Autonumber field: February 2012

Saturday, February 25, 2012

AWE and Memory Configuration

We have a database server running Windows 2000 Advanced Server and SQL 2000
Enterprise with 4 CPU and 8MB of memory. PAE has been configured in boot.ini.
AWE has been enabled and 5120 MB of memory allocated to SQL Server default
instance. Everything has been running fine for the last two years.
Now we are planning to add a named instance on the same server for housing
Accounting database. My question is:
1) Do I need to enable AWE on both instances of SQL Server.
2) Set upper memory for both instances. Say 4GB for default instance and
1GB for the new named instance based on their usage ratio. Leave 3GB for OS.
3) Do I need to do anything with CPU allocations?
Any suggestion. Thanks...FrazHi
With 8GB, can configure 1 GB and 5.5GB without starving the OS (as long as
it is a dedicated SQL Server).
/3GB must be set in boot.ini
Set AWE for the instance with 5.5GB, and a fixed memory setting.
Do not set AWE for the 1GB instance, but have a fixed memory setting for it
too.
Leave OS and SQL server to manage CPU allocations and leave the defaults.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Fraz" <Fraz@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CD4267EB-FF45-4272-B737-6997046F38EC@.microsoft.com...
> We have a database server running Windows 2000 Advanced Server and SQL
> 2000
> Enterprise with 4 CPU and 8MB of memory. PAE has been configured in
> boot.ini.
> AWE has been enabled and 5120 MB of memory allocated to SQL Server default
> instance. Everything has been running fine for the last two years.
> Now we are planning to add a named instance on the same server for housing
> Accounting database. My question is:
> 1) Do I need to enable AWE on both instances of SQL Server.
> 2) Set upper memory for both instances. Say 4GB for default instance and
> 1GB for the new named instance based on their usage ratio. Leave 3GB for
> OS.
> 3) Do I need to do anything with CPU allocations?
> Any suggestion. Thanks...Fraz
>|||"Fraz" <Fraz@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CD4267EB-FF45-4272-B737-6997046F38EC@.microsoft.com...
> We have a database server running Windows 2000 Advanced Server and SQL
> 2000
> Enterprise with 4 CPU and 8MB of memory. PAE has been configured in
> boot.ini.
> AWE has been enabled and 5120 MB of memory allocated to SQL Server default
> instance. Everything has been running fine for the last two years.
> Now we are planning to add a named instance on the same server for housing
> Accounting database. My question is:
Why a new instance instead of just adding the database to the default
instance?
How large are these databases? How busy?
> 1) Do I need to enable AWE on both instances of SQL Server.
I would not do that. Either configure the accounting instance to use 2 or
max memory, or mount the database in the main instance. Either one big
instance with AWE, or one big instance with AWE and one small one without.
> 2) Set upper memory for both instances. Say 4GB for default instance and
> 1GB for the new named instance based on their usage ratio. Leave 3GB for
> OS.
The OS doesn't need 3GB. 200-400MB is fine. An instance will "want" a
certian amount of memory depending on its workload and database size.
Giving it more is doesn't help at all; giving it less causes increased
physical IO and a decreased cache hit ratio. AWE is slower than normal
memory, so your smaller instance will run better without AWE. You should
evaluate how much memory your instances really need. Perhaps both instances
will run better with the /3GB switch and AWE off.
> 3) Do I need to do anything with CPU allocations?
If you don't then both instances will share all 4 CPU's, which is lets them
share resources (good), but makes is more difficult to guarantee QOS to
either workload (bad).
If you put the database in the default instance you will share memory and
CPU; in a seperate instance it will not share memory, but will share CPU
unless you set CPU affinity for the instances. So assuming you want to
segregate the instances, you should probably do something with the CPU
affinity.
David|||I really appreciate your prompt feedback. This satisfies all the questions I
had in my mind. Thanks and cheers. Fraz
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
> Hi
> With 8GB, can configure 1 GB and 5.5GB without starving the OS (as long as
> it is a dedicated SQL Server).
> /3GB must be set in boot.ini
> Set AWE for the instance with 5.5GB, and a fixed memory setting.
> Do not set AWE for the 1GB instance, but have a fixed memory setting for it
> too.
> Leave OS and SQL server to manage CPU allocations and leave the defaults.
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "Fraz" <Fraz@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:CD4267EB-FF45-4272-B737-6997046F38EC@.microsoft.com...
> > We have a database server running Windows 2000 Advanced Server and SQL
> > 2000
> > Enterprise with 4 CPU and 8MB of memory. PAE has been configured in
> > boot.ini.
> > AWE has been enabled and 5120 MB of memory allocated to SQL Server default
> > instance. Everything has been running fine for the last two years.
> > Now we are planning to add a named instance on the same server for housing
> > Accounting database. My question is:
> > 1) Do I need to enable AWE on both instances of SQL Server.
> > 2) Set upper memory for both instances. Say 4GB for default instance and
> > 1GB for the new named instance based on their usage ratio. Leave 3GB for
> > OS.
> > 3) Do I need to do anything with CPU allocations?
> > Any suggestion. Thanks...Fraz
> >
> >
>
>|||The new Accounting database (new named instance) will use different collation
setting i.e. Latin1_General, Sort order Binary whereas the default instance
is using Latin1-General, case-insensitive,for use with 1252 Character Set.
The database size in the new named instance is 5GB, it will be more busy in
the month-end than other days. The test system performance statistics (Total
Server Memory) shows that currently this instance is using 300-350MB.
The default instance in production is a busy instance as we have about 25
databases of different sizes from 5GB to 200MB. The performance statistics
for this shows that it is currently using 1.7 - 2.0GB out of allocated 5GB.
For CPU affinity, would it be okay to leave it to the Default setting.
Thanks...Fraz
"David Browne" wrote:
> "Fraz" <Fraz@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:CD4267EB-FF45-4272-B737-6997046F38EC@.microsoft.com...
> > We have a database server running Windows 2000 Advanced Server and SQL
> > 2000
> > Enterprise with 4 CPU and 8MB of memory. PAE has been configured in
> > boot.ini.
> > AWE has been enabled and 5120 MB of memory allocated to SQL Server default
> > instance. Everything has been running fine for the last two years.
> > Now we are planning to add a named instance on the same server for housing
> > Accounting database. My question is:
> Why a new instance instead of just adding the database to the default
> instance?
> How large are these databases? How busy?
> > 1) Do I need to enable AWE on both instances of SQL Server.
> I would not do that. Either configure the accounting instance to use 2 or
> max memory, or mount the database in the main instance. Either one big
> instance with AWE, or one big instance with AWE and one small one without.
> > 2) Set upper memory for both instances. Say 4GB for default instance and
> > 1GB for the new named instance based on their usage ratio. Leave 3GB for
> > OS.
> The OS doesn't need 3GB. 200-400MB is fine. An instance will "want" a
> certian amount of memory depending on its workload and database size.
> Giving it more is doesn't help at all; giving it less causes increased
> physical IO and a decreased cache hit ratio. AWE is slower than normal
> memory, so your smaller instance will run better without AWE. You should
> evaluate how much memory your instances really need. Perhaps both instances
> will run better with the /3GB switch and AWE off.
> > 3) Do I need to do anything with CPU allocations?
> If you don't then both instances will share all 4 CPU's, which is lets them
> share resources (good), but makes is more difficult to guarantee QOS to
> either workload (bad).
> If you put the database in the default instance you will share memory and
> CPU; in a seperate instance it will not share memory, but will share CPU
> unless you set CPU affinity for the instances. So assuming you want to
> segregate the instances, you should probably do something with the CPU
> affinity.
> David
>
>

