August 1, 2011 at 3:38 pm
Yes - plenty of times when data volume has grown beyond the capacity of the buffer pool because memory has also not been expanded.
Paul Randal
CEO, SQLskills.com: Check out SQLskills online training!
Blog:www.SQLskills.com/blogs/paul Twitter: @PaulRandal
SQL MVP, Microsoft RD, Contributing Editor of TechNet Magazine
Author of DBCC CHECKDB/repair (and other Storage Engine) code of SQL Server 2005
August 2, 2011 at 5:42 am
Paul,
Makes sense. Ok, I won't stick to the 300 then, I'll look at a broader picture instead. The number seemed to fit for my 'up to 32GB of mem' servers. Thanks for the advice. Didn't mean to start a fight with an expert whom I normally follow. 🙂 Looking forward to your next article in sql mag. Thanks.
August 2, 2011 at 7:16 am
Cool - no hard feelings.
Paul Randal
CEO, SQLskills.com: Check out SQLskills online training!
Blog:www.SQLskills.com/blogs/paul Twitter: @PaulRandal
SQL MVP, Microsoft RD, Contributing Editor of TechNet Magazine
Author of DBCC CHECKDB/repair (and other Storage Engine) code of SQL Server 2005
Viewing 3 posts - 16 through 18 (of 18 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply