Hi all
Does anybody have any experience on this? We have some customers who claim our SQL Server 2k based application works better with it disabled. A quick google indicates SQL Server does not run that well with it enabled but I would like to get a broader view on it.
Thanks
Rich
Hi:
I have a server with 4 processors with hyperthreading, so my Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition see 8 processors. I have installed SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition and see 8 processors. The question is : if i install SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition, how many processors see and use 4 or 8 ?
I know that i have to license only 4 processors according to the Microsoft License, but,really, how many processors see and use???.
Hello,
I have to find out whether my servers have hyperthreading enabled or not???? I am running Windows server 2003 Standard edition on many of my machines. I have to configure the SQL Server, server configuration values according to the Hyperthreading. I know about the CPUcount.exe utility but is there anything else apart from it??????
1. Use mssql server agent service to take the schedule
2. Use a .NET windows service with timers to call SqlClientConnection
above, which way would be faster and get a better performance?
Hello Everyone,I have a very complex performance issue with our production database.Here's the scenario. We have a production webserver server and adevelopment web server. Both are running SQL Server 2000.I encounted various performance issues with the production server with aparticular query. It would take approximately 22 seconds to return 100rows, thats about 0.22 seconds per row. Note: I ran the query in singleuser mode. So I tested the query on the Development server by taking abackup (.dmp) of the database and moving it onto the dev server. I ranthe same query and found that it ran in less than a second.I took a look at the query execution plan and I found that they we'rethe exact same in both cases.Then I took a look at the various index's, and again I found nodifferences in the table indices.If both databases are identical, I'm assumeing that the issue is relatedto some external hardware issue like: disk space, memory etc. Or couldit be OS software related issues, like service packs, SQL Serverconfiguations etc.Here's what I've done to rule out some obvious hardware issues on theprod server:1. Moved all extraneous files to a secondary harddrive to free up spaceon the primary harddrive. There is 55gb's of free space on the disk.2. Applied SQL Server SP4 service packs3. Defragmented the primary harddrive4. Applied all Windows Server 2003 updatesHere is the prod servers system specs:2x Intel Xeon 2.67GHZTotal Physical Memory 2GB, Available Physical Memory 815MBWindows Server 2003 SE /w SP1Here is the dev serers system specs:2x Intel Xeon 2.80GHz2GB DDR2-SDRAMWindows Server 2003 SE /w SP1I'm not sure what else to do, the query performance is an order ofmagnitude difference and I can't explain it. To me its is a hardware oroperating system related issue.Any Ideas would help me greatly!Thanks,Brian T*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
View 2 Replies View RelatedWe are trying to create some alerts in our SQL Server 2014 BI edition.Issue is that, after I chose "Type" as "SQL Server performance condition alert" nothing is listed in the "Object" list box.SQL Server event alerts are working. Issue is only with "SQL Server performance condition alert".
View 3 Replies View RelatedI can't find 'SQL Server: SSIS Pipeline' performance object in performance monitor on a 64-bit SQL Server. I see it on a 32-bit. Does anybody know why?
Thanks
I set up the collector, and specify the Run As as my AD account in the Collector Set - Properties - General screen. My AD account is the local admin of the remote server.
However, the collector does not seem to work. Although the collecting set is shown as running, the The blg file stays at 64K. If I open it, there is nothing inside (no counter at the bottom). What did I miss?
Hi,
I am interested if anyone else has come across performance problems with the SQL Server linked servers to SQL Server. I suspect that the OLE DB Provider that I am using perhaps has some performance issues when passed parameters.
I have set the dynamic paramters option on, and use collation compatible.
Hi,
Does anyone know of a quick check list I can use (config setup), for the Server running my SQl Server to enable best performance. The box is dedicated to the SQL Server. The problem is when running a farely heavy sp, the box lockeds up, CPU hits 100% and I'm ending up staring at a screen trying to load itself for ages.
Any tips??
Many thanks,
S.
We are currently in the process of loading large amounts of data into our database. We are running into a situation where we are getting a message of "Waiting for WRITELOG", and this is slowing down our process to a crawl. I do no have a lot of experience in the performance side. I would truly appreciate any help on this matter.
Thanks,
Charlie
Guys I need help!
If SQL Server is working slowly, where first of all I should look for
reasons?
Thanks in advance.
