Backing Up databases with Enterprise Manager

Please forgive my ignorance - I'm completely new to MSSQL.

Our office bought a set of Laserfiche licenses and had to also buy MSSQL to handle the database end of things. Part of my job is to make sure everything gets backed up. I want to use Enterprise Manager to back up the databases which seems straightforward enough - even though I've never done it.

Our Network Admin has installed a temporary USB drive to hold our back-ups until a more permanent form of media can be installed. He is using drive compression to maximize the space available. The server sees it as Drive F:

I created a folder on F: to contain my MSSQL Back-ups. Then I opened Enterprise Manager and clicked on SQL Server Group, which contains two databases:

(local) (Windows NT)

and

CYWD_IMAGE/LASERFICHE (Windows NT)

My understanding is that they both have to be backed up.

I clicked on the first one, then selected the Database Maintenence Plan Wizard from the 'Tools' menu. I stepped through the process (choosing 'all databases') until I got to the point where I could specify the back-up directory. I was able to browse right to the folder I created and choose it. I could then finish the process normally. The problem is that when I selected the second database (CYWD_IMAGE/LASERFICHE) and launched the wizard I was unable to browse to my folder. I could choose the F: Drive but no folder showed up under it. Oddly, it would not even show me my D: partition (just thought I'd mention that in case it is somehow relevent).

I don't see any difference in the properties tabs between these two databases. The obvious difference is the name, and that one says (local) and the other does not.

I really don't want to choose to dump the back-up into the root of F:

Can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong?

Thanks in advance.

MacIf the plan created by your first Wizard backs up "all databases', why do you need to create a second backup plan?|||If the plan created by your first Wizard backs up "all databases', why do you need to create a second backup plan?

There are two servers under the SQL Servers Group, and each contain multiple databases. As far as I can tell the back-up plan will not span both servers, therefore the need for two plans.

It turns out the second server and it's databases are not currently in use so I lucked out. I am still curious why the second server and it's databases behaved this way, though.

Follow-up question. How to I review the plan I created to make modifications? If I pull up the Maintnence Planner there is no option to review exisiting plans.|||If the two servers are on different machines, then they will have different drives. You created a folder on the F drive of one machine, but not the other.

To review or edit the maitenance plans, open up the job they created in the SQL Server Agent tab.|||If the two servers are on different machines, then they will have different drives. You created a folder on the F drive of one machine, but not the other.

To review or edit the maitenance plans, open up the job they created in the SQL Server Agent tab.

Thanks - the servers both appear to be the same machine. Our other servers do not have external (or network) drives that would evaluate to F: - but it was a good thing to check for!

I was able to locate the SQL Server Agent Tab, I appreciate the information!

I'm sure I'll have other questions later, but I'm set for now.|||Be careful not to fill up your harddrive|||Be careful not to fill up your harddrive

Will do - Supposedly I'm going to have to burn off older jobs to dvd to avoid that.

Doesn't sounds like I'll be getting any additional storage drives any time soon, does it? ;)

AWE on 2003 x64 with SP4 and 8 gigs of memory.