AWE and Memory Configuration

We have a database server running Windows 2000 Advanced Server and SQL 2000
Enterprise with 4 CPU and 8MB of memory. PAE has been configured in boot.ini
.
AWE has been enabled and 5120 MB of memory allocated to SQL Server default
instance. Everything has been running fine for the last two years.
Now we are planning to add a named instance on the same server for housing
Accounting database. My question is:
1) Do I need to enable AWE on both instances of SQL Server.
2) Set upper memory for both instances. Say 4GB for default instance and
1GB for the new named instance based on their usage ratio. Leave 3GB for OS
.
3) Do I need to do anything with CPU allocations?
Any suggestion. Thanks...FrazHi
With 8GB, can configure 1 GB and 5.5GB without starving the OS (as long as
it is a dedicated SQL Server).
/3GB must be set in boot.ini
Set AWE for the instance with 5.5GB, and a fixed memory setting.
Do not set AWE for the 1GB instance, but have a fixed memory setting for it
too.
Leave OS and SQL server to manage CPU allocations and leave the defaults.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Fraz" <Fraz@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CD4267EB-FF45-4272-B737-6997046F38EC@.microsoft.com...
> We have a database server running Windows 2000 Advanced Server and SQL
> 2000
> Enterprise with 4 CPU and 8MB of memory. PAE has been configured in
> boot.ini.
> AWE has been enabled and 5120 MB of memory allocated to SQL Server default
> instance. Everything has been running fine for the last two years.
> Now we are planning to add a named instance on the same server for housing
> Accounting database. My question is:
> 1) Do I need to enable AWE on both instances of SQL Server.
> 2) Set upper memory for both instances. Say 4GB for default instance and
> 1GB for the new named instance based on their usage ratio. Leave 3GB for
> OS.
> 3) Do I need to do anything with CPU allocations?
> Any suggestion. Thanks...Fraz
>|||"Fraz" <Fraz@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CD4267EB-FF45-4272-B737-6997046F38EC@.microsoft.com...
> We have a database server running Windows 2000 Advanced Server and SQL
> 2000
> Enterprise with 4 CPU and 8MB of memory. PAE has been configured in
> boot.ini.
> AWE has been enabled and 5120 MB of memory allocated to SQL Server default
> instance. Everything has been running fine for the last two years.
> Now we are planning to add a named instance on the same server for housing
> Accounting database. My question is:
Why a new instance instead of just adding the database to the default
instance?
How large are these databases? How busy?

> 1) Do I need to enable AWE on both instances of SQL Server.
I would not do that. Either configure the accounting instance to use 2 or
max memory, or mount the database in the main instance. Either one big
instance with AWE, or one big instance with AWE and one small one without.
> 2) Set upper memory for both instances. Say 4GB for default instance and
> 1GB for the new named instance based on their usage ratio. Leave 3GB for
> OS.
The OS doesn't need 3GB. 200-400MB is fine. An instance will "want" a
certian amount of memory depending on its workload and database size.
Giving it more is doesn't help at all; giving it less causes increased
physical IO and a decreased cache hit ratio. AWE is slower than normal
memory, so your smaller instance will run better without AWE. You should
evaluate how much memory your instances really need. Perhaps both instances
will run better with the /3GB switch and AWE off.

> 3) Do I need to do anything with CPU allocations?
If you don't then both instances will share all 4 CPU's, which is lets them
share resources (good), but makes is more difficult to guarantee QOS to
either workload (bad).
If you put the database in the default instance you will share memory and
CPU; in a seperate instance it will not share memory, but will share CPU
unless you set CPU affinity for the instances. So assuming you want to
segregate the instances, you should probably do something with the CPU
affinity.
David|||I really appreciate your prompt feedback. This satisfies all the questions I
had in my mind. Thanks and cheers. Fraz
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:

> Hi
> With 8GB, can configure 1 GB and 5.5GB without starving the OS (as long as
> it is a dedicated SQL Server).
> /3GB must be set in boot.ini
> Set AWE for the instance with 5.5GB, and a fixed memory setting.
> Do not set AWE for the 1GB instance, but have a fixed memory setting for i
t
> too.
> Leave OS and SQL server to manage CPU allocations and leave the defaults.
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "Fraz" <Fraz@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:CD4267EB-FF45-4272-B737-6997046F38EC@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||The new Accounting database (new named instance) will use different collatio
n
setting i.e. Latin1_General, Sort order Binary whereas the default instance
is using Latin1-General, case-insensitive,for use with 1252 Character Set.
The database size in the new named instance is 5GB, it will be more busy in
the month-end than other days. The test system performance statistics (Total
Server Memory) shows that currently this instance is using 300-350MB.
The default instance in production is a busy instance as we have about 25
databases of different sizes from 5GB to 200MB. The performance statistics
for this shows that it is currently using 1.7 - 2.0GB out of allocated 5GB.
For CPU affinity, would it be okay to leave it to the Default setting.
Thanks...Fraz
"David Browne" wrote:

> "Fraz" <Fraz@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:CD4267EB-FF45-4272-B737-6997046F38EC@.microsoft.com...
> Why a new instance instead of just adding the database to the default
> instance?
> How large are these databases? How busy?
>
> I would not do that. Either configure the accounting instance to use 2 or
> max memory, or mount the database in the main instance. Either one big
> instance with AWE, or one big instance with AWE and one small one without.
> The OS doesn't need 3GB. 200-400MB is fine. An instance will "want" a
> certian amount of memory depending on its workload and database size.
> Giving it more is doesn't help at all; giving it less causes increased
> physical IO and a decreased cache hit ratio. AWE is slower than normal
> memory, so your smaller instance will run better without AWE. You should
> evaluate how much memory your instances really need. Perhaps both instanc
es
> will run better with the /3GB switch and AWE off.
>
> If you don't then both instances will share all 4 CPU's, which is lets the
m
> share resources (good), but makes is more difficult to guarantee QOS to
> either workload (bad).
> If you put the database in the default instance you will share memory and
> CPU; in a seperate instance it will not share memory, but will share CPU
> unless you set CPU affinity for the instances. So assuming you want to
> segregate the instances, you should probably do something with the CPU
> affinity.
> David
>
>

AWE and Max Server Memory (MB)

What purpose does Max Server Memory (MB) serve, if I have 8 GB of RAM:
1. I have the switch properly set in the boot.ini
2. AWE Enabled is set to 1
3. Max Server Memory (MB) set to 2147483647
In other words, if I want to reserve 2 GB for my OS, then would not the Max
Server Memory (MB) set to 2147483647 allow SQL Server to use 6 GB?
Message posted via http://www.droptable.comYou want to set the max server memory to 6 GB = 6 * 1,204 MB = 7,224 MB.
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
"cbrichards via droptable.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:65e80daa1f3f8@.uwe...
What purpose does Max Server Memory (MB) serve, if I have 8 GB of RAM:
1. I have the switch properly set in the boot.ini
2. AWE Enabled is set to 1
3. Max Server Memory (MB) set to 2147483647
In other words, if I want to reserve 2 GB for my OS, then would not the Max
Server Memory (MB) set to 2147483647 allow SQL Server to use 6 GB?
Message posted via http://www.droptable.com|||You should also see my reply to your original post on this subject.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"cbrichards via droptable.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:65e80daa1f3f8@.uwe...
> What purpose does Max Server Memory (MB) serve, if I have 8 GB of RAM:
> 1. I have the switch properly set in the boot.ini
> 2. AWE Enabled is set to 1
> 3. Max Server Memory (MB) set to 2147483647
> In other words, if I want to reserve 2 GB for my OS, then would not the
> Max
> Server Memory (MB) set to 2147483647 allow SQL Server to use 6 GB?
> --
> Message posted via http://www.droptable.com
>

AWE and Max Server Memory (MB)

What purpose does Max Server Memory (MB) serve, if I have 8 GB of RAM:
1. I have the switch properly set in the boot.ini
2. AWE Enabled is set to 1
3. Max Server Memory (MB) set to 2147483647
In other words, if I want to reserve 2 GB for my OS, then would not the Max
Server Memory (MB) set to 2147483647 allow SQL Server to use 6 GB?
--
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.comYou want to set the max server memory to 6 GB = 6 * 1,204 MB = 7,224 MB.
--
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
"cbrichards via SQLMonster.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:65e80daa1f3f8@.uwe...
What purpose does Max Server Memory (MB) serve, if I have 8 GB of RAM:
1. I have the switch properly set in the boot.ini
2. AWE Enabled is set to 1
3. Max Server Memory (MB) set to 2147483647
In other words, if I want to reserve 2 GB for my OS, then would not the Max
Server Memory (MB) set to 2147483647 allow SQL Server to use 6 GB?
--
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com|||You should also see my reply to your original post on this subject.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"cbrichards via SQLMonster.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:65e80daa1f3f8@.uwe...
> What purpose does Max Server Memory (MB) serve, if I have 8 GB of RAM:
> 1. I have the switch properly set in the boot.ini
> 2. AWE Enabled is set to 1
> 3. Max Server Memory (MB) set to 2147483647
> In other words, if I want to reserve 2 GB for my OS, then would not the
> Max
> Server Memory (MB) set to 2147483647 allow SQL Server to use 6 GB?
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
>