Hi guys,
I have windows NT workstation 4.0 and SQL Server Client Configuration Utility
installed on my computer,so I have remote administration of SQL Server.
But because Performance monitor is'not a part of NT workst. I can't check behavior of Cache hit ratio and .....
May be you give me some idea how can I do it remotely without Performance monitor.
Thanks a lot,
Alona F.
My company is contemplating which platform (Oracle or SQL Server) to develop a new imaging application in (large databases, many users). All of our current SQL Server applications are relatively small now (100 MB databases). Can anyone give me some idea of what size databases they are running in SQL Server and number of users concurrently accessing them. What can SQL Server realistically handle?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have to admin a datbase which makes almost no use of stored procedures. The C++ frontend makes use of ad hoc calls to the database(No this is not my idea of how to do things, but I have no say). Any ideas on the best way to tweak the SQL Server to handle this?
Thanks
We have an application that uses SQL 2000 server. I am almost certain all the performance issues we are having are due to the SQL server. I really need to confirm this.
Where do I start? What should I check?
Please help.
Thanks
We have an application that uses SQL 2000 server. I am almost certain all the performance issues we are having are due to the SQL server. I really need to confirm this.
Where do I start? What should I check?
Please help.
Thanks
Hello Everyone,Regarding stored procedures and views, I know that stored procedurescause SQL Server to create a cached execution plan. Is the same thingdone for views? Also, how bad is the performance hit for a storedprocedure that use 1 or a few views as opposed to re-creating the sameselect statement with the proper joins to the required tables?I know that there are a bunch of variables that affect this stuff, Ijust trying to get a ball park idea of how this stuff works.Thanks,Frank
View 4 Replies View RelatedI am investigating a SQL server performance issue where the systemoperates well at times and poorly at others. This SQL server isconnected to a SAN where I believe the issue lies. I have started sometesting using the SQLIOSimx86 utility from Microsoft with theapplication stopped. My initial results show that there are quite afew errors that indicate"IO requests are outstanding for more than 15 sec."I am next going to look @ the IO system as a whole (bios,driverversion)Any thoughts? I can't seem to find any documentation regarding thisand whether this is acceptable.Thanks,Scott
View 1 Replies View RelatedRecently created a library module (ASP.Net and SQL Server 2005) where we store files inside the SQL DB. We now have several thousand files and the DB is around 25 gb. I think we are starting to see performance problems when trying to select files for download. Filed under 10 Mb seem to download fine, but over 10 MB we are having problems with. Was wondering if someone could point me to a good article that might talk about these kind of performance issue and what I might do to over come it.
Real quick
I have multiple reports that use the same headers say Topic 1 and Topic 2
The body of the reports will have 0-50 records and 2-15 columns.
These reports will be run many times concurrently. My question is which is more efficient
1.
Open connection
Call sp to returns Topic 1 and Topic 2 for report header
Close connection
Open Connection
Call sp to return the report body data
Close Connection
2.
Open connection
Call sp to return the report body data as well as 2 addition text fields of char(50) and use FIRST to extract headers?
Close connection
We have recently updated an application from SQL Server CE 2.0 to SQL Server Mobile 2005 and we are seeing a huge decrease in performance? Is this normal? Database query that used to take 8 or 9 seconds are now around 20 secs, the database is only about 5 MB and the two tables in this particular query have 20 rows and 14K rows respectively. The query is basically:
select * from table1 join table2 on table1.myint = table2.myint
myint is the Primary Key of table2 and I have even created an index on myint for table1, any ideas?
Thanks - MTW
I understand that the number of records allowed in a SQL server is
limited by storage capacity, but at what point will there be a
noticable decline in performance? Assuming each row has, say, 10
fields, and the only operation being performed on the table are selects
(no inserts, updates, etc).Will performance begin to drag at 50,000 records? 100,000? 1,000,000? 5,000,000?I'm
trying to wonder just how scalable SQL server is, and perhaps explore
some alternatives if tremendous amounts of data will bring down
performance. Currently using 8.0, not 2005.Thanks in advance.
