BEFORE Triggers: enterprise

Showing posts with label enterprise. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Best Strategy to backup the system db

Hi,
I am trying to approach method to copy my system database using enterprise
tool. I have researched on Database Mainteance tool and Backup database. I
would like to use one of the method to copy my database without any
transcational log since we don't have any transcational going on and not
growing my database too much.
how would i accomplish this?
any comments would be appreciatePooja,
You might want to clarify whether or not this is a system database i.e.,
Master, MSDB, etc... or a user-defined database. When you say "my" database
I'm going to assume it is a user-defined database. If you do not require
the transaction logs to be backed up as part of your database recovery
strategy, you can set the recovery mode for the database to SIMPLE (the
t-log will be automatically truncated). Then schedule your full database
backup as a job or use a Maintenance Plan.
HTH
Jerry
"Pooja" <Pooja@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8F05EF72-186D-4B93-BA20-E81364824F29@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I am trying to approach method to copy my system database using enterprise
> tool. I have researched on Database Mainteance tool and Backup database. I
> would like to use one of the method to copy my database without any
> transcational log since we don't have any transcational going on and not
> growing my database too much.
> how would i accomplish this?
> any comments would be appreciate

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Best Real Datatype

Hi all,
I have several columns which store currency values (typically up to 4
integer values, plus two decimal places)
Using Enterprise Manager I can set a column as decimal type, but it doesn't
allow me to specify precision) and any values show as the integer amount plu
s
.00 (ie 123.45 shows as 123.00). I converted these fields to money, but
several stored procedures showed a slow-down.
What is the most efficient datatype for storing very low precision real
numbers? What went wrong with my decimal datatype?
Many thanks in advance!Within EM look at the bottom half of the window. You will see a precision
and scale attribute there.
Keith Kratochvil
"GeorgeBR" <GeorgeBR@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B8499051-76E7-4F2E-8650-971709333F6D@.microsoft.com...
> Hi all,
> I have several columns which store currency values (typically up to 4
> integer values, plus two decimal places)
> Using Enterprise Manager I can set a column as decimal type, but it
> doesn't
> allow me to specify precision) and any values show as the integer amount
> plus
> .00 (ie 123.45 shows as 123.00). I converted these fields to money, but
> several stored procedures showed a slow-down.
> What is the most efficient datatype for storing very low precision real
> numbers? What went wrong with my decimal datatype?
> Many thanks in advance!|||Also, don't use the money type. In addition to the performance issues you
are seeing, you will get rounding errors with money.
"Keith Kratochvil" <sqlguy.back2u@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:e$STqrafGHA.1208@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Within EM look at the bottom half of the window. You will see a precision
> and scale attribute there.
>
> --
> Keith Kratochvil
>
> "GeorgeBR" <GeorgeBR@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B8499051-76E7-4F2E-8650-971709333F6D@.microsoft.com...
>

Thursday, March 22, 2012

Best Practices Question

Environment is SQL Server 2005 x64 Enterprise running under Windows Server 2003 x64 Enterprise with four processors and 16GB of ram.

I have 28 data copy routines I would like to add to a SSIS package. They use the Data Reader Source to an ODBC database (InterSystems Cache) and copy the table contents to a SQL2005 database for reporting needs. The data rows in these 28 routines range from only 100 rows to over 6 million rows depending on the table. I have tested these individually and they work fine. My question is, is it a good practice to have all of these routines in a single package or can I expect performance degragation?

A single package is fine, but multiple packages are more supportable.|||

Thanks Phil. I should note that in this package, all 28 copy routines are in the same data flow object. Would it be better to have them in separate data flow objects? Also, when you say more supportable, are you referring to making it easier to troubleshoot?

|||

windthorstking wrote:

Thanks Phil. I should note that in this package, all 28 copy routines are in the same data flow object. Would it be better to have them in separate data flow objects? Also, when you say more supportable, are you referring to making it easier to troubleshoot?

I'd probably put the distinct "copy routines" into their own data flows, at the very least.