AWE and limiting below 4GB SQL Server Memory Allocation

We are running W2K Advanced Server with SQL Server
Enterprise Edition. Problem is SQL Server takes almost
all of the memory 7.8GB of 8GB and Peoplesoft application
pages like crazy. Anyway, is there a way to limit the
below 4GB SQL Server memory and use all of the above 4GB
limit? Peoplesoft can't address the above 4GB line. The
real soluition is getting the !#@.$ application off of the
server. But I can't do that right now. Is there a patch
or some way to limit the below 4GB SQL Server memory to
say 2GB and let it have all 4GB above the 4GB line?You cannot tell sql server to use what memory area. You
should set the max memory for sql server to 4gb in sql
enterprise manager. At startup sql server will grab the
first 4gb of memory. So, configure sql server in service
control manager to start manually. Start the Peoplesoft
application first so that it will get the memory it needs.
Then start the sql server and it will grab 4gb of memory
out of available memory. SQL server will lock that memory
and won't dynamically release/acquire memory as it needs
(this is a feature of AWE).
This isn't perfect solution, but you will survive.
>--Original Message--
>We are running W2K Advanced Server with SQL Server
>Enterprise Edition. Problem is SQL Server takes almost
>all of the memory 7.8GB of 8GB and Peoplesoft application
>pages like crazy. Anyway, is there a way to limit the
>below 4GB SQL Server memory and use all of the above 4GB
>limit? Peoplesoft can't address the above 4GB line. The
>real soluition is getting the !#@.$ application off of the
>server. But I can't do that right now. Is there a patch
>or some way to limit the below 4GB SQL Server memory to
>say 2GB and let it have all 4GB above the 4GB line?
>.
>

AWE and 3GB switches

I'm configuring a new server with Windows 2003 Enterprise SP1 and SQL Server
2000 Enterprise/SP3a. The server has 8GB of RAM
I have set the /PAE switch in boot.ini and then ran the following:
sp_configure 'show advanced options', 1
RECONFIGURE
GO
sp_configure 'awe enabled', 1
RECONFIGURE
GO
sp_configure 'max server memory', 6144
RECONFIGURE
GO
I can confirm using the SQL Server:Memory Manager-Total Server Memory
counter that SQL Server is using 6303928 kbs of memory.
Should I be using the 3GB switch? If so why?If you want to use as much of the 8GB SQL server then no.
Using the /3G switch will allow only up to 3GB of RAM to SQL Server.
Likewise, you should leave approx. 1GB of RAM for the OS for every 8GB of
RAM available.
--
MG
"Terri" wrote:
> I'm configuring a new server with Windows 2003 Enterprise SP1 and SQL Server
> 2000 Enterprise/SP3a. The server has 8GB of RAM
> I have set the /PAE switch in boot.ini and then ran the following:
> sp_configure 'show advanced options', 1
> RECONFIGURE
> GO
> sp_configure 'awe enabled', 1
> RECONFIGURE
> GO
> sp_configure 'max server memory', 6144
> RECONFIGURE
> GO
> I can confirm using the SQL Server:Memory Manager-Total Server Memory
> counter that SQL Server is using 6303928 kbs of memory.
> Should I be using the 3GB switch? If so why?
>
>
>|||Hurme, thanks for your response. My confusion on this issue unfortunately
persists. Subsequent to my post I found the following article which says I
should use both, /3GB and /PAE.
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/sql_server_performance_audit5.asp
"Hurme" <michael.geles@.thomson.com> wrote in message
news:93A66D75-882B-4501-9607-309CC354FA40@.microsoft.com...
> If you want to use as much of the 8GB SQL server then no.
> Using the /3G switch will allow only up to 3GB of RAM to SQL Server.
> Likewise, you should leave approx. 1GB of RAM for the OS for every 8GB of
> RAM available.
> --
> MG
>
> "Terri" wrote:
> > I'm configuring a new server with Windows 2003 Enterprise SP1 and SQL
Server
> > 2000 Enterprise/SP3a. The server has 8GB of RAM
> >
> > I have set the /PAE switch in boot.ini and then ran the following:
> >
> > sp_configure 'show advanced options', 1
> > RECONFIGURE
> > GO
> > sp_configure 'awe enabled', 1
> > RECONFIGURE
> > GO
> > sp_configure 'max server memory', 6144
> > RECONFIGURE
> > GO
> >
> > I can confirm using the SQL Server:Memory Manager-Total Server Memory
> > counter that SQL Server is using 6303928 kbs of memory.
> >
> > Should I be using the 3GB switch? If so why?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >|||Hmmm...the wording is a little ambiguous. It does say in the article, "you
must enter one of the following switches in the boot line of the boot.ini
file..." and Perfmon is showing that more than 6GB on RAM is getting used.
Here is a line that found in another article
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/274750 :
"Use of the /PAE switch in the Boot.ini and the AWE enable option in SQL
Server allows SQL Server 2000 to utilize more than 4 GB memory. Without the
/PAE switch SQL Server can only utilize up to 3 GB of memory."
It's doesn't say that you need both flags to use more that 4GB.
HTH
--
MG
"Terri" wrote:
> Hurme, thanks for your response. My confusion on this issue unfortunately
> persists. Subsequent to my post I found the following article which says I
> should use both, /3GB and /PAE.
> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/sql_server_performance_audit5.asp
> "Hurme" <michael.geles@.thomson.com> wrote in message
> news:93A66D75-882B-4501-9607-309CC354FA40@.microsoft.com...
> > If you want to use as much of the 8GB SQL server then no.
> > Using the /3G switch will allow only up to 3GB of RAM to SQL Server.
> >
> > Likewise, you should leave approx. 1GB of RAM for the OS for every 8GB of
> > RAM available.
> > --
> > MG
> >
> >
> > "Terri" wrote:
> >
> > > I'm configuring a new server with Windows 2003 Enterprise SP1 and SQL
> Server
> > > 2000 Enterprise/SP3a. The server has 8GB of RAM
> > >
> > > I have set the /PAE switch in boot.ini and then ran the following:
> > >
> > > sp_configure 'show advanced options', 1
> > > RECONFIGURE
> > > GO
> > > sp_configure 'awe enabled', 1
> > > RECONFIGURE
> > > GO
> > > sp_configure 'max server memory', 6144
> > > RECONFIGURE
> > > GO
> > >
> > > I can confirm using the SQL Server:Memory Manager-Total Server Memory
> > > counter that SQL Server is using 6303928 kbs of memory.
> > >
> > > Should I be using the 3GB switch? If so why?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>|||Yes, there is some ambiguity. Perhaps others will chime in with additional
thoughts.
"Hurme" <michael.geles@.thomson.com> wrote in message
news:1A5C69C9-0D56-4F33-845C-457C11FAEE62@.microsoft.com...
> Hmmm...the wording is a little ambiguous. It does say in the article,
"you
> must enter one of the following switches in the boot line of the boot.ini
> file..." and Perfmon is showing that more than 6GB on RAM is getting used.
> Here is a line that found in another article
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/274750 :
> "Use of the /PAE switch in the Boot.ini and the AWE enable option in SQL
> Server allows SQL Server 2000 to utilize more than 4 GB memory. Without
the
> /PAE switch SQL Server can only utilize up to 3 GB of memory."
> It's doesn't say that you need both flags to use more that 4GB.
>|||Terry
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/283037/en-us
With more than 4GB, then you should use PAE, whether or not Win2K3 enables
this for you or not, use the registry settings to determine if it was
detected, but AWE will require PAE to make use of any address space above
4GB. In fact, the OS and SS will not even recognize memory greater than 4GB
even exists without PAE enabled.
"Terri" <terri@.cybernets.com> wrote in message
news:f0lsmn$g2k$1@.reader2.nmix.net...
> Yes, there is some ambiguity. Perhaps others will chime in with additional
> thoughts.
> "Hurme" <michael.geles@.thomson.com> wrote in message
> news:1A5C69C9-0D56-4F33-845C-457C11FAEE62@.microsoft.com...
>> Hmmm...the wording is a little ambiguous. It does say in the article,
> "you
>> must enter one of the following switches in the boot line of the boot.ini
>> file..." and Perfmon is showing that more than 6GB on RAM is getting
>> used.
>> Here is a line that found in another article
>> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/274750 :
>> "Use of the /PAE switch in the Boot.ini and the AWE enable option in SQL
>> Server allows SQL Server 2000 to utilize more than 4 GB memory. Without
> the
>> /PAE switch SQL Server can only utilize up to 3 GB of memory."
>> It's doesn't say that you need both flags to use more that 4GB.
>

AWE and 3GB switches

AWE + PAE + 3GB cause system to freeze?