I just bought a nice new server with EMT64 ( we have to buy Dell ). It ha
s
8 gigs of memory. It is running Windows 2003 Std x64 edition and the OS
detects all of the 8 gigs.
I installed SQL 2000 SP4 Enterprise edition and applied SP4. I restored a
decent sized database of 60+ gigs to it. I wanted to see just how much memor
y
SQL could use for its buffers versus going off toe the SCSI drives.
I stared selecting all the data out of my database to move the data in
their. I top 3 gigs, but shortly after SQL seemed to stop using more memory.
I was guessing this was the limit.
At this point I thought, maybe I should turn on AWE. I then went and applied
the patch for SP4 that fixes the half memory utilization issue.
Turned it on and restarted the machine and SQL just to be safe. I have SQL
setup to use roughly 7+ gigs of memory and to reserve physical memory. I'm
not using dynamic allocation.
If I pull up taskmgr I see the process for SQL is only using around 190 megs
of memory, however, if I switch to the performance tab I see that I have
almost all the memory allocated.
After selecting a ton of data and doing some tests it is clear that way more
then 190 megs of 8k pages are in memory. Mostly from selecting all the rows
from a large table, and then watching the disk io on future requests which i
s
virtually zero.
I select * from master.dbo.sysperfinfo, but I can't seem to be able to find
the number that would indicate that I have gigs of pages in the buffer.
Is there a know issue with SQL server or TaskMgr on the x64 edition where it
would report the memory usage wrong like this?
Lastly we have Software Assurance for this product, does that give me free
access to support to ask this question?
thanks,
et"et" <et@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:44C118C0-DF0A-4F0E-9752-BC198B40B425@.microsoft.com...
>I just bought a nice new server with EMT64 ( we have to buy Dell ). It
>has
> 8 gigs of memory. It is running Windows 2003 Std x64 edition and the OS
> detects all of the 8 gigs.
> I installed SQL 2000 SP4 Enterprise edition and applied SP4. I restored a
> decent sized database of 60+ gigs to it. I wanted to see just how much
> memory
> SQL could use for its buffers versus going off toe the SCSI drives.
> I stared selecting all the data out of my database to move the data in
> their. I top 3 gigs, but shortly after SQL seemed to stop using more
> memory.
> I was guessing this was the limit.
>
Yes. 4 gigs is the limit in this configuration (SQL 2000 EE 32bit on
Windows 2003 x64 edition).

> At this point I thought, maybe I should turn on AWE. I then went and
> applied
> the patch for SP4 that fixes the half memory utilization issue.
> Turned it on and restarted the machine and SQL just to be safe. I have SQL
> setup to use roughly 7+ gigs of memory and to reserve physical memory. I'm
> not using dynamic allocation.
> If I pull up taskmgr I see the process for SQL is only using around 190
> megs
> of memory, however, if I switch to the performance tab I see that I have
> almost all the memory allocated.
> After selecting a ton of data and doing some tests it is clear that way
> more
> then 190 megs of 8k pages are in memory. Mostly from selecting all the
> rows
> from a large table, and then watching the disk io on future requests which
> is
> virtually zero.
> I select * from master.dbo.sysperfinfo, but I can't seem to be able to
> find
> the number that would indicate that I have gigs of pages in the buffer.
> Is there a know issue with SQL server or TaskMgr on the x64 edition where
> it
> would report the memory usage wrong like this?
>
Not an x64 issue. AWE usage is not visible in Task Manager:
From BOL topic "Managing AWE Memory"
Use System Monitor (Performance Monitor in Microsoft Windows NT 4.0) to
retrieve information on SQL Server memory usage and available memory. Task
Manager does not provide accurate memory usage information for AWE.
Therefore, the memory quoted for sqlservr.exe is not correct. To obtain the
correct amount of SQL Server memory usage, you can use the Total Server
Memory (KB) performance counter, activated through System Monitor, or select
the memory usage from sysperfinfo. For more information, see Monitoring
Memory Usage.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...>
ver_1fnd.asp

> Lastly we have Software Assurance for this product, does that give me free
> access to support to ask this question?
>
The short answer is Yes, Software Assurance for server products includes
some free phone support, as well as free upgrades to new versions. The
number of incidents and hours of support vary by product and SKU, and total
amount of money spent. Also new stuff is included Software Assurance as of
March 2006. See generally:
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/...sa/default.mspx .
David|||When you call in for support, the tech router will tell you if your call is
free or not :-)
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
"David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:ONfOaFWGGHA.2680@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> "et" <et@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:44C118C0-DF0A-4F0E-9752-BC198B40B425@.microsoft.com...
> Yes. 4 gigs is the limit in this configuration (SQL 2000 EE 32bit on
> Windows 2003 x64 edition).
>
> Not an x64 issue. AWE usage is not visible in Task Manager:
> From BOL topic "Managing AWE Memory"
> Use System Monitor (Performance Monitor in Microsoft Windows NT 4.0) to
> retrieve information on SQL Server memory usage and available memory. Task
> Manager does not provide accurate memory usage information for AWE.
> Therefore, the memory quoted for sqlservr.exe is not correct. To obtain
> the correct amount of SQL Server memory usage, you can use the Total
> Server Memory (KB) performance counter, activated through System Monitor,
> or select the memory usage from sysperfinfo. For more information, see
> Monitoring Memory Usage.
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...
erver_1fnd.asp
>
> The short answer is Yes, Software Assurance for server products includes
> some free phone support, as well as free upgrades to new versions. The
> number of incidents and hours of support vary by product and SKU, and
> total amount of money spent. Also new stuff is included Software
> Assurance as of March 2006. See generally:
> http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/...sa/default.mspx .
>
> David
>
>|||maybe i am beating dead horses but
if this is a brand new machine i do not understand why you did not install
sql 2005 64 bit ,,,,
regards
Michel Posseth [MCP]
"David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:ONfOaFWGGHA.2680@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> "et" <et@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:44C118C0-DF0A-4F0E-9752-BC198B40B425@.microsoft.com...
> Yes. 4 gigs is the limit in this configuration (SQL 2000 EE 32bit on
> Windows 2003 x64 edition).
>
> Not an x64 issue. AWE usage is not visible in Task Manager:
> From BOL topic "Managing AWE Memory"
> Use System Monitor (Performance Monitor in Microsoft Windows NT 4.0) to
> retrieve information on SQL Server memory usage and available memory. Task
> Manager does not provide accurate memory usage information for AWE.
> Therefore, the memory quoted for sqlservr.exe is not correct. To obtain
> the correct amount of SQL Server memory usage, you can use the Total
> Server Memory (KB) performance counter, activated through System Monitor,
> or select the memory usage from sysperfinfo. For more information, see
> Monitoring Memory Usage.
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...
erver_1fnd.asp
>
> The short answer is Yes, Software Assurance for server products includes
> some free phone support, as well as free upgrades to new versions. The
> number of incidents and hours of support vary by product and SKU, and
> total amount of money spent. Also new stuff is included Software
> Assurance as of March 2006. See generally:
> http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/...sa/default.mspx .
>
> David
>
>

AWE on 2003 x64 with SP4 and 8 gigs of memory.

I just bought a nice new server with EMT64 ( we have to buy Dell ). It has
8 gigs of memory. It is running Windows 2003 Std x64 edition and the OS
detects all of the 8 gigs.
I installed SQL 2000 SP4 Enterprise edition and applied SP4. I restored a
decent sized database of 60+ gigs to it. I wanted to see just how much memory
SQL could use for its buffers versus going off toe the SCSI drives.
I stared selecting all the data out of my database to move the data in
their. I top 3 gigs, but shortly after SQL seemed to stop using more memory.
I was guessing this was the limit.
At this point I thought, maybe I should turn on AWE. I then went and applied
the patch for SP4 that fixes the half memory utilization issue.
Turned it on and restarted the machine and SQL just to be safe. I have SQL
setup to use roughly 7+ gigs of memory and to reserve physical memory. I'm
not using dynamic allocation.
If I pull up taskmgr I see the process for SQL is only using around 190 megs
of memory, however, if I switch to the performance tab I see that I have
almost all the memory allocated.
After selecting a ton of data and doing some tests it is clear that way more
then 190 megs of 8k pages are in memory. Mostly from selecting all the rows
from a large table, and then watching the disk io on future requests which is
virtually zero.
I select * from master.dbo.sysperfinfo, but I can't seem to be able to find
the number that would indicate that I have gigs of pages in the buffer.
Is there a know issue with SQL server or TaskMgr on the x64 edition where it
would report the memory usage wrong like this?
Lastly we have Software Assurance for this product, does that give me free
access to support to ask this question?
thanks,
et
"et" <et@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:44C118C0-DF0A-4F0E-9752-BC198B40B425@.microsoft.com...
>I just bought a nice new server with EMT64 ( we have to buy Dell ). It
>has
> 8 gigs of memory. It is running Windows 2003 Std x64 edition and the OS
> detects all of the 8 gigs.
> I installed SQL 2000 SP4 Enterprise edition and applied SP4. I restored a
> decent sized database of 60+ gigs to it. I wanted to see just how much
> memory
> SQL could use for its buffers versus going off toe the SCSI drives.
> I stared selecting all the data out of my database to move the data in
> their. I top 3 gigs, but shortly after SQL seemed to stop using more
> memory.
> I was guessing this was the limit.
>
Yes. 4 gigs is the limit in this configuration (SQL 2000 EE 32bit on
Windows 2003 x64 edition).

