I have a client server that has win2000 on it with sql 2000 enterprise edition. The box has 4 gig of memory on it. I noticed today that the sql server was set to use all 4 gig (even though I know sql can't really access that memory because sql can't really utilize the 2-4 gig range). Is there overhead or a downside to leaving it at this, or should I set it to 2 gig
View 3 RepliesHi,
Can anybody explain to me what's going on with my Target memory and Total memory in Perfmon?
Last week, before I upgraded my servers memory, they were both almost the same, at around 24 on the graph. Target was just fractionally above total, but there was almost no space between the two.
Then I doubled my servers memory to 4GB and expected to see total go way up and target stay the same. However, target went up to 72, and total came down to 16. When I looked this morning, target is now around 47 and total is 25.
I guess I expected these numbers to fluctuate, but not as much as this, and also why is there now such a big difference between target and total?
Thanks
Colin
I have a few questions about memory setting inheritedWindows 2003, SQL Server SP4, both Enterprise Edition 8 GB RAM1. How to know how much Memory SQL can address ( SQL script is betteras there is no access to Perfmonitor or EM ) . ie what is maximummemory SQL can use ?2. In this server awe is set to 0 . Do I have to turn it to 1 so thatSQL can use all memory .3. If awe is enabled, what is the minimum and maximum memory size needto be set ?4. Should I set max worker set also ?If someone can provide examples of /PAE, /AWE. /3GB ,/USERVA etc , I amgratefulThanksSrinivas
View 3 Replies View RelatedI am using SQL 8 Personal edition with sp2 applied. I set the maxserver memory to 32MB and leave the min server memory at 0. When myapplication starts hitting the database hard the memory usage reportedthrough task manager peaks between 41-42MB. I've stopped and restartedthe MSSQLserver service and checked that the running values are what Iset them to be. Does anybody have any ideas as to why the sqlservr.exewould be utilizing more memory than the configured value?This message was posted some years ago but nobody answered. Now I havethe same problem! Does anybody have an explanation?Thanks a lot
View 4 Replies View RelatedI need to up the Maximum Memory setting.
Out of the box it is set to 2147483647 MB.
I assume this is ~2GB. I have been instructed
to set it to 1GB less than total server memory
which is 16GB. When I change the value
it just changes back.
How do I change it and how are these Megabyte
numbers calculated?
OS: Windows 2003 R2 Enterprise
SQL: SQL Server 2005 Standard
Thanks!
Hi there,
Don't know if anyone can help,
There used to be a Whitepaper on the Microsoft website comparing SQL server (2000?) against Pervasive SQL or 2000, the link was http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/prodtechnol/sql/.
But it's not working anymore.
Does anyone have a copy of this paper, or know where it's now located? I've been looking for hours and can't find it.
Thanks in advance.
Jezza
I have an issue with my production server regarding memory usage (Memory Utilization is above 95%.). Memory is : 12 GB and the service that is consuming the majority of memory 88%/10.5GB is sqlserver.exe. So it would appear that MSSQL is not set to restrict the amount of memory it uses ? How much should I set for min and max memory ? the defauld is min memory : 0 and max : 2 TB
View 5 Replies View RelatedI am running SQL 2005 Standard under Windows 2003 Standard with 8 GB of RAM in one of our 64 bit servers; I noticed min server memory was set for some reason to 128 MB and max server memory to 6114 MB by the previous DBA. We plan to upgrade it to 32 GB. What is the best approach when changing those values ? Should I change those values to the defaults (0 - 2147483647) or create min and max boundaries? . This box is only utilzed by SQL.
Also I know that those changes are reconfigured dynamically so no need to reboot, but would this place any performance hit in the server and should I use Management studio or sp_configure ? (for some reason I don't trust Management studio for these type of changes :))
Thanks,
Carlos
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
We have an interesting problem. We are attempting to migrate from sql 2000 to sql 2005. the schema we have is exactly the same. the new 2005 box is more powerful than our 2000 box.