Hi,
I have a server with 8Gb of memory
so the /3Gb and /PAE switches are in the boot.ini.
I'm using Win 2003 Ent. & SQL 2000 ent.
at regular basis, my system freeze for some seconds if the AWE option is on.
any idea of what's appends?
My server also host Analysis Services + IIS + Sharepoint + Reporting
Services.
thanks.
Jerome."Jéjé" <willgart@.BBBhotmailAAA.com> wrote in message
news:ecI4P2S0FHA.3000@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have a server with 8Gb of memory
> so the /3Gb and /PAE switches are in the boot.ini.
> I'm using Win 2003 Ent. & SQL 2000 ent.
> at regular basis, my system freeze for some seconds if the AWE option is
> on.
> any idea of what's appends?
> My server also host Analysis Services + IIS + Sharepoint + Reporting
> Services.
>
It's not generally recommended to use AWE if the server is not dedicated to
SQL Server. Leave the /3GB switch, but get rid of /PAE and AWE. Give 3GB
to SQL Server and leave 2G for Analysis Services, and 2G for IIS, Sharepoint
and Reporting.
David|||in this configuration, only 4Gb is used by the applications
AS consumme 200mb, 200mb for sharepoint & RS
SQL use 2.7 Gb
So I have a lot of free memory.
But also... for the moment I'm in dev mode, and only SQL Server is used, so
the other applications don't use any ressources and are in standby.
I'm just using DTS to load data in my databases.
"David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:uFjaGMT0FHA.1028@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> "Jéjé" <willgart@.BBBhotmailAAA.com> wrote in message
> news:ecI4P2S0FHA.3000@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>> I have a server with 8Gb of memory
>> so the /3Gb and /PAE switches are in the boot.ini.
>> I'm using Win 2003 Ent. & SQL 2000 ent.
>> at regular basis, my system freeze for some seconds if the AWE option is
>> on.
>> any idea of what's appends?
>> My server also host Analysis Services + IIS + Sharepoint + Reporting
>> Services.
> It's not generally recommended to use AWE if the server is not dedicated
> to SQL Server. Leave the /3GB switch, but get rid of /PAE and AWE. Give
> 3GB to SQL Server and leave 2G for Analysis Services, and 2G for IIS,
> Sharepoint and Reporting.
> David
>

AWE + 8GB

I have the \PAE switch in the boot.ini file. Do I also need the \3GB ? What
is that used for ? If i dont use it, can i still enable AWE ?
I have 8GB of RAM and also enabled AWE option. Just wondering what the \3GB
switch does in addition to \PAE/PAE is an OS switch needed if you want any application to have access to
memory beyond 4GB.
Normally, applications cannot address or use any memory beyond 2GB. However,
if you have /PAE on in the OS, you can configure AWE in SQL Server so that
SQL Server, as an application, can access memory above 2 GB. It access that
memory sort of like a page fault, using some memory as a map, to be able to
access the memory in the higher range.
/3GB is an OS flag that allows any app to ADDRESS memory up to 3GB. That
means that if you have both /3GB and AWE in SQL Server, the memory in the
203GB range can be directly accessed, rather than going through the AWE
maps. Direct access is always faster than mapped addressing.
So to summarize the two OS flags:
/PAE allows an app within the OS to use memory beyond 4GB
/3GB allows an app to directly address memory in the 2-3GB range
--
HTH
--
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:#L1K98nkDHA.688@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I have the \PAE switch in the boot.ini file. Do I also need the \3GB ?
What
> is that used for ? If i dont use it, can i still enable AWE ?
> I have 8GB of RAM and also enabled AWE option. Just wondering what the
\3GB
> switch does in addition to \PAE
>|||So its best advisable then even though we may set a max limit to say 5 or
6GB on an 8GB RAM box to use both switches right ?
"Kalen Delaney" <replies@.public_newsgroups.com> wrote in message
news:%2376kiKokDHA.2732@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> /PAE is an OS switch needed if you want any application to have access to
> memory beyond 4GB.
> Normally, applications cannot address or use any memory beyond 2GB.
However,
> if you have /PAE on in the OS, you can configure AWE in SQL Server so
that
> SQL Server, as an application, can access memory above 2 GB. It access
that
> memory sort of like a page fault, using some memory as a map, to be able
to
> access the memory in the higher range.
> /3GB is an OS flag that allows any app to ADDRESS memory up to 3GB. That
> means that if you have both /3GB and AWE in SQL Server, the memory in the
> 203GB range can be directly accessed, rather than going through the AWE
> maps. Direct access is always faster than mapped addressing.
> So to summarize the two OS flags:
> /PAE allows an app within the OS to use memory beyond 4GB
> /3GB allows an app to directly address memory in the 2-3GB range
> --
> HTH
> --
> Kalen Delaney
> SQL Server MVP
> www.SolidQualityLearning.com
>
> "Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:#L1K98nkDHA.688@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I have the \PAE switch in the boot.ini file. Do I also need the \3GB ?
> What
> > is that used for ? If i dont use it, can i still enable AWE ?
> > I have 8GB of RAM and also enabled AWE option. Just wondering what the
> \3GB
> > switch does in addition to \PAE
> >
> >
>|||Yes, up to 16 GB you should use both. After 16, the memory maps that AWE
needs take so much space and must be directly accessible, so if you use /3GB
and only leave 1 GB for the OS and the AWE maps, it is not enough. So after
16GB, you should not use AWE and /3GB both.
--
HTH
--
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OXA4IdokDHA.1948@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> So its best advisable then even though we may set a max limit to say 5 or
> 6GB on an 8GB RAM box to use both switches right ?
>
> "Kalen Delaney" <replies@.public_newsgroups.com> wrote in message
> news:%2376kiKokDHA.2732@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > /PAE is an OS switch needed if you want any application to have access
to
> > memory beyond 4GB.
> > Normally, applications cannot address or use any memory beyond 2GB.
> However,
> > if you have /PAE on in the OS, you can configure AWE in SQL Server so
> that
> > SQL Server, as an application, can access memory above 2 GB. It access
> that
> > memory sort of like a page fault, using some memory as a map, to be able
> to
> > access the memory in the higher range.
> >
> > /3GB is an OS flag that allows any app to ADDRESS memory up to 3GB. That
> > means that if you have both /3GB and AWE in SQL Server, the memory in
the
> > 203GB range can be directly accessed, rather than going through the AWE
> > maps. Direct access is always faster than mapped addressing.
> >
> > So to summarize the two OS flags:
> > /PAE allows an app within the OS to use memory beyond 4GB
> > /3GB allows an app to directly address memory in the 2-3GB range
> >
> > --
> > HTH
> > --
> > Kalen Delaney
> > SQL Server MVP
> > www.SolidQualityLearning.com
> >
> >
> > "Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:#L1K98nkDHA.688@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > I have the \PAE switch in the boot.ini file. Do I also need the \3GB ?
> > What
> > > is that used for ? If i dont use it, can i still enable AWE ?
> > > I have 8GB of RAM and also enabled AWE option. Just wondering what the
> > \3GB
> > > switch does in addition to \PAE
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>|||"Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23L1K98nkDHA.688@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I have the \PAE switch in the boot.ini file. Do I also need the \3GB ?
What
> is that used for ? If i dont use it, can i still enable AWE ?
> I have 8GB of RAM and also enabled AWE option. Just wondering what the
\3GB
> switch does in addition to \PAE
Just to add to what has already been said, be careful of AWE because it does
not always provide benefit. The additional level of indirection has some
overhead: I ran a large number of benchmarks a couple of years ago on a 16Gb
32 way machine and we found that every test process of our application ran
slightly _slower_ with AWE switched on!
If your application is using AWE as cache, demanding Gb of data to be
present in RAM for it to run at an acceptable speed, it is likely that you
have an inefficient application. In this case, tweaking the app will provide
you orders of magnitude better performance than throwing hardware at the
problem.
Of course, this is assuming you live in a perfect world...
On the other hand you may be using a single SQL Server instance to host many
SQL Server applications on different databases, in which case I can see that
AWE may provide some benefit in that case. In this case, however, it may
well be that you have partitioned the applications onto separate SQL Server
instances instead.
AWE gives me palpitations from the old x86 DOS days with the 640k/1Mb memory
barrier, paging LIM/EMS banks, upper memory and extended memory. I had a
little cottage industry crafting config.sys and autoexec.bat to make
combinations of apps work together without having to reboot or crash. Ahhh
those were the days.
Kind Regards, Howard|||I want to use AWE cos we have 8GB of RAM sitting on the box and do not wish
to see it go waste . The folks always say to throw as much memory as you can
and were just doing that ...How can we determine if our AWE is using cache
as you mentioned and that we might need to tweak the app bcos of the same ?
"Howard Long" <howard@.howardlongxxx.com> wrote in message
news:bmj3ap$df8$1@.sparta.btinternet.com...
> "Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23L1K98nkDHA.688@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I have the \PAE switch in the boot.ini file. Do I also need the \3GB ?
> What
> > is that used for ? If i dont use it, can i still enable AWE ?
> > I have 8GB of RAM and also enabled AWE option. Just wondering what the
> \3GB
> > switch does in addition to \PAE
> Just to add to what has already been said, be careful of AWE because it
does
> not always provide benefit. The additional level of indirection has some
> overhead: I ran a large number of benchmarks a couple of years ago on a
16Gb
> 32 way machine and we found that every test process of our application ran
> slightly _slower_ with AWE switched on!
> If your application is using AWE as cache, demanding Gb of data to be
> present in RAM for it to run at an acceptable speed, it is likely that you
> have an inefficient application. In this case, tweaking the app will
provide
> you orders of magnitude better performance than throwing hardware at the
> problem.
> Of course, this is assuming you live in a perfect world...
> On the other hand you may be using a single SQL Server instance to host
many
> SQL Server applications on different databases, in which case I can see
that
> AWE may provide some benefit in that case. In this case, however, it may
> well be that you have partitioned the applications onto separate SQL
Server
> instances instead.
> AWE gives me palpitations from the old x86 DOS days with the 640k/1Mb
memory
> barrier, paging LIM/EMS banks, upper memory and extended memory. I had a
> little cottage industry crafting config.sys and autoexec.bat to make
> combinations of apps work together without having to reboot or crash. Ahhh
> those were the days.
> Kind Regards, Howard
>

