVE FILEGROUP MyFileGroupName
It says:
Server: Msg 5042, Level 16, State 7, Line 1
The filegroup 'MyFileGroupName' cannot be removed because it is not empty.
Question: How can I tell what is on this filegroup.
<Forgive me if it is a simple BOL answer, but I'm having trouble finding it>
I have a non-recoverable filegroup in a partition that I would like to remove from the database. Every command that I know of requires the filegroup to be on-line before I can remove it.
Is it possible to remove an off-line filegroup from a database?
SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition.
If I install SQL 2005 Standard on Windows 2003 Standard, is SQL limited to 4 gigs of physical RAM?
I'm planning a new system that will run SQL 2005 Standard edition on a Windows 2003 Standard platform. The spec calls for 8 GB of RAM. My experience would lead me to suspect I need to install Windows 2003 Enterprise to take advantage of all the installed memory.
We have a box with dual Intel Xeon 3.4GHz processors, and 8GB RAM, OS and Data on separate RAID5 arrays. It runs:
MS Win2k3 Enterprise for the OS,
MS SQLServer 2k Enterprise for DB,
MS SQL Analysis Services for OLAP,
MS SQL Reporting Services for reports distrib,
MS IIS for web hosting,
SPSS OLAPHub for OLAP web UI, and other small stuff...
My question is this: How should the memory be configured? Should we use the OS' /3GB switch or are there enough apps running here for the OS to need 2GB to track them? What SQLServer switches would you run? I'm not sure that I want to lock more that 3-4GB of SQL data pages into memory and starve the other pigs... How could I set this up to keep 2GB for the OS and yet really use the remaining 6GB most effectively?
All input is sincerely appreciated.
Robert
I had the drives switched out on my sever this weekend and the memory is
running at a consistent 100%.
OS: NT Server 4.0 SP6
SQL Server 7.0 SP1
Drives:
From: 60gb To: 210gb
Memory: 1gb (will be increasing to 2gb)
Pagefile: 3gb
Can anyone tell me why or what would be causing all the memory to be
used?
I have been tracking SQL's memory usage over the past few months with Perfmon. I have noticed a trend that little by little "% Committed Bytes in Use" creeps up starting at 8% and eventually climing as high at 35%. I stop and start the SQL services and the total comes back down to 8%. This happens over a week and a half or two week period. Is this normal SQL activity?
Thanks for your help!
DOUG
I am going to purchase a new server to run Eastman's OpenImage software's CATALOG database. Our current server is SQL 6.5,
but it is not able to be upgraded to SQL 7.0 (known bug with this particular HP server). So I am going to buy a new one. My question is
where to find documentation that could recommend how much memory to purchase for this server. I can find scads of documents
detailing how much RAM to give SQL given a fixed amount of RAM on your server, but nowwhere can I find how much RAM to get when
buying a new server.
Any tips?
Thanks,
Joe
hi, i have a dell server with 4 xeon processors, 4GB RAM, running sql 7 ent ed sp2 on win2k advance server (dedicated sql server). configured my sql to dynamically configure memory. i've been monitoring the memory usage using task manager and the most sql will use is up to 2GB even on very heavy loads. why? everything i read on sql 7 ent ed tells me that it should be able to take advantage of up to 8GB of memory. also, the readings i did on win2k advance server says it supports PAE (Intel's Physical Address Extension). why isn't it using the other 2GB or at least another 1GB? if it's not able to use it, then my co's investment on the other 2GB RAM is wasted! please help!
View 2 Replies View RelatedFor a 2 gig machine(running SQL only) how much should be allocated to
SQL and NT? The old chart and formular Microsoft had went up to 512 and
was more of a guess.