> At this point I thought, maybe I should turn on AWE. I then went and
> applied
> the patch for SP4 that fixes the half memory utilization issue.
> Turned it on and restarted the machine and SQL just to be safe. I have SQL
> setup to use roughly 7+ gigs of memory and to reserve physical memory. I'm
> not using dynamic allocation.
> If I pull up taskmgr I see the process for SQL is only using around 190
> megs
> of memory, however, if I switch to the performance tab I see that I have
> almost all the memory allocated.
> After selecting a ton of data and doing some tests it is clear that way
> more
> then 190 megs of 8k pages are in memory. Mostly from selecting all the
> rows
> from a large table, and then watching the disk io on future requests which
> is
> virtually zero.
> I select * from master.dbo.sysperfinfo, but I can't seem to be able to
> find
> the number that would indicate that I have gigs of pages in the buffer.
> Is there a know issue with SQL server or TaskMgr on the x64 edition where
> it
> would report the memory usage wrong like this?
>
Not an x64 issue. AWE usage is not visible in Task Manager:
From BOL topic "Managing AWE Memory"
Use System Monitor (Performance Monitor in Microsoft Windows NT 4.0) to
retrieve information on SQL Server memory usage and available memory. Task
Manager does not provide accurate memory usage information for AWE.
Therefore, the memory quoted for sqlservr.exe is not correct. To obtain the
correct amount of SQL Server memory usage, you can use the Total Server
Memory (KB) performance counter, activated through System Monitor, or select
the memory usage from sysperfinfo. For more information, see Monitoring
Memory Usage.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...erver_1fnd.asp

> Lastly we have Software Assurance for this product, does that give me free
> access to support to ask this question?
>
The short answer is Yes, Software Assurance for server products includes
some free phone support, as well as free upgrades to new versions. The
number of incidents and hours of support vary by product and SKU, and total
amount of money spent. Also new stuff is included Software Assurance as of
March 2006. See generally:
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/p...a/default.mspx .
David
|||When you call in for support, the tech router will tell you if your call is
free or not :-)
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
"David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:ONfOaFWGGHA.2680@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> "et" <et@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:44C118C0-DF0A-4F0E-9752-BC198B40B425@.microsoft.com...
> Yes. 4 gigs is the limit in this configuration (SQL 2000 EE 32bit on
> Windows 2003 x64 edition).
>
> Not an x64 issue. AWE usage is not visible in Task Manager:
> From BOL topic "Managing AWE Memory"
> Use System Monitor (Performance Monitor in Microsoft Windows NT 4.0) to
> retrieve information on SQL Server memory usage and available memory. Task
> Manager does not provide accurate memory usage information for AWE.
> Therefore, the memory quoted for sqlservr.exe is not correct. To obtain
> the correct amount of SQL Server memory usage, you can use the Total
> Server Memory (KB) performance counter, activated through System Monitor,
> or select the memory usage from sysperfinfo. For more information, see
> Monitoring Memory Usage.
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...erver_1fnd.asp
>
> The short answer is Yes, Software Assurance for server products includes
> some free phone support, as well as free upgrades to new versions. The
> number of incidents and hours of support vary by product and SKU, and
> total amount of money spent. Also new stuff is included Software
> Assurance as of March 2006. See generally:
> http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/p...a/default.mspx .
>
> David
>
>
|||maybe i am beating dead horses but
if this is a brand new machine i do not understand why you did not install
sql 2005 64 bit ,,,,
regards
Michel Posseth [MCP]
"David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:ONfOaFWGGHA.2680@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> "et" <et@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:44C118C0-DF0A-4F0E-9752-BC198B40B425@.microsoft.com...
> Yes. 4 gigs is the limit in this configuration (SQL 2000 EE 32bit on
> Windows 2003 x64 edition).
>
> Not an x64 issue. AWE usage is not visible in Task Manager:
> From BOL topic "Managing AWE Memory"
> Use System Monitor (Performance Monitor in Microsoft Windows NT 4.0) to
> retrieve information on SQL Server memory usage and available memory. Task
> Manager does not provide accurate memory usage information for AWE.
> Therefore, the memory quoted for sqlservr.exe is not correct. To obtain
> the correct amount of SQL Server memory usage, you can use the Total
> Server Memory (KB) performance counter, activated through System Monitor,
> or select the memory usage from sysperfinfo. For more information, see
> Monitoring Memory Usage.
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...erver_1fnd.asp
>
> The short answer is Yes, Software Assurance for server products includes
> some free phone support, as well as free upgrades to new versions. The
> number of incidents and hours of support vary by product and SKU, and
> total amount of money spent. Also new stuff is included Software
> Assurance as of March 2006. See generally:
> http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/p...a/default.mspx .
>
> David
>
>