here is our schema:
tbl_Items
ItemID int pk
ReferenceID int
sessionid varchar(255)
StatusID int
tbl_ItemsStatus
statusid int pk
isinternalstatus bit
there is an index on (ReferenceID, SessionID, StatusID) and (SessionID, StatusID)
this is the query:
DECLARE @referenceid INTEGER
SET @referenceid = 1019
SELECT MAX(i2.itemid)
FROM tbl_Items i2 (NOLOCK)
JOIN tbl_ItemsStatus s (NOLOCK)
ON i2.StatusID = s.StatusID
WHERE
s.IsInternalStatus = 0
AND i2.referenceid = @referenceid
AND i2.sessionid IN (
SELECT i3.sessionid
FROM tbl_Items i3 (NOLOCK)
WHERE
i3.referenceid = @referenceid
AND i3.status <> 7
AND i3.status <> 8
AND i3.status <> 10
AND i3.itemid IN (
SELECT max(i4.itemid)
FROM tbl_Items i4 (NOLOCK)
WHERE i4.referenceid = @referenceid
GROUP BY i4.sessionid
)
AND i3.itemid NOT IN (
SELECT MAX(i7.itemid )
FROM tbl_Items i7 (NOLOCK)
WHERE
i7.referenceid = @referenceid
AND i7.SessionID IN (
SELECT i5.SessionID
FROM tbl_Items i5 (NOLOCK)
WHERE
i5.status <> 11
AND i5.referenceid = @referenceid
AND i5.itemid IN (
SELECT MAX(i6.itemid)
FROM tbl_Items i6 (NOLOCK)
WHERE
i6.referenceid = @referenceid
AND i6.status IN (7,11,8)
GROUP BY i6.sessionid
)
)
GROUP BY i7.SessionID
)
)
GROUP BY i2.sessionid
we know this query is pretty bad and can be optimized. however, if we run this query as is on 2005 it takes about 2 hours to run...if we run the exact same query on 2000 it takes 9 seconds.
so this query on 2005 if run takes 2 hours..however, if we omit the s.IsInternalStatus = 0 or the i2.referenceid = @referenceid line it takes about 9 seconds.
why would this be? it makes no sense why omitting one of those where clauses would increase the performance of the query by 2 hours? we know its a bad query...but this doesnt make sense.
any one else run into this problem?
I was hoping I wouldn't be another poster with performance issues after migrating to SQl 2005 from SQL 2000 but here I am.
I am in the process of testing out our databases on Sql Server 2005 for migration from SQL Server 2000 and there are certain portions of code that have been affected negatively. I have read thru many of the posts here and have tried out most of the recommendations. I will start out with things I've done and then provide the actual SQL.
1) I have rebuilt all indexes ( using the DBCC REINDEX using the table option).
2) Updated the db engine to latest hot fix (build 3239) that addresses speed related fixes.
3) I also ran sp_createstats using the 'fullscan' option to create stats on all columns of all tables (minus indexed columns)
4) Since nothing seemed to work, I even ran UPDATE STATICS with FULL SCAN on all tables even though I did not need it as the REBUILD woudl have created stats. But I was willing to try anything.
I have confirmed that the execution plans are different even though the data on both sql 2000 and sql 2005 are identical (i put a copy on 2005). The plans themselves are huge as the queries are huge. Here is the query.
SELECT InterimView.* ,TestView.*
FROM View_LabDataExport_TestFormData_55 TestView
RIGHT OUTER JOIN ( SELECT ReqView.*, CDView.*
FROM View_LabDataExport_FormData_55 ReqView
LEFT OUTER JOIN View_LabDataExport_FormData_CD_55 CDView
ON ( CDView.DB_SubjectID_CD = ReqView.DB_SUbjectID )
) InterimView
ON ( InterimView.DB_FormID = TestView.DB_FormID_T AND
InterimView.DB_LabSampleID = TestView.DB_LabSampleID_T )
The above query takes abotu 8 secs to run on 2000 and about 1 minute to run on 2005. This is for a small dataset and on larger datasets this is only going to more pronounced ( as confirmed by other teams that have already migrated in my company). Another point worth mentioning might be if I remove the TestView.* from the select list, it works in 5 to 6 seconds. Is there an issue with Sql 2005 and a large number of columns or anything of that sort? On 2000, the time remains the same , about 8 seconds if I remove this from the select list.
Here is the statistics ion on 2005
(21234 row(s) affected)
Table 'Worktable'. Scan count 75490, logical reads 3676867, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'LabTestToReportPanel'. Scan count 476, logical reads 1524, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'LabReportPanel'. Scan count 0, logical reads 260, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'DiscreteValue'. Scan count 1, logical reads 176106, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'LabReleasedSampleTest'. Scan count 1, logical reads 2078, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'LabSample'. Scan count 1360, logical reads 18567, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'Form'. Scan count 2302, logical reads 8225, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'LabTest'. Scan count 1, logical reads 23, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'LabSampleDef'. Scan count 1, logical reads 10530, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'LabArea'. Scan count 1, logical reads 2, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'Lab'. Scan count 1, logical reads 2, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'Location'. Scan count 1, logical reads 2, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'Study'. Scan count 0, logical reads 6, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'Item'. Scan count 1335, logical reads 32940, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'ObjectState'. Scan count 1, logical reads 10972, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'Object'. Scan count 0, logical reads 20674, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'Subject'. Scan count 0, logical reads 3293, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'FormDef'. Scan count 2, logical reads 70, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'PrintedLabSampleLabel'. Scan count 0, logical reads 13144, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'PrintedForm'. Scan count 0, logical reads 4219, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'StudySite'. Scan count 0, logical reads 2756, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'StudyEvent'. Scan count 18, logical reads 40, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'StudyEventDef'. Scan count 0, logical reads 36, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'FormDefToStudyEventDef'. Scan count 1, logical reads 43, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'LabSampleDefToFormDef'. Scan count 1, logical reads 255, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0.