AWE /3GB performance

I have 8gb of memory, win2003 server advanced, sql server 2000 ent. The
concern when using the 3gb option is that I force the OS into 1gb of memory
and causing the OS to be memory starved. Is it possible to create this
condition and what would be the minimum set of services that should be
running on the SQL Server box. For example, print spooler, application layer
gateway, etc.
"Uri Dimant" wrote:

> John
> If you have Windows 2000(Advanced or Datacenter) and 4GB RAM use /3GB (AWE
> support isn't used)
> You can provide more info to get more accurate advice
> "John Grant" <JohnGrant@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:617A3083-DBEA-46C4-AFBE-C501839D12C7@.microsoft.com...
>
>
John
>The /3GB switch is used to tell SQL Server to take advantage of 3GB out of
>the base 4GB of RAM that Windows 2000/3 supports natively. If you don't
>specify >this option, then SQL Server will only take advantage of 2GB of
>the first 4GB of RAM in the server, essentially wasting 1GB of RAM.
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
"John Grant" <JohnGrant@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A6CF4DB6-FFEE-4AA0-82B8-DD3BB04E6D74@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
>I have 8gb of memory, win2003 server advanced, sql server 2000 ent. The
> concern when using the 3gb option is that I force the OS into 1gb of
> memory
> and causing the OS to be memory starved. Is it possible to create this
> condition and what would be the minimum set of services that should be
> running on the SQL Server box. For example, print spooler, application
> layer
> gateway, etc.
>
> "Uri Dimant" wrote:
|||Uri, thanks for the info. I have read the doc and understand AWE and the 3gb
option. Also I noticed some more advanced boot.ini options to control the
use of the memory above 1g.
I have a sql server that is running slow. I have not been able to profile
the server. What I want to understand is "Is it possible to cause the OS to
be memory starved using the 3gb option causing sql server to appear slow?"
For example if the OS is forced to swap to disk for normal OS activities.
If it is possible what would be the telling signs?
thanks
"Uri Dimant" wrote:

> John
> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
>
>
> "John Grant" <JohnGrant@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:A6CF4DB6-FFEE-4AA0-82B8-DD3BB04E6D74@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||John
Is it SQL Server running dedicated on the server?
Do you have an OLTP applications connect to the SQL Server?
I'd strat to to identify perfomance problems from the application side (
checking indexes, database design)
"John Grant" <JohnGrant@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DD6405A3-56C5-4394-81D5-121D204420F3@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Uri, thanks for the info. I have read the doc and understand AWE and the
> 3gb
> option. Also I noticed some more advanced boot.ini options to control the
> use of the memory above 1g.
> I have a sql server that is running slow. I have not been able to profile
> the server. What I want to understand is "Is it possible to cause the OS
> to
> be memory starved using the 3gb option causing sql server to appear slow?"
> For example if the OS is forced to swap to disk for normal OS activities.
> If it is possible what would be the telling signs?
> thanks
> "Uri Dimant" wrote:

AWE /3GB performance

Is it possible to use AWE and /3gb option and cause the OS to become
constrained? Is so what key OS services are critical and which ones should
be stopped?
thank
-JohnJohn
If you have Windows 2000(Advanced or Datacenter) and 4GB RAM use /3GB (AWE
support isn't used)
You can provide more info to get more accurate advice
"John Grant" <JohnGrant@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:617A3083-DBEA-46C4-AFBE-C501839D12C7@.microsoft.com...
> Is it possible to use AWE and /3gb option and cause the OS to become
> constrained? Is so what key OS services are critical and which ones
> should
> be stopped?
> thank
> -John|||Hello John,
You can also use \PAE option if memory is more on the server e.g.8 GB and
SQL Server 2005 will manage the memory dynamically after the enabling the
AWE option.
Good Luck!
MB
"John Grant" <JohnGrant@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:617A3083-DBEA-46C4-AFBE-C501839D12C7@.microsoft.com...
> Is it possible to use AWE and /3gb option and cause the OS to become
> constrained? Is so what key OS services are critical and which ones
> should
> be stopped?
> thank
> -John|||John
>The /3GB switch is used to tell SQL Server to take advantage of 3GB out of
>the base 4GB of RAM that Windows 2000/3 supports natively. If you don't
>specify >this option, then SQL Server will only take advantage of 2GB of
>the first 4GB of RAM in the server, essentially wasting 1GB of RAM.
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
"John Grant" <JohnGrant@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A6CF4DB6-FFEE-4AA0-82B8-DD3BB04E6D74@.microsoft.com...
>I have 8gb of memory, win2003 server advanced, sql server 2000 ent. The
> concern when using the 3gb option is that I force the OS into 1gb of
> memory
> and causing the OS to be memory starved. Is it possible to create this
> condition and what would be the minimum set of services that should be
> running on the SQL Server box. For example, print spooler, application
> layer
> gateway, etc.
>
> "Uri Dimant" wrote:
>> John
>> If you have Windows 2000(Advanced or Datacenter) and 4GB RAM use /3GB
>> (AWE
>> support isn't used)
>> You can provide more info to get more accurate advice
>> "John Grant" <JohnGrant@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:617A3083-DBEA-46C4-AFBE-C501839D12C7@.microsoft.com...
>> > Is it possible to use AWE and /3gb option and cause the OS to become
>> > constrained? Is so what key OS services are critical and which ones
>> > should
>> > be stopped?
>> >
>> > thank
>> > -John
>>|||John
Is it SQL Server running dedicated on the server?
Do you have an OLTP applications connect to the SQL Server?
I'd strat to to identify perfomance problems from the application side (
checking indexes, database design)
"John Grant" <JohnGrant@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DD6405A3-56C5-4394-81D5-121D204420F3@.microsoft.com...
> Uri, thanks for the info. I have read the doc and understand AWE and the
> 3gb
> option. Also I noticed some more advanced boot.ini options to control the
> use of the memory above 1g.
> I have a sql server that is running slow. I have not been able to profile
> the server. What I want to understand is "Is it possible to cause the OS
> to
> be memory starved using the 3gb option causing sql server to appear slow?"
> For example if the OS is forced to swap to disk for normal OS activities.
> If it is possible what would be the telling signs?
> thanks
> "Uri Dimant" wrote:
>> John
>> >The /3GB switch is used to tell SQL Server to take advantage of 3GB out
>> >of
>> >the base 4GB of RAM that Windows 2000/3 supports natively. If you don't
>> >specify >this option, then SQL Server will only take advantage of 2GB of
>> >the first 4GB of RAM in the server, essentially wasting 1GB of RAM.
>> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
>>
>>
>> "John Grant" <JohnGrant@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:A6CF4DB6-FFEE-4AA0-82B8-DD3BB04E6D74@.microsoft.com...
>> >I have 8gb of memory, win2003 server advanced, sql server 2000 ent. The
>> > concern when using the 3gb option is that I force the OS into 1gb of
>> > memory
>> > and causing the OS to be memory starved. Is it possible to create this
>> > condition and what would be the minimum set of services that should be
>> > running on the SQL Server box. For example, print spooler, application
>> > layer
>> > gateway, etc.
>> >
>> >
>> > "Uri Dimant" wrote:
>> >
>> >> John
>> >>
>> >> If you have Windows 2000(Advanced or Datacenter) and 4GB RAM use
>> >> /3GB
>> >> (AWE
>> >> support isn't used)
>> >> You can provide more info to get more accurate advice
>> >>
>> >> "John Grant" <JohnGrant@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:617A3083-DBEA-46C4-AFBE-C501839D12C7@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > Is it possible to use AWE and /3gb option and cause the OS to become
>> >> > constrained? Is so what key OS services are critical and which ones
>> >> > should
>> >> > be stopped?
>> >> >
>> >> > thank
>> >> > -John
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>

