Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase ««12

memory and CPU allocation on a monster server? Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Friday, August 07, 2009 9:50 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:54 PM
Points: 212, Visits: 466
Jeffrey & GilaMonster, thanks for the info!!!

fizzlme, sorry for hijacking your post bro.
Post #767060
Posted Friday, August 07, 2009 9:52 AM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 7:28 AM
Points: 1,281, Visits: 4,731
Second, for a dedicated database server there is no reason to set a minimum memory amount. Setting the minimum to 12GB and the maximum to 14GB running SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition (x64) will almost certainly cause memory pressure on the system.


Out of curiosity, what is the reason for not setting the minimum memory amount?

Edit: Nevermind... missed Gail's post.


- Jeff
Post #767062
Posted Friday, August 07, 2009 10:07 AM


SSC-Forever

SSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-Forever

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 11:47 AM
Points: 41,525, Visits: 34,442
GilaMonster (8/7/2009)
SQL Standard edition cannot use the lock pages in memory feature. It's immaterial that it's an OS setting, the SQL engine cannot and will not use locked pages in anything other than Enterprise edition.


Though it is worth noting that there's a hotfix available (either currently or soon) for both 2005 and 2008, that removes this limitation.



Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008, MVP
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability

We walk in the dark places no others will enter
We stand on the bridge and no one may pass

Post #767082
Posted Friday, August 07, 2009 12:36 PM
SSCarpal Tunnel

SSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal Tunnel

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 11:17 AM
Points: 4,379, Visits: 9,470
Warren Peace (8/7/2009)
Richard, thanks for the vlidation. I know this has always been cunfusing, that's why I raised the question of it.
lol, why the hell does MS leave in there then?......lol


They leave it in there because that is part of the client-tool which is, of course, used to manage both 64 bit and 32bit systems.

There have been many reports about SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition on x64 paging out memory and memory pressure. What most people have found is that you have to drop the max memory setting quite a bit to relieve these issues. Some have been able to set it as high as 13GB (on 16GB machines) with no problems. Most, however, have not been able to go above 12GB without issues.

I was running Standard Edition on a machine with 32GB of memory. I could not go above 24GB allocated to SQL Server without having memory issues.



Jeffrey Williams
Problems are opportunites brilliantly disguised as insurmountable obstacles.

How to post questions to get better answers faster
Managing Transaction Logs
Post #767211
Posted Monday, August 10, 2009 10:37 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 10:15 AM
Points: 263, Visits: 183
Just a quick thank you. I will set the maximum at 12 gig with no minimum. This has been extremely informative.
Post #767992
Posted Wednesday, August 12, 2009 8:42 AM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 12:24 PM
Points: 2,835, Visits: 1,124
I had an interesting time at the Seattle PASS conference a few years ago getting some of the Microsoft geniuses behind SQLOS (who insisted that the memory allocation process responds to memory pressure and no max memory setting is necessary) and some other Microsoft geniuses that insisted the other group was nuts. It was very entertaining, but inconclusive.

I would put more faith in the opinions of real-world users, and go with the 12GB recommendation.

The conference is in Seattle again this year but I can't attend. Maybe someone else can get a straight answer.



Post #769365
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase ««12

Permissions Expand / Collapse