Here is the statistics ion on 2000
Table 'LabTestToReportPanel'. Scan count 2123, logical reads 4820, physical reads 44, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'LabReportPanel'. Scan count 130, logical reads 260, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'DiscreteValue'. Scan count 103914, logical reads 208214, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'Location'. Scan count 19031, logical reads 38062, physical reads 2, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'Lab'. Scan count 19031, logical reads 38062, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'LabArea'. Scan count 19031, logical reads 38062, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'LabSampleDef'. Scan count 24670, logical reads 49340, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'LabTest'. Scan count 19406, logical reads 39575, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'LabReleasedSampleTest'. Scan count 4289, logical reads 73865, physical reads 1014, read-ahead reads 24.
Table 'Study'. Scan count 4291, logical reads 8582, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'LabSample'. Scan count 5647, logical reads 31382, physical reads 308, read-ahead reads 4.
Table 'Form'. Scan count 4291, logical reads 9272, physical reads 2, read-ahead reads 10.
Table 'PrintedLabSampleLabel'. Scan count 4289, logical reads 17097, physical reads 114, read-ahead reads 308.
Table 'ObjectState'. Scan count 6860, logical reads 13760, physical reads 1, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'Object'. Scan count 6860, logical reads 23559, physical reads 90, read-ahead reads 701.
Table 'PrintedForm'. Scan count 1375, logical reads 4505, physical reads 40, read-ahead reads 16.
Table 'StudySite'. Scan count 1378, logical reads 2756, physical reads 4, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'Subject'. Scan count 1599, logical reads 3332, physical reads 2, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'StudyEvent'. Scan count 18, logical reads 52, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'StudyEventDef'. Scan count 18, logical reads 54, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 2.
Table 'FormDefToStudyEventDef'. Scan count 1, logical reads 69, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 23.
Table 'FormDef'. Scan count 2, logical reads 78, physical reads 1, read-ahead reads 4.
Table 'LabSampleDefToFormDef'. Scan count 1, logical reads 308, physical reads 1, read-ahead reads 306.
Table 'Item'. Scan count 1335, logical reads 36510, physical reads 140, read-ahead reads 1047.
(21234 row(s) affected)
(147 row(s) affected)
One difference between the two is the work table that 2005 creates versus 2000. I can attach the plans but they are huge. I will attach it if you ask.
What I was looking for was suggestions on what I could do short of rewriting code or any suggestions in general.
FYI, this has also been posted on the SQL Server Engine forum.
Thanks
hi, here is the situation, my system has the following specks
hard drive = 45GB
memory = 1152 mb
Opsystem = win NT 4.0
application on the NT is ftp server and SQL server 6.5
I am having a tough time retrieving a simple query from a 11 million records.some of the feed back from the newsgroup is that I do not have enought memory. Is there a formula to use to figure out how much memory should allocate to the sql server? what if I allocated too much memory, does that affect the sql performance in a negative way?
Please help......
I can be reach at a.alhussein@mci.com
thanks alot
regards
Ali
I am curious about maximum memory setting .
Should we set maximum memory setting for each SQL server? For example a server has 6 GB memory then should we set maximum memory setting = 3.5 GB ?
We have a SQL 2005 installed in Windows 2003 64 bit system, which has 16 CPU and 32GB RAM, but the performance is poor. SQL server is AWE enable and the sql start account with "Lock Pages In Memory". I checked the task manager and it looks that the SQL server used only about 300 MB memory. Here is what I found:
http://blogs.msdn.com/psssql/archive/2006/11/28/sql-server-becomes-sluggish-or-appears-to-stall-on-64-bit-installations.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage
What I need to do?
Thanks
After I have set the maximum sql server memory in sql server 2014 using sp_configure, do I need to reboot whole server or restart sql service?