AWE / Maximum Server Memory

We have a clustered environment with each node having 8GB memory, Win2k3
Enterprise Edition SP2, and SQL2k Enterprise Edition SP4.
I have read a few articles on AWE and the following link provided me with a
lot of information, but I still have a few questions:
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
I understand that the switches that I should use are /3GB /PAE.
In the above article it stated that AWE technology is used only for the RAM
that exceeds the base 4GB of RAM. It further states that once the AWE
Enabled option is set to 1, SQL Server will take all of the RAM except 128MB
reserved for the OS. My question here is whether this statement refers to
128MB of the available AWE memory (e.g. the 128MB of the 4GB that is not from
the base 4GB in an 8GB configuration). So with the /3GB switch and AWE
enabled, does the operating system have approxiamtely 1.128GB dedicated to
the OS or only 128MB (this latter seems much too low).
When setting "Maximum Server Memory" does this refer to the entire 8GB (my
guess is yes)? And with no other applications running, should this be set to
8GB or (8GB - 1.128GB => 6.872GB).
The only other applications that we have running are the Vertias Client for
Backups and Symantec's Antivirus besides the standard Windows 2003 services.
I'm sure most production environments have something very similar. What
sould the recommended "Maximum Server Memory" be set to for a 8GB environment
with these services running.
Thanks,
Larry
Larry
> When setting "Maximum Server Memory" does this refer to the entire 8GB (my
> guess is yes)? And with no other applications running, should this be set
> to
> 8GB or (8GB - 1.128GB => 6.872GB).
Yes , you can set up even to 7GB :-))

> The only other applications that we have running are the Vertias Client
> for
> Backups and Symantec's Antivirus besides the standard Windows 2003
> services.
> I'm sure most production environments have something very similar. What
> sould the recommended "Maximum Server Memory" be set to for a 8GB
> environment
> with these services running.
You have to determine how much memory does each proccess take and
according to it set the MAX memory
"Larry Herbinaux" <LarryHerbinaux@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:7E65D50A-7BA1-4F5E-B62A-B8F9792C77CC@.microsoft.com...
> We have a clustered environment with each node having 8GB memory, Win2k3
> Enterprise Edition SP2, and SQL2k Enterprise Edition SP4.
> I have read a few articles on AWE and the following link provided me with
> a
> lot of information, but I still have a few questions:
> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
> I understand that the switches that I should use are /3GB /PAE.
> In the above article it stated that AWE technology is used only for the
> RAM
> that exceeds the base 4GB of RAM. It further states that once the AWE
> Enabled option is set to 1, SQL Server will take all of the RAM except
> 128MB
> reserved for the OS. My question here is whether this statement refers to
> 128MB of the available AWE memory (e.g. the 128MB of the 4GB that is not
> from
> the base 4GB in an 8GB configuration). So with the /3GB switch and AWE
> enabled, does the operating system have approxiamtely 1.128GB dedicated to
> the OS or only 128MB (this latter seems much too low).
> When setting "Maximum Server Memory" does this refer to the entire 8GB (my
> guess is yes)? And with no other applications running, should this be set
> to
> 8GB or (8GB - 1.128GB => 6.872GB).
> The only other applications that we have running are the Vertias Client
> for
> Backups and Symantec's Antivirus besides the standard Windows 2003
> services.
> I'm sure most production environments have something very similar. What
> sould the recommended "Maximum Server Memory" be set to for a 8GB
> environment
> with these services running.
> Thanks,
> Larry
|||just to mention to be carefuly on mem counting having full 4gb of mem.
close to 4gb boundary, there may be memory mapped area used by motherboard
[pci cards etc], which may take almost 0,5gb of memory.
so, instead of 4gb, you may find available only 3,5gb appx or so
"Larry Herbinaux" <LarryHerbinaux@.discussions.microsoft.com> je napisao u
poruci interesnoj
grupi:7E65D50A-7BA1-4F5E-B62A-B8F9792C77CC@.microsoft.com...
> We have a clustered environment with each node having 8GB memory, Win2k3
> Enterprise Edition SP2, and SQL2k Enterprise Edition SP4.
> enabled, does the operating system have approxiamtely 1.128GB dedicated to
> the OS or only 128MB (this latter seems much too low).
>
> Larry

AWE / Maximum Server Memory

We have a clustered environment with each node having 8GB memory, Win2k3
Enterprise Edition SP2, and SQL2k Enterprise Edition SP4.
I have read a few articles on AWE and the following link provided me with a
lot of information, but I still have a few questions:
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
I understand that the switches that I should use are /3GB /PAE.
In the above article it stated that AWE technology is used only for the RAM
that exceeds the base 4GB of RAM. It further states that once the AWE
Enabled option is set to 1, SQL Server will take all of the RAM except 128MB
reserved for the OS. My question here is whether this statement refers to
128MB of the available AWE memory (e.g. the 128MB of the 4GB that is not from
the base 4GB in an 8GB configuration). So with the /3GB switch and AWE
enabled, does the operating system have approxiamtely 1.128GB dedicated to
the OS or only 128MB (this latter seems much too low).
When setting "Maximum Server Memory" does this refer to the entire 8GB (my
guess is yes)? And with no other applications running, should this be set to
8GB or (8GB - 1.128GB => 6.872GB).
The only other applications that we have running are the Vertias Client for
Backups and Symantec's Antivirus besides the standard Windows 2003 services.
I'm sure most production environments have something very similar. What
sould the recommended "Maximum Server Memory" be set to for a 8GB environment
with these services running.
Thanks,
LarryLarry
> When setting "Maximum Server Memory" does this refer to the entire 8GB (my
> guess is yes)? And with no other applications running, should this be set
> to
> 8GB or (8GB - 1.128GB => 6.872GB).
Yes , you can set up even to 7GB :-))
> The only other applications that we have running are the Vertias Client
> for
> Backups and Symantec's Antivirus besides the standard Windows 2003
> services.
> I'm sure most production environments have something very similar. What
> sould the recommended "Maximum Server Memory" be set to for a 8GB
> environment
> with these services running.
You have to determine how much memory does each proccess take and
according to it set the MAX memory
"Larry Herbinaux" <LarryHerbinaux@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:7E65D50A-7BA1-4F5E-B62A-B8F9792C77CC@.microsoft.com...
> We have a clustered environment with each node having 8GB memory, Win2k3
> Enterprise Edition SP2, and SQL2k Enterprise Edition SP4.
> I have read a few articles on AWE and the following link provided me with
> a
> lot of information, but I still have a few questions:
> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
> I understand that the switches that I should use are /3GB /PAE.
> In the above article it stated that AWE technology is used only for the
> RAM
> that exceeds the base 4GB of RAM. It further states that once the AWE
> Enabled option is set to 1, SQL Server will take all of the RAM except
> 128MB
> reserved for the OS. My question here is whether this statement refers to
> 128MB of the available AWE memory (e.g. the 128MB of the 4GB that is not
> from
> the base 4GB in an 8GB configuration). So with the /3GB switch and AWE
> enabled, does the operating system have approxiamtely 1.128GB dedicated to
> the OS or only 128MB (this latter seems much too low).
> When setting "Maximum Server Memory" does this refer to the entire 8GB (my
> guess is yes)? And with no other applications running, should this be set
> to
> 8GB or (8GB - 1.128GB => 6.872GB).
> The only other applications that we have running are the Vertias Client
> for
> Backups and Symantec's Antivirus besides the standard Windows 2003
> services.
> I'm sure most production environments have something very similar. What
> sould the recommended "Maximum Server Memory" be set to for a 8GB
> environment
> with these services running.
> Thanks,
> Larry|||just to mention to be carefuly on mem counting having full 4gb of mem.
close to 4gb boundary, there may be memory mapped area used by motherboard
[pci cards etc], which may take almost 0,5gb of memory.
so, instead of 4gb, you may find available only 3,5gb appx or so
"Larry Herbinaux" <LarryHerbinaux@.discussions.microsoft.com> je napisao u
poruci interesnoj
grupi:7E65D50A-7BA1-4F5E-B62A-B8F9792C77CC@.microsoft.com...
> We have a clustered environment with each node having 8GB memory, Win2k3
> Enterprise Edition SP2, and SQL2k Enterprise Edition SP4.
> enabled, does the operating system have approxiamtely 1.128GB dedicated to
> the OS or only 128MB (this latter seems much too low).
>
> Larry

