Enabling AWE on SQL Enterprise Ed on a W2K STANDARD ed does appear to work (there seemed to be some doubt). I have reserved 3.5GB max server memory, and it has been allocated. The AWE counters in perfmon also seem to indicate it is functioning.
Does anyone have any experience with this configuration (good or bad)?
Also, any tips as to monitor memory usage - SQLServer/SQL Cache Memory doesn't appear to be of any use.
RegardsHi Stuart,
Not sure what you have done yet, but refers to the following article for
configuring AWE on SQL Server
HOW TO: Configure memory for more than 2 GB in SQL Server
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;274750
On 24 Mar 2004 08:04:17 -0800, Stuart wrote:
> Hi
> Enabling AWE on SQL Enterprise Ed on a W2K STANDARD ed does appear to
> work (there seemed to be some doubt). I have reserved 3.5GB max server
> memory, and it has been allocated. The AWE counters in perfmon also
> seem to indicate it is functioning.
> Does anyone have any experience with this configuration (good or bad)?
> Also, any tips as to monitor memory usage - SQLServer/SQL Cache Memory
> doesn't appear to be of any use.
> Regards
> Stuart|||Thanks - have read the MS articles (they often seem contradictory as
to whether AWE would work on W2k Server Standard)
However, even though AWE it does work on W2K server, there seems to be
some doubt as to whether there is any point in doing this, e.g.
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp says should leave
AWE off for my config.
To date, the config is looking quite good - enabling AWE has doubled
the available RAM to SQL and the Page Life Expectancy has gone up to
about 3 hours (up from a few seconds)
.Regards
Stuart
Yih-Yoon Lee <yihyoon@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<1lywgm6zbxldi.sdsrs0dj91ss$.dlg@.4
0tude.net>...
> Hi Stuart,
> Not sure what you have done yet, but refers to the following article for
> configuring AWE on SQL Server
> HOW TO: Configure memory for more than 2 GB in SQL Server
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;274750
> On 24 Mar 2004 08:04:17 -0800, Stuart wrote:
>
No comments:
Post a Comment