And yes, I mean it will be easier to troubleshoot.sql

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Best practice-backup-

I am confused because I see two options on the backup plan of SQL 2000.
Under SQL Server Enterprise Manager - SQL Agent:
1.Security Backup (copia de seguridad)
Here I can setup a simple copy, at first it allows me only to select the
path and filename. Then now I was able to right click and select the
schedulle and all.
2.Database Maintaince Plan (Planes de mantenimento de la base)
Here I can do more then just backup. And what I like best is that it has
option to automtacly remove files older the x day plus the schedulle.
Is there a link a good SQL backup plan.
Hi,
In the security backup u can do backup of one database at one time. and
u cannot schedule to delete ur old database backup files.
In the Database maintinance plane u can sehedule back up on all the
database in ur sql server and u can also delete old file accoring to
days.
U can also do log shipping in database maintinance plan.
For more informatiom read books online
from
killer
|||Hi,
For production databases it is always recommended to write your own script
for Full backup and Transaction log backup
and schedule it susing SQL Agent Jobs.
But for development/QA servers you could use the maintenance plan which is
very easy to maintain. But I have seen few issues
with maintenence plan occasionaly. Thats the reason i am not recommending
Maintenance plan for production env.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"API Conektia" <api@.online.nospam> wrote in message
news:19z7mqty6g8g.4bq726qi6ysq.dlg@.40tude.net...
>I am confused because I see two options on the backup plan of SQL 2000.
> Under SQL Server Enterprise Manager - SQL Agent:
> 1.Security Backup (copia de seguridad)
> Here I can setup a simple copy, at first it allows me only to select the
> path and filename. Then now I was able to right click and select the
> schedulle and all.
> 2.Database Maintaince Plan (Planes de mantenimento de la base)
> Here I can do more then just backup. And what I like best is that it has
> option to automtacly remove files older the x day plus the schedulle.
> Is there a link a good SQL backup plan.
|||Any chance you could post sample scripts for best practise?
Thanks
Paul
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23SUkjO8rFHA.260@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> For production databases it is always recommended to write your own script
> for Full backup and Transaction log backup
> and schedule it susing SQL Agent Jobs.
> But for development/QA servers you could use the maintenance plan which is
> very easy to maintain. But I have seen few issues
> with maintenence plan occasionaly. Thats the reason i am not recommending
> Maintenance plan for production env.
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
> "API Conektia" <api@.online.nospam> wrote in message
> news:19z7mqty6g8g.4bq726qi6ysq.dlg@.40tude.net...
>
|||Yes, Hari if you could post any samples of scripts.
Well I found something in the net witch I will give it a try.
http://www.cryer.co.uk/brian/sqlserv...sql2000bkp.htm