AWE / Maximum Server Memory

We have a clustered environment with each node having 8GB memory, Win2k3
Enterprise Edition SP2, and SQL2k Enterprise Edition SP4.
I have read a few articles on AWE and the following link provided me with a
lot of information, but I still have a few questions:
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
I understand that the switches that I should use are /3GB /PAE.
In the above article it stated that AWE technology is used only for the RAM
that exceeds the base 4GB of RAM. It further states that once the AWE
Enabled option is set to 1, SQL Server will take all of the RAM except 128MB
reserved for the OS. My question here is whether this statement refers to
128MB of the available AWE memory (e.g. the 128MB of the 4GB that is not fro
m
the base 4GB in an 8GB configuration). So with the /3GB switch and AWE
enabled, does the operating system have approxiamtely 1.128GB dedicated to
the OS or only 128MB (this latter seems much too low).
When setting "Maximum Server Memory" does this refer to the entire 8GB (my
guess is yes)? And with no other applications running, should this be set t
o
8GB or (8GB - 1.128GB => 6.872GB).
The only other applications that we have running are the Vertias Client for
Backups and Symantec's Antivirus besides the standard Windows 2003 services.
I'm sure most production environments have something very similar. What
sould the recommended "Maximum Server Memory" be set to for a 8GB environmen
t
with these services running.
Thanks,
LarryLarry
> When setting "Maximum Server Memory" does this refer to the entire 8GB (my
> guess is yes)? And with no other applications running, should this be set
> to
> 8GB or (8GB - 1.128GB => 6.872GB).
Yes , you can set up even to 7GB :-))

> The only other applications that we have running are the Vertias Client
> for
> Backups and Symantec's Antivirus besides the standard Windows 2003
> services.
> I'm sure most production environments have something very similar. What
> sould the recommended "Maximum Server Memory" be set to for a 8GB
> environment
> with these services running.
You have to determine how much memory does each proccess take and
according to it set the MAX memory
"Larry Herbinaux" <LarryHerbinaux@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:7E65D50A-7BA1-4F5E-B62A-B8F9792C77CC@.microsoft.com...
> We have a clustered environment with each node having 8GB memory, Win2k3
> Enterprise Edition SP2, and SQL2k Enterprise Edition SP4.
> I have read a few articles on AWE and the following link provided me with
> a
> lot of information, but I still have a few questions:
> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
> I understand that the switches that I should use are /3GB /PAE.
> In the above article it stated that AWE technology is used only for the
> RAM
> that exceeds the base 4GB of RAM. It further states that once the AWE
> Enabled option is set to 1, SQL Server will take all of the RAM except
> 128MB
> reserved for the OS. My question here is whether this statement refers to
> 128MB of the available AWE memory (e.g. the 128MB of the 4GB that is not
> from
> the base 4GB in an 8GB configuration). So with the /3GB switch and AWE
> enabled, does the operating system have approxiamtely 1.128GB dedicated to
> the OS or only 128MB (this latter seems much too low).
> When setting "Maximum Server Memory" does this refer to the entire 8GB (my
> guess is yes)? And with no other applications running, should this be set
> to
> 8GB or (8GB - 1.128GB => 6.872GB).
> The only other applications that we have running are the Vertias Client
> for
> Backups and Symantec's Antivirus besides the standard Windows 2003
> services.
> I'm sure most production environments have something very similar. What
> sould the recommended "Maximum Server Memory" be set to for a 8GB
> environment
> with these services running.
> Thanks,
> Larry|||just to mention to be carefuly on mem counting having full 4gb of mem.
close to 4gb boundary, there may be memory mapped area used by motherboard
[pci cards etc], which may take almost 0,5gb of memory.
so, instead of 4gb, you may find available only 3,5gb appx or so
"Larry Herbinaux" <LarryHerbinaux@.discussions.microsoft.com> je napisao u
poruci interesnoj
grupi:7E65D50A-7BA1-4F5E-B62A-B8F9792C77CC@.microsoft.com...
> We have a clustered environment with each node having 8GB memory, Win2k3
> Enterprise Edition SP2, and SQL2k Enterprise Edition SP4.
> enabled, does the operating system have approxiamtely 1.128GB dedicated to
> the OS or only 128MB (this latter seems much too low).
>
> Larry

AWE - SQL Server 2000 - Memory usage

Hi all!
We have a SQL Server 2000 Enterprise machine with 3.75 GB of ram in it.
Microsoft gave the advise to enable the "AWE" sql server option and the
"/3GB" windows option.
(http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;274750&sd=tech)
But when I go to the task manager I see SQL server is only using about 144
mb ?
And the total system memory usage is 2.6 GB... and i cannot see the process
that is using that amount of memory.....
-How can I see what it using so much memory?
-Is this a normal situation when you enablee /3GB and AWE or do you see
sqlserver.exe consuming more memory in your task manager?
I want to know if there is something wrong with our configuration.
Thanks in advance for your answer!
Best regards
Floris van HaasterTask Manager isn't AWE aware. Use Perf Mon instead.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Floris van Haaster" <floris@.NO-SPAM-datasmit.nl> wrote in message
news:435de4b3$0$11072$e4fe514c@.news.xs4all.nl...
> Hi all!
> We have a SQL Server 2000 Enterprise machine with 3.75 GB of ram in it.
> Microsoft gave the advise to enable the "AWE" sql server option and the "/3GB" windows option.
> (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;274750&sd=tech)
> But when I go to the task manager I see SQL server is only using about 144 mb ?
> And the total system memory usage is 2.6 GB... and i cannot see the process that is using that
> amount of memory.....
> -How can I see what it using so much memory?
> -Is this a normal situation when you enablee /3GB and AWE or do you see sqlserver.exe consuming
> more memory in your task manager?
> I want to know if there is something wrong with our configuration.
> Thanks in advance for your answer!
> Best regards
> Floris van Haaster
>|||Ok thanks,
But what meter shows the correct value?
When i take a look @. "SQLServer:Memory Manager > Maximum Workspace memory
(KB)" it's value = 1175344 KB and that's only 1 GB or so...
Or do i have to look at another counter?
Best regards
Floris
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> schreef
in bericht news:%230isnEU2FHA.3228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Task Manager isn't AWE aware. Use Perf Mon instead.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "Floris van Haaster" <floris@.NO-SPAM-datasmit.nl> wrote in message
> news:435de4b3$0$11072$e4fe514c@.news.xs4all.nl...
>> Hi all!
>> We have a SQL Server 2000 Enterprise machine with 3.75 GB of ram in it.
>> Microsoft gave the advise to enable the "AWE" sql server option and the
>> "/3GB" windows option.
>> (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;274750&sd=tech)
>> But when I go to the task manager I see SQL server is only using about
>> 144 mb ?
>> And the total system memory usage is 2.6 GB... and i cannot see the
>> process that is using that amount of memory.....
>> -How can I see what it using so much memory?
>> -Is this a normal situation when you enablee /3GB and AWE or do you see
>> sqlserver.exe consuming more memory in your task manager?
>> I want to know if there is something wrong with our configuration.
>> Thanks in advance for your answer!
>> Best regards
>> Floris van Haaster
>>
>|||Use "Buffer Manager: Total Pages" or DBCC MEMORYSTATUS command
(http://support.microsoft.com/?id=271624), check Buffer Counts, Committed,
which should be close to what you are consuming through AWE. Assuming AWE is
enabled.
Later versions (service packs) of SQL Server 2000 also have Visible counter
in DBCC MEMORYSTATUS output which will show how much of AWE-allocated memory
is actually mapped into virtual address space of SQL Server.
HTH,
Boris.
Boris Baryshnikov
Program Manager, SQL Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Floris van Haaster" <floris@.NO-SPAM-datasmit.nl> wrote in message
news:435e27bf$0$11063$e4fe514c@.news.xs4all.nl...
> Ok thanks,
> But what meter shows the correct value?
> When i take a look @. "SQLServer:Memory Manager > Maximum Workspace memory
> (KB)" it's value = 1175344 KB and that's only 1 GB or so...
> Or do i have to look at another counter?
> Best regards
> Floris
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> schreef
> in bericht news:%230isnEU2FHA.3228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Task Manager isn't AWE aware. Use Perf Mon instead.
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>>
>> "Floris van Haaster" <floris@.NO-SPAM-datasmit.nl> wrote in message
>> news:435de4b3$0$11072$e4fe514c@.news.xs4all.nl...
>> Hi all!
>> We have a SQL Server 2000 Enterprise machine with 3.75 GB of ram in it.
>> Microsoft gave the advise to enable the "AWE" sql server option and the
>> "/3GB" windows option.
>> (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;274750&sd=tech)
>> But when I go to the task manager I see SQL server is only using about
>> 144 mb ?
>> And the total system memory usage is 2.6 GB... and i cannot see the
>> process that is using that amount of memory.....
>> -How can I see what it using so much memory?
>> -Is this a normal situation when you enablee /3GB and AWE or do you see
>> sqlserver.exe consuming more memory in your task manager?
>> I want to know if there is something wrong with our configuration.
>> Thanks in advance for your answer!
>> Best regards
>> Floris van Haaster
>>
>