AWE on 2003 x64 with SP4 and 8 gigs of memory.

I just bought a nice new server with EMT64 ( we have to buy Dell :( ). It has
8 gigs of memory. It is running Windows 2003 Std x64 edition and the OS
detects all of the 8 gigs.
I installed SQL 2000 SP4 Enterprise edition and applied SP4. I restored a
decent sized database of 60+ gigs to it. I wanted to see just how much memory
SQL could use for its buffers versus going off toe the SCSI drives.
I stared selecting all the data out of my database to move the data in
their. I top 3 gigs, but shortly after SQL seemed to stop using more memory.
I was guessing this was the limit.
At this point I thought, maybe I should turn on AWE. I then went and applied
the patch for SP4 that fixes the half memory utilization issue.
Turned it on and restarted the machine and SQL just to be safe. I have SQL
setup to use roughly 7+ gigs of memory and to reserve physical memory. I'm
not using dynamic allocation.
If I pull up taskmgr I see the process for SQL is only using around 190 megs
of memory, however, if I switch to the performance tab I see that I have
almost all the memory allocated.
After selecting a ton of data and doing some tests it is clear that way more
then 190 megs of 8k pages are in memory. Mostly from selecting all the rows
from a large table, and then watching the disk io on future requests which is
virtually zero.
I select * from master.dbo.sysperfinfo, but I can't seem to be able to find
the number that would indicate that I have gigs of pages in the buffer.
Is there a know issue with SQL server or TaskMgr on the x64 edition where it
would report the memory usage wrong like this?
Lastly we have Software Assurance for this product, does that give me free
access to support to ask this question?
thanks,
et"et" <et@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:44C118C0-DF0A-4F0E-9752-BC198B40B425@.microsoft.com...
>I just bought a nice new server with EMT64 ( we have to buy Dell :( ). It
>has
> 8 gigs of memory. It is running Windows 2003 Std x64 edition and the OS
> detects all of the 8 gigs.
> I installed SQL 2000 SP4 Enterprise edition and applied SP4. I restored a
> decent sized database of 60+ gigs to it. I wanted to see just how much
> memory
> SQL could use for its buffers versus going off toe the SCSI drives.
> I stared selecting all the data out of my database to move the data in
> their. I top 3 gigs, but shortly after SQL seemed to stop using more
> memory.
> I was guessing this was the limit.
>
Yes. 4 gigs is the limit in this configuration (SQL 2000 EE 32bit on
Windows 2003 x64 edition).
> At this point I thought, maybe I should turn on AWE. I then went and
> applied
> the patch for SP4 that fixes the half memory utilization issue.
> Turned it on and restarted the machine and SQL just to be safe. I have SQL
> setup to use roughly 7+ gigs of memory and to reserve physical memory. I'm
> not using dynamic allocation.
> If I pull up taskmgr I see the process for SQL is only using around 190
> megs
> of memory, however, if I switch to the performance tab I see that I have
> almost all the memory allocated.
> After selecting a ton of data and doing some tests it is clear that way
> more
> then 190 megs of 8k pages are in memory. Mostly from selecting all the
> rows
> from a large table, and then watching the disk io on future requests which
> is
> virtually zero.
> I select * from master.dbo.sysperfinfo, but I can't seem to be able to
> find
> the number that would indicate that I have gigs of pages in the buffer.
> Is there a know issue with SQL server or TaskMgr on the x64 edition where
> it
> would report the memory usage wrong like this?
>
Not an x64 issue. AWE usage is not visible in Task Manager:
From BOL topic "Managing AWE Memory"
Use System Monitor (Performance Monitor in Microsoft Windows NT® 4.0) to
retrieve information on SQL Server memory usage and available memory. Task
Manager does not provide accurate memory usage information for AWE.