On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 15:30:41 +0100, Paul Cahill wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> script
|||Now I found 2 ways of doing it thru scripts and really apreciate to know
the best one:
first:
USE Tempdb
GO
SELECT GETDATE()
GO
SELECT @.@.SERVERNAME
GO
BACKUP DATABASE Master TO DISK =
'g:\temp\sql\BackupsMaster.bak'
WITH INIT
GO
BACKUP DATABASE MSDB TO DISK =
'g:\temp\sql\BackupsMSDB.bak'
WITH INIT
GO
BACKUP DATABASE Model TO DISK =
'g:\temp\sql\BackupsModel.bak'
WITH INIT
GO
SELECT GETDATE()
GO
and the other:
-- Start by truncating the logs.
BACKUP LOG MASTER WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
BACKUP LOG MODEL WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
BACKUP LOG MSDB WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
GO
-- Now backup each database in turn.
BACKUP DATABASE MASTER TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\master.bak' WITH NAME='MASTER
COMPLETE', NOUNLOAD
BACKUP DATABASE MODEL TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\model.bak' WITH NAME='MODEL
COMPLETE'
BACKUP DATABASE MSDB TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\msdb.bak' WITH NAME='MSDB
COMPLETE'
GO
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 15:34:49 +0200, API Conektia wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Yes, Hari if you could post any samples of scripts.
> Well I found something in the net witch I will give it a try.
> http://www.cryer.co.uk/brian/sqlserv...sql2000bkp.htm
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 15:30:41 +0100, Paul Cahill wrote:
|||Are you doing regular transaction log backups?
If you are, don't do backup log with TRUNCATE_ONLY as it will break the log backup sequence.
If not, set the database to simple recovery mode and you don't have to do TRUNCATE_ONLY.
Also, your scripts only includes the system databases.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"API Conektia" <api@.online.nospam> wrote in message
news:k9lcagxl496e$.6ni4bk2xmuzn$.dlg@.40tude.net... [vbcol=seagreen]
> Now I found 2 ways of doing it thru scripts and really apreciate to know
> the best one:
> first:
> USE Tempdb
> GO
> SELECT GETDATE()
> GO
> SELECT @.@.SERVERNAME
> GO
> BACKUP DATABASE Master TO DISK =
> 'g:\temp\sql\BackupsMaster.bak'
> WITH INIT
> GO
> BACKUP DATABASE MSDB TO DISK =
> 'g:\temp\sql\BackupsMSDB.bak'
> WITH INIT
> GO
> BACKUP DATABASE Model TO DISK =
> 'g:\temp\sql\BackupsModel.bak'
> WITH INIT
> GO
> SELECT GETDATE()
> GO
>
> and the other:
> -- Start by truncating the logs.
> BACKUP LOG MASTER WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
> BACKUP LOG MODEL WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
> BACKUP LOG MSDB WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
> GO
> -- Now backup each database in turn.
> BACKUP DATABASE MASTER TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\master.bak' WITH NAME='MASTER
> COMPLETE', NOUNLOAD
> BACKUP DATABASE MODEL TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\model.bak' WITH NAME='MODEL
> COMPLETE'
> BACKUP DATABASE MSDB TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\msdb.bak' WITH NAME='MSDB
> COMPLETE'
> GO
>
> On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 15:34:49 +0200, API Conektia wrote:

Best practice-backup-

I am confused because I see two options on the backup plan of SQL 2000.
Under SQL Server Enterprise Manager - SQL Agent:
1.Security Backup (copia de seguridad)
Here I can setup a simple copy, at first it allows me only to select the
path and filename. Then now I was able to right click and select the
schedulle and all.
2.Database Maintaince Plan (Planes de mantenimento de la base)
Here I can do more then just backup. And what I like best is that it has
option to automtacly remove files older the x day plus the schedulle.
Is there a link a good SQL backup plan.Hi,
In the security backup u can do backup of one database at one time. and
u cannot schedule to delete ur old database backup files.
In the Database maintinance plane u can sehedule back up on all the
database in ur sql server and u can also delete old file accoring to
days.
U can also do log shipping in database maintinance plan.
For more informatiom read books online
from
killer|||Hi,
For production databases it is always recommended to write your own script
for Full backup and Transaction log backup
and schedule it susing SQL Agent Jobs.
But for development/QA servers you could use the maintenance plan which is
very easy to maintain. But I have seen few issues
with maintenence plan occasionaly. Thats the reason i am not recommending
Maintenance plan for production env.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"API Conektia" <api@.online.nospam> wrote in message
news:19z7mqty6g8g.4bq726qi6ysq.dlg@.40tude.net...
>I am confused because I see two options on the backup plan of SQL 2000.
> Under SQL Server Enterprise Manager - SQL Agent:
> 1.Security Backup (copia de seguridad)
> Here I can setup a simple copy, at first it allows me only to select the
> path and filename. Then now I was able to right click and select the
> schedulle and all.
> 2.Database Maintaince Plan (Planes de mantenimento de la base)
> Here I can do more then just backup. And what I like best is that it has
> option to automtacly remove files older the x day plus the schedulle.
> Is there a link a good SQL backup plan.|||Any chance you could post sample scripts for best practise?
Thanks
Paul
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23SUkjO8rFHA.260@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> For production databases it is always recommended to write your own script
> for Full backup and Transaction log backup
> and schedule it susing SQL Agent Jobs.
> But for development/QA servers you could use the maintenance plan which is
> very easy to maintain. But I have seen few issues
> with maintenence plan occasionaly. Thats the reason i am not recommending
> Maintenance plan for production env.
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
> "API Conektia" <api@.online.nospam> wrote in message
> news:19z7mqty6g8g.4bq726qi6ysq.dlg@.40tude.net...
>|||Yes, Hari if you could post any samples of scripts.
Well I found something in the net witch I will give it a try.
http://www.cryer.co.uk/brian/sqlser...ksql2000bkp.htm
On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 15:30:41 +0100, Paul Cahill wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> script|||Now I found 2 ways of doing it thru scripts and really apreciate to know
the best one:
first:
USE Tempdb
GO
SELECT GETDATE()
GO
SELECT @.@.SERVERNAME
GO
BACKUP DATABASE Master TO DISK =
'g:\temp\sql\BackupsMaster.bak'
WITH INIT
GO
BACKUP DATABASE MSDB TO DISK =
'g:\temp\sql\BackupsMSDB.bak'
WITH INIT
GO
BACKUP DATABASE Model TO DISK =
'g:\temp\sql\BackupsModel.bak'
WITH INIT
GO
SELECT GETDATE()
GO
and the other:
-- Start by truncating the logs.
BACKUP LOG MASTER WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
BACKUP LOG MODEL WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
BACKUP LOG MSDB WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
GO
-- Now backup each database in turn.
BACKUP DATABASE MASTER TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\master.bak' WITH NAME='MASTER
COMPLETE', NOUNLOAD
BACKUP DATABASE MODEL TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\model.bak' WITH NAME='MODEL
COMPLETE'
BACKUP DATABASE MSDB TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\msdb.bak' WITH NAME='MSDB
COMPLETE'
GO
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 15:34:49 +0200, API Conektia wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Yes, Hari if you could post any samples of scripts.
> Well I found something in the net witch I will give it a try.
> http://www.cryer.co.uk/brian/sqlser...ksql2000bkp.htm
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 15:30:41 +0100, Paul Cahill wrote:
>|||Are you doing regular transaction log backups?
If you are, don't do backup log with TRUNCATE_ONLY as it will break the log
backup sequence.
If not, set the database to simple recovery mode and you don't have to do TR
UNCATE_ONLY.
Also, your scripts only includes the system databases.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"API Conektia" <api@.online.nospam> wrote in message
news:k9lcagxl496e$.6ni4bk2xmuzn$.dlg@.40tude.net...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Now I found 2 ways of doing it thru scripts and really apreciate to know
> the best one:
> first:
> USE Tempdb
> GO
> SELECT GETDATE()
> GO
> SELECT @.@.SERVERNAME
> GO
> BACKUP DATABASE Master TO DISK =
> 'g:\temp\sql\BackupsMaster.bak'
> WITH INIT
> GO
> BACKUP DATABASE MSDB TO DISK =
> 'g:\temp\sql\BackupsMSDB.bak'
> WITH INIT
> GO
> BACKUP DATABASE Model TO DISK =
> 'g:\temp\sql\BackupsModel.bak'
> WITH INIT
> GO
> SELECT GETDATE()
> GO
>
> and the other:
> -- Start by truncating the logs.
> BACKUP LOG MASTER WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
> BACKUP LOG MODEL WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
> BACKUP LOG MSDB WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
> GO
> -- Now backup each database in turn.
> BACKUP DATABASE MASTER TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\master.bak' WITH NAME='MASTER
> COMPLETE', NOUNLOAD
> BACKUP DATABASE MODEL TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\model.bak' WITH NAME='MODEL
> COMPLETE'
> BACKUP DATABASE MSDB TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\msdb.bak' WITH NAME='MSDB
> COMPLETE'
> GO
>
> On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 15:34:49 +0200, API Conektia wrote:
>