AWE

Hi,
Imagine that my server has 4GB physical memory. I have added /3GB switch to
boot.ini.
Should I enable AWE configuration for my SQL Server to use 3 GB address
space? Or AWE must only be used when I have more than 4GB memory?
Thanks in advance,
Leila
Hello,
AWE can be used only if you have more than 4 GB physical memory. But The
/3GB switch is used to tell SQL Server to take advantage of 3GB out of the
base 4GB
of RAM that Windows OS supports natively. If you don't specify this option,
then SQL Server will only take advantage of 2GB of the first 4GB of RAM in
the
server, essentially wasting 1GB of RAM
Please post the OS and SQL Server edition. This is because For SQL Server
2005 - 64 bit running in Windows 2003 you donot want any changes in BOOT.INI
to use the additional RAM.
Thanks
Hari
"Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:OEze$NnfHHA.2432@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> Imagine that my server has 4GB physical memory. I have added /3GB switch
> to boot.ini.
> Should I enable AWE configuration for my SQL Server to use 3 GB address
> space? Or AWE must only be used when I have more than 4GB memory?
> Thanks in advance,
> Leila
>
|||> AWE can be used only if you have more than 4 GB physical memory.
That's not correct. Take a look at some empirical data at
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/default.aspx?p=2
Linchi
"Hari Prasad" wrote:

> Hello,
> AWE can be used only if you have more than 4 GB physical memory. But The
> /3GB switch is used to tell SQL Server to take advantage of 3GB out of the
> base 4GB
> of RAM that Windows OS supports natively. If you don't specify this option,
> then SQL Server will only take advantage of 2GB of the first 4GB of RAM in
> the
> server, essentially wasting 1GB of RAM
> Please post the OS and SQL Server edition. This is because For SQL Server
> 2005 - 64 bit running in Windows 2003 you donot want any changes in BOOT.INI
> to use the additional RAM.
> Thanks
> Hari
>
> "Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:OEze$NnfHHA.2432@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>
>
|||Hello Linchi,
If I remember correct for a server with 4 GB RAM running in SQL Server 2005
32 bit and Windows 2003 Advanced, all I did is just /3GB switch in Boot.ini
to
use 3 GB RAM. I will take a look into the server on Moday and keep you
posted
Thanks
Hari
"Linchi Shea" <LinchiShea@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:45A920F2-86E6-4A86-A1B1-8306C3077E8B@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> That's not correct. Take a look at some empirical data at
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/default.aspx?p=2
> Linchi
> "Hari Prasad" wrote:
|||Hari;
My comment had nothing to do with whether /3GB is used, how it should be
used, or what impact it may have. I was commenting on the statement that AWE
can be used only if you have more than 4GB physical memory. As the data at
the link indicate that setting AWE has an impact on SQL Server memory
consumption even with 4GB physical memory. And if you want your bpool to
consume a certain amount of memory under 4GB, you may need to use AWE to
accomplish that.
Now, whether or not you should use AWE with less than 4GB of physical memory
or whether there is any compelling rason for doing so are entirely different
issue.
Linchi
"Hari Prasad" wrote:

> Hello Linchi,
> If I remember correct for a server with 4 GB RAM running in SQL Server 2005
> 32 bit and Windows 2003 Advanced, all I did is just /3GB switch in Boot.ini
> to
> use 3 GB RAM. I will take a look into the server on Moday and keep you
> posted
> Thanks
> Hari
>
>
> "Linchi Shea" <LinchiShea@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:45A920F2-86E6-4A86-A1B1-8306C3077E8B@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Thanks Hari and Linchi!
Based on documents that I have read, /3GB causes that kernel mode use only
1GB and Virtual Address Space for applications therefore can reserve up to
3GB. Whereas 32-bit based Windows can address up to 4GB of memory, therefore
I think by using /3GB switch we don't need to enable AWE for SQL Server to
use 3GB. Because we are not beyond the 4GB limit of addressing in this
situation.
"Linchi Shea" <LinchiShea@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F6FB03D7-3B0F-4CD1-B2A2-BBFD660502EE@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hari;
> My comment had nothing to do with whether /3GB is used, how it should be
> used, or what impact it may have. I was commenting on the statement that
> AWE
> can be used only if you have more than 4GB physical memory. As the data at
> the link indicate that setting AWE has an impact on SQL Server memory
> consumption even with 4GB physical memory. And if you want your bpool to
> consume a certain amount of memory under 4GB, you may need to use AWE to
> accomplish that.
> Now, whether or not you should use AWE with less than 4GB of physical
> memory
> or whether there is any compelling rason for doing so are entirely
> different
> issue.
> Linchi
> "Hari Prasad" wrote:
|||That is correct and the most recommended approach with 4GB.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:ucNNgjyfHHA.2640@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Hari and Linchi!
> Based on documents that I have read, /3GB causes that kernel mode use only
> 1GB and Virtual Address Space for applications therefore can reserve up to
> 3GB. Whereas 32-bit based Windows can address up to 4GB of memory,
> therefore I think by using /3GB switch we don't need to enable AWE for SQL
> Server to use 3GB. Because we are not beyond the 4GB limit of addressing
> in this situation.
>
> "Linchi Shea" <LinchiShea@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:F6FB03D7-3B0F-4CD1-B2A2-BBFD660502EE@.microsoft.com...
>
|||Thanks indeed Andrew :-)
Now these two conditions:
1) 5GB RAM + /PAE switch + /3GB switch
2) 6GB RAM + /PAE switch
Can I say that neither of these situations need AWE for SQL Server?
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:uW%23DbP3fHHA.4936@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> That is correct and the most recommended approach with 4GB.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> "Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:ucNNgjyfHHA.2640@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
|||Depends on how much you want for SQL Server. If you want more than 3GB you
must use AWE (in addition to PAE) on 32 bit systems. In either case you
should always leave at least a GB for the OS when using AWE since it is not
dynamic. 2GB if going over 12GB total. The /3GB is optional depending on
how much you need for non-buffer pool memory such as procedure cache,
connections etc.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:%2399LSA4fHHA.2396@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Thanks indeed Andrew :-)
> Now these two conditions:
> 1) 5GB RAM + /PAE switch + /3GB switch
> 2) 6GB RAM + /PAE switch
> Can I say that neither of these situations need AWE for SQL Server?
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:uW%23DbP3fHHA.4936@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
|||If I have 5GB memory and I use both /PAE and /3GB, then SQL Server can use
up to 4GB memory and this is not beyond 32-bit addressing. Why should I
enable AWE for SQL Server?
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:utisfW8fHHA.668@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Depends on how much you want for SQL Server. If you want more than 3GB you
> must use AWE (in addition to PAE) on 32 bit systems. In either case you
> should always leave at least a GB for the OS when using AWE since it is
> not dynamic. 2GB if going over 12GB total. The /3GB is optional depending
> on how much you need for non-buffer pool memory such as procedure cache,
> connections etc.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> "Leila" <Leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:%2399LSA4fHHA.2396@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>

Saturday, February 25, 2012

AWE and Memory Configuration

AWE and Memory Configuration

AWE and Max Server Memory (MB)

AWE and Max Server Memory (MB)

AWE and limiting below 4GB SQL Server Memory Allocation

AWE and 3GB switches

AWE and 3GB switches

AWE and 3GB switches

AWE + PAE + 3GB cause system to freeze?

AWE + 8GB

AWE /3GB performance

AWE /3GB performance

AWE / Maximum Server Memory

AWE / Maximum Server Memory

AWE / Maximum Server Memory

AWE - SQL Server 2000 - Memory usage

AWE - SQL Server 2000 - Memory usage

AWE - SQL Server 2000 - Memory usage

AWE

Autonumber field

Blog Archive

About Me