Therefore, the memory quoted for sqlservr.exe is not correct. To obtain the
correct amount of SQL Server memory usage, you can use the Total Server
Memory (KB) performance counter, activated through System Monitor, or select
the memory usage from sysperfinfo. For more information, see Monitoring
Memory Usage.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/adminsql/ad_1_server_1fnd.asp
> Lastly we have Software Assurance for this product, does that give me free
> access to support to ask this question?
>
The short answer is Yes, Software Assurance for server products includes
some free phone support, as well as free upgrades to new versions. The
number of incidents and hours of support vary by product and SKU, and total
amount of money spent. Also new stuff is included Software Assurance as of
March 2006. See generally:
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/programs/sa/default.mspx .
David|||When you call in for support, the tech router will tell you if your call is
free or not :-)
--
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
"David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:ONfOaFWGGHA.2680@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> "et" <et@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:44C118C0-DF0A-4F0E-9752-BC198B40B425@.microsoft.com...
>>I just bought a nice new server with EMT64 ( we have to buy Dell :( ). It
>>has
>> 8 gigs of memory. It is running Windows 2003 Std x64 edition and the OS
>> detects all of the 8 gigs.
>> I installed SQL 2000 SP4 Enterprise edition and applied SP4. I restored a
>> decent sized database of 60+ gigs to it. I wanted to see just how much
>> memory
>> SQL could use for its buffers versus going off toe the SCSI drives.
>> I stared selecting all the data out of my database to move the data in
>> their. I top 3 gigs, but shortly after SQL seemed to stop using more
>> memory.
>> I was guessing this was the limit.
> Yes. 4 gigs is the limit in this configuration (SQL 2000 EE 32bit on
> Windows 2003 x64 edition).
>> At this point I thought, maybe I should turn on AWE. I then went and
>> applied
>> the patch for SP4 that fixes the half memory utilization issue.
>> Turned it on and restarted the machine and SQL just to be safe. I have
>> SQL
>> setup to use roughly 7+ gigs of memory and to reserve physical memory.
>> I'm
>> not using dynamic allocation.
>> If I pull up taskmgr I see the process for SQL is only using around 190
>> megs
>> of memory, however, if I switch to the performance tab I see that I have
>> almost all the memory allocated.
>> After selecting a ton of data and doing some tests it is clear that way
>> more
>> then 190 megs of 8k pages are in memory. Mostly from selecting all the
>> rows
>> from a large table, and then watching the disk io on future requests
>> which is
>> virtually zero.
>> I select * from master.dbo.sysperfinfo, but I can't seem to be able to
>> find
>> the number that would indicate that I have gigs of pages in the buffer.
>> Is there a know issue with SQL server or TaskMgr on the x64 edition where
>> it
>> would report the memory usage wrong like this?
> Not an x64 issue. AWE usage is not visible in Task Manager:
> From BOL topic "Managing AWE Memory"
> Use System Monitor (Performance Monitor in Microsoft Windows NT® 4.0) to
> retrieve information on SQL Server memory usage and available memory. Task
> Manager does not provide accurate memory usage information for AWE.
> Therefore, the memory quoted for sqlservr.exe is not correct. To obtain
> the correct amount of SQL Server memory usage, you can use the Total
> Server Memory (KB) performance counter, activated through System Monitor,
> or select the memory usage from sysperfinfo. For more information, see
> Monitoring Memory Usage.
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/adminsql/ad_1_server_1fnd.asp
>
>> Lastly we have Software Assurance for this product, does that give me
>> free
>> access to support to ask this question?