Best practice-backup-

I am confused because I see two options on the backup plan of SQL 2000.
Under SQL Server Enterprise Manager - SQL Agent:
1.Security Backup (copia de seguridad)
Here I can setup a simple copy, at first it allows me only to select the
path and filename. Then now I was able to right click and select the
schedulle and all.
2.Database Maintaince Plan (Planes de mantenimento de la base)
Here I can do more then just backup. And what I like best is that it has
option to automtacly remove files older the x day plus the schedulle.
Is there a link a good SQL backup plan.Hi,
In the security backup u can do backup of one database at one time. and
u cannot schedule to delete ur old database backup files.
In the Database maintinance plane u can sehedule back up on all the
database in ur sql server and u can also delete old file accoring to
days.
U can also do log shipping in database maintinance plan.
For more informatiom read books online
from
killer|||Hi,
For production databases it is always recommended to write your own script
for Full backup and Transaction log backup
and schedule it susing SQL Agent Jobs.
But for development/QA servers you could use the maintenance plan which is
very easy to maintain. But I have seen few issues
with maintenence plan occasionaly. Thats the reason i am not recommending
Maintenance plan for production env.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"API Conektia" <api@.online.nospam> wrote in message
news:19z7mqty6g8g.4bq726qi6ysq.dlg@.40tude.net...
>I am confused because I see two options on the backup plan of SQL 2000.
> Under SQL Server Enterprise Manager - SQL Agent:
> 1.Security Backup (copia de seguridad)
> Here I can setup a simple copy, at first it allows me only to select the
> path and filename. Then now I was able to right click and select the
> schedulle and all.
> 2.Database Maintaince Plan (Planes de mantenimento de la base)
> Here I can do more then just backup. And what I like best is that it has
> option to automtacly remove files older the x day plus the schedulle.
> Is there a link a good SQL backup plan.|||Any chance you could post sample scripts for best practise?
Thanks
Paul
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23SUkjO8rFHA.260@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> For production databases it is always recommended to write your own script
> for Full backup and Transaction log backup
> and schedule it susing SQL Agent Jobs.
> But for development/QA servers you could use the maintenance plan which is
> very easy to maintain. But I have seen few issues
> with maintenence plan occasionaly. Thats the reason i am not recommending
> Maintenance plan for production env.
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
> "API Conektia" <api@.online.nospam> wrote in message
> news:19z7mqty6g8g.4bq726qi6ysq.dlg@.40tude.net...
>>I am confused because I see two options on the backup plan of SQL 2000.
>> Under SQL Server Enterprise Manager - SQL Agent:
>> 1.Security Backup (copia de seguridad)
>> Here I can setup a simple copy, at first it allows me only to select the
>> path and filename. Then now I was able to right click and select the
>> schedulle and all.
>> 2.Database Maintaince Plan (Planes de mantenimento de la base)
>> Here I can do more then just backup. And what I like best is that it has
>> option to automtacly remove files older the x day plus the schedulle.
>> Is there a link a good SQL backup plan.
>|||Yes, Hari if you could post any samples of scripts.
Well I found something in the net witch I will give it a try.
http://www.cryer.co.uk/brian/sqlserver/howtofullw2ksql2000bkp.htm
On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 15:30:41 +0100, Paul Cahill wrote:
> script
>> for Full backup|||Now I found 2 ways of doing it thru scripts and really apreciate to know
the best one:
first:
USE Tempdb
GO
SELECT GETDATE()
GO
SELECT @.@.SERVERNAME
GO
BACKUP DATABASE Master TO DISK ='g:\temp\sql\BackupsMaster.bak'
WITH INIT
GO
BACKUP DATABASE MSDB TO DISK ='g:\temp\sql\BackupsMSDB.bak'
WITH INIT
GO
BACKUP DATABASE Model TO DISK ='g:\temp\sql\BackupsModel.bak'
WITH INIT
GO
SELECT GETDATE()
GO
and the other:
-- Start by truncating the logs.
BACKUP LOG MASTER WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
BACKUP LOG MODEL WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
BACKUP LOG MSDB WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
GO
-- Now backup each database in turn.
BACKUP DATABASE MASTER TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\master.bak' WITH NAME='MASTER
COMPLETE', NOUNLOAD
BACKUP DATABASE MODEL TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\model.bak' WITH NAME='MODEL
COMPLETE'
BACKUP DATABASE MSDB TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\msdb.bak' WITH NAME='MSDB
COMPLETE'
GO
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 15:34:49 +0200, API Conektia wrote:
> Yes, Hari if you could post any samples of scripts.
> Well I found something in the net witch I will give it a try.
> http://www.cryer.co.uk/brian/sqlserver/howtofullw2ksql2000bkp.htm