Hi,I am having a problem with one of my stored procedures in SQL Server 2005. Basically the proc brings back a data set for the ASP.NET front end, but it is running very slowly from .NET. I have run SQL profiler on the procedure and its taking around 20 seconds to bring back the data for the .NET, where as if I copy and paste the executed SP from profiler into the management studio and run it in a query window, it runs in around 1 second, even if I run DBCC DROPCLEANBUFFERS before I run it. More worryingly, the CPU usage is 40 times higher and the number of reads is 50% higher from .NET.We have the .NET front end spread over 3 clustered web servers with load balancers and the SQL db is on a dedicated rig. I am having the same problem on my locally published version of the site as well, so I don't think it's an issue with the web site.If anyone has got any ideas on this then please let me know as I am completely stuck. I should mention that the issue has only recently started occuring and it used to be fine and the rest of the site is fine...Thanks in advance Tom
View 1 Replies View RelatedHi experts,
I am facing one performance issue.This is the scenario.
For eg., EmpId,EmpName,DeptId,DeptName,Sal are there.Except sal all the remaining columns values are same(I mean having same data).
Assume,here 4 rows are there in that table.
so I wrote a select query to get the data like 1,xx,1,yy,50,500,5000,1000
here 50,500,5000,1000... are the sal column values.
I wrote a function to get the sal values as comma separated ones if the remaining column values are same.But for Huge no' of records (assume for 25000 records), the performance is very bad.
So need a inbuilt query / any other solution for this problem.
Hi,
Can some one please send me the Sql Server 2005 Performance Tuning artilce links?
Thanks
Hello!I have a very simple structured table:id | datawhere "data" is a varchar(100) This table would contain a lot rows (~ 500.000.000) and I want to select all "id" where data=@data. Is it realistic that the SQL Server could serve this request on a normal webserver within 1 or 2 seconds? Thanks!
View 1 Replies View RelatedI hard that SQL Server 7.0 has problems when the database reaches
50 - 100GB, in areas such as backup, transaction logging, and database
admin and that by 100GB parallel queries are also affected.
Is this true ? Where I can get information on this ?
Thanks in Advance.
Regards,
Vidyadhar
ENVIRONMENT:
I have SQL Server6.5 running under a dedicated NT Server. NT configuration includes dual pentium 200Mhz processors, 256MB RAM and RAID system.
The Database size is 1GB with actual data size about 500MB.
PROBLEM:
I have an application which uses lots of joins to get the results. My select query is running too slow even when I run it on the server.
I updated the statistics and rebuild all the indexes on the tables used by the query.
Any suggestions on using SQL Trace and tuning the server/database are welcome.
Srini
Hi,
We have got a Server with couple 731MHz Pentium III + 1GB Memory and about 25-30 users connecting to it. The Processor Queue Length has always been more than 70%-99%. Is there any fix for this problem, like increasing any buffer sizes and so forth or should I add more processor power to that server?
Thank you in advance,
Raman.
Hi
We are facing performance related problem using Sql server 2000.
We have one stand alone P4 Pc (128 ram) and around 30 users access the sql server through network.
We have written our aplication in VB 6 and backend as Sql Server 2000. We have used Stored Procedure where ever necessary. We have used cursor location as Server side.
When we start with 5 users it is not slow, when all the users say 30 comes in it is slow down.
Can some one help to find out what is the problem.
Thanks
We've got a clustered environment in which we run several SQL servers. However, one of the platforms, Greats Plains hangs for no reason. Is there a tool out there that we can use to determine what is causing the load ?
Thanks
Hi there,
We are currently exploring the possibility of migrating from mysql to Microsoft SQL Server. The reason for the move is to make use of the extra functionality.
We have migrated a website which was running on mysql to SQL Server using the freeTDS library. We have noticed a considerable increase in the time it takes to execute the pages.
One particular heavy page has gone from 0.16566 sec execution time in mysql to 1.52923 sec in SQL Server. A 10 fold increase.
I understand that mysql is faster than SQL Server but I would not have expected such a large change.
We are looking to have about 100 sites working with this configuration, and these performace decreases are concerning.
Reading the freeTDS FAQ
http://www.freetds.org/faq.html#pending
describes a strict one-query-at-a-time limitation and a further limitation in php creating new connections.
Is anyone using PHP and SQL Server together in a demanding environment? Do they work together well?
Is it just a case that we need to optomize the new database?
Is freeTDS the only/right solution for the job?
Any help would be greatly appreciated,
Karl
We are running a redhat 8 system with apache2, php4.3.9 and freetds0.62.4. I connect to MSSQL 2000 on a windows 2000 server.