> The short answer is Yes, Software Assurance for server products includes
> some free phone support, as well as free upgrades to new versions. The
> number of incidents and hours of support vary by product and SKU, and
> total amount of money spent. Also new stuff is included Software
> Assurance as of March 2006. See generally:
> http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/programs/sa/default.mspx .
>
> David
>
>|||maybe i am beating dead horses but
if this is a brand new machine i do not understand why you did not install
sql 2005 64 bit ,,,,
regards
Michel Posseth [MCP]
"David Browne" <davidbaxterbrowne no potted meat@.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:ONfOaFWGGHA.2680@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> "et" <et@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:44C118C0-DF0A-4F0E-9752-BC198B40B425@.microsoft.com...
>>I just bought a nice new server with EMT64 ( we have to buy Dell :( ). It
>>has
>> 8 gigs of memory. It is running Windows 2003 Std x64 edition and the OS
>> detects all of the 8 gigs.
>> I installed SQL 2000 SP4 Enterprise edition and applied SP4. I restored a
>> decent sized database of 60+ gigs to it. I wanted to see just how much
>> memory
>> SQL could use for its buffers versus going off toe the SCSI drives.
>> I stared selecting all the data out of my database to move the data in
>> their. I top 3 gigs, but shortly after SQL seemed to stop using more
>> memory.
>> I was guessing this was the limit.
> Yes. 4 gigs is the limit in this configuration (SQL 2000 EE 32bit on
> Windows 2003 x64 edition).
>> At this point I thought, maybe I should turn on AWE. I then went and
>> applied
>> the patch for SP4 that fixes the half memory utilization issue.
>> Turned it on and restarted the machine and SQL just to be safe. I have
>> SQL
>> setup to use roughly 7+ gigs of memory and to reserve physical memory.
>> I'm
>> not using dynamic allocation.
>> If I pull up taskmgr I see the process for SQL is only using around 190
>> megs
>> of memory, however, if I switch to the performance tab I see that I have
>> almost all the memory allocated.
>> After selecting a ton of data and doing some tests it is clear that way
>> more
>> then 190 megs of 8k pages are in memory. Mostly from selecting all the
>> rows
>> from a large table, and then watching the disk io on future requests
>> which is
>> virtually zero.
>> I select * from master.dbo.sysperfinfo, but I can't seem to be able to
>> find
>> the number that would indicate that I have gigs of pages in the buffer.
>> Is there a know issue with SQL server or TaskMgr on the x64 edition where
>> it
>> would report the memory usage wrong like this?
> Not an x64 issue. AWE usage is not visible in Task Manager:
> From BOL topic "Managing AWE Memory"
> Use System Monitor (Performance Monitor in Microsoft Windows NT® 4.0) to
> retrieve information on SQL Server memory usage and available memory. Task
> Manager does not provide accurate memory usage information for AWE.
> Therefore, the memory quoted for sqlservr.exe is not correct. To obtain
> the correct amount of SQL Server memory usage, you can use the Total
> Server Memory (KB) performance counter, activated through System Monitor,
> or select the memory usage from sysperfinfo. For more information, see
> Monitoring Memory Usage.
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/adminsql/ad_1_server_1fnd.asp
>
>> Lastly we have Software Assurance for this product, does that give me
>> free
>> access to support to ask this question?
> The short answer is Yes, Software Assurance for server products includes
> some free phone support, as well as free upgrades to new versions. The
> number of incidents and hours of support vary by product and SKU, and
> total amount of money spent. Also new stuff is included Software
> Assurance as of March 2006. See generally:
> http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/programs/sa/default.mspx .
>
> David
>
>