View 4 Replies View RelatedHi,
I am testing SQL 2005 Standard (32 bit) on a Windows 2003 Server 64 bit with 8GB of RAM? Should I enable the AWP Setting or not and should I change the maximum server memory (currently saying 2GB)?
Thanks!
Tom
We have several 2005 servers with "Maximum server memory" set to 214 gig, which I believe is the default at installation time. I am told that this means "use all the memory there is including paging." Well, this is nuts but the servers seem to work fine with this setting no matter how much physical memory they have.
One of our 2005 servers recently started paging like crazy, so I reduced "Maximum server memory" to 6000 and the paging disappeared (server has 8 gig of physical memory) and the server appears happy.
I can not explain why only this one server has this paging issue and the others do not. Should I be setting "Maximum server memory" on all my servers? Are there other considerations which might cause the server to eat-up all the memory? As far as I know no other applications run on this box.
Thanks,
Michael
I am not very good in queries. Could you please suggest me some web site/Tutorial/Artical where i can get Study Material for complex and real life queries. I know the syntexes, I just need to practice queries to enhance my skills
View 1 Replies View Related
I would like to know what happens when a very large reference data set for a lookup transform with full caching enabled is getting loaded during package execution and the computer memory runs out or is very low.
Does SSIS
a) give an out of memory error of some sort
b) resort to a no caching or partial caching mode
c) maintain the full caching mode but will switch to using the paging file(virtual memory).
I think it will resort to using the page file in which case the benefits of in memory lookups are lost and performance would suffer. If I cannot upgrade the memory or shrink the reference set somehow, i should switch that lookup task to use partial caching or no caching with an indexed lookup table. Would this make sense?
Hi
We are facing an acute situation in our web-application. Technology is ASP.NEt/VB.NET, SQL Server 2000.
Consider a scenario in which User 1 is clicking on a button which calls a SQL stored procedure. This procedure selects Group A of records of Database Page1.
At the same time if User 2 also clicks the same button which calls same SQL stored procedure. This procedure selects Group B of records of Database Page1.
So, its the same Page1 but different sets of records. At this moment, both the calls have shared locked on the Page1 inside the procedure.
Now, in call 1, inside the procedure after selecting Group A of records, the next statement is and update to those records. As soon as update statement executes, SQL Server throws a deadlock exception as follows :
Transaction (Process ID 78) was deadlocked on lock resources with another process and has been chosen as the deadlock victim. Rerun the transaction
We are able to understand why its happening. Its because, Group A and Group B of records are on the same Page1. But both the users have shared lock on the Page1. So, no one gets the exclusive lock in records for update, even though, the records are different.
How can I resolve this issue? How can I get lock on wanted rows instead of entire page?
Please advice. Thanks a bunch.
Pankaj
Iam not sure why Iam not able to successfully set up sql mail. here are the steps I follow:
1. I Created a user account and password to be used for sql server and sql agent as a service account.( Domain Namesqlservice )
2. Logged off window 2000 then log in with the same account I created in step one.
3. double clicked mail icon in control panel to set up a mail account by specifying the following:
pop :pop.erols.com
smtp: smtp.erols.com
I choose POP instead of IMAP to set up the mail account
4.tested the account by opening Outlook and was able to send and recieve mail via Outlook.
So far so good
I assume that I have already (a)created a service account to be used for sql server and sql agen mail account (b) created a mail account (c)tested the mail.
5. I opened sql server and clicked on the mail in the management console to test the sql mail by typing the same mail account in the text box, then clicking test.... I got an error message the MAPI is not set up and it is not connecting to any profile.
another error I got was Error :xp_mapi profile : failed with mail error 0x80040106
Here are some questions that I am not sure about.
Q1. Do I need to set up smtp service in service tab to use same account as sql server/ sql agent. It is using local system account now
Q2. the above steps are correct, I guess so, so what is the reason not being able to set up the mail profile to be used by sql server mail
Thanks for your help
Ali
Does anyone know how or where to adjust Ram Memory usage for SQL 2000.
I've just added Changed the 512 MB Ram that came with the Server and Exchanged it with 4 GIG Ram . Is it a good Idea to allow only 2GiG for SQL . I 've heard that SQL will take/use all Ram that you install if you let. If this is true
Can anyone advise on how/where to make adjustments. Thank You...
I am looking for recommandations regarding the memory distribution for SQL 2000 server. In the memory tab of the server properties you can define use a fixed memory size or dynamically configure SQL server or even reserve physical memory for SQL server.
Are there any hints available or must it be handled according trial and error?
Thanks for any info
mipo
Running sqlserver 2000 on a w2k server with 1gb of memory. After a reboot the memory usage is around 500m but quickly climbs. At 1 point it was up to 1.5gb so it must have been swapping. Are there any good docs about this or any recommendations on how to limit sqlserver from using all the memory. It is the only application on the server so it isn't affecting anything else so maybe it isn't a problem. I just wanted to get people's inpit on this.
View 2 Replies View RelatedWe have a SQL server that has a failover cluster on our network. We are looking to updrade the memory by adding a couple gigs of ram.
We don't need to upgrade the failover cluster to have the exact amount of memory as the primary do we?
DotNetJunkie
I would like to ask regarding the memory allocation fo SQL Server 2000. For example if my Data Server have 8GB physical memory installed how much memory can SQL Server 2000 utilize? Based on my research and understing SQL 2000 Server can only utilize 3GB memory? But using the AWE you can set the memory to a maximum server memory?
View 8 Replies View RelatedI recently changed the max. memory option in SQL from 24 GB to 30GB but the perfmon counters still only show 24 GB. Any ideas on why it is not recognizing the change? The server has Win 2003 EE and 32 GB of RAM.
View 5 Replies View RelatedI have SQL Server 2000 STD installed on a Windows Server 2003 STD machine. It's essentially the only app on this box. I have 4GB of RAM installed. SQL is configured to dynamically allocate memory. I run a batch file daily to restart the SQL services as SQL does not seem to release memory once it's got it. I don't think this is a problem because, like I said, it's basically the only app. But I want to make sure my OS memory settings and SQL's memory settings are optimized. Will adding the /3gb switch to the boot.ini file make a difference? Also, can someone educate me a little on PAE and AWE?
Thanks
Probably a dumb question, but if one is using SQL Server 2000 instead of 'SQL Express' what has to change here, in order to set up caching? What changes in the paths?
http://beta.asp.net/guidedtour2/s22.aspx
Every day or two I have to restart my SQL Server because users are receiving timeouts and very slow page loads. My mem usage in Task Manager show that SQL Server is at 1,200,000k compared to 400,000k when I restart it. Performance Monitor also shows that Buffer Manager/Target Pages and Total pages are maxed out. Any advice? Thanks!
Hello!
We have a SQL Server 2000 that has been working nice
without any issues. Lately we noticed the fact that the amount of memory that
it is using has increased and once it took down the web server as the total
amount of memory used was 2G. Due to this fact I have set Memory Max to 500MB.
Now as I look in Task Manager the Memory usage is at 530396k which is 518MB.
Any reason why would it exceed the 500MB?
What we did before was to stop the SQL Server and restart it, and it takes about
2 days until it gets back to +500MB.
What can I do to stop this behavior?
Thanks.
Dear All,
We have a Windows 2003 Enterprise server with SQL Server 2000 Enterprise on it. This has the AWE settings for 'max memory setting' to 5120MB. This server has 6GB of memory, or rather about 5.8GB due to PAE. From yesterday morning the server has become almost unresponsive when the SQL service is running, and pretty much all the memory, ie < 1MB on average is listed as being free.
The database has been growing constantly and is now 46GB, with database file size of 67GB.
We moved the database onto a new box which was being prepared for another service, and this has 8GB or ram and no AWE settings. It is running fantastic.
We are going to rebuild the original box and the SAN structure, but I want to do some fiddling before we do. I was going to set awe-enabled to 0 to see if that setting was allowing the OS to have no memory, but from reading http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/maintain/failclus.mspx it says If AWE is enabled and is taking too much memory, SQL Server must be shut down to reconfigure it, causing downtime (which makes a high availability option such as failover clustering less available). Because the memory pages used by the instance of SQL Server are taken from the nonpageable pool of Windows memory, none of the memory can be exchanged. This means that if the physical memory is filled up, SQL Server cannot use the page file set up on a physical disk to account for the surplus in memory usage. How do you reconfigure AWE settings if the SQL service is shutdown?
Also, how can I figure out whether the server is deficient in physical RAM, or it is just a 'max memory' setting we need to tweak, or is it just trial and error?
Incase it might help, we have ~3 meaningful DB's on the server apart from 'master'. One is an archive DB ~80GB, one is ~5MB and the live DB which is the size mentioned above. Unfortunately I don't know table sizes.
Pax
Greetings all!
On one of our intranet SQL servers running under Windows 2000 SP 3,
MSsql 2000 SP4 seems to gradually "eat" away all available memory (with no obvious reason for it) until a certain limit is reached, forcing the server to slow down substantially since the OS has to SWAP continuously.
I would appreciate any suggestions at this point on how to tackle this problem :)
Thank you!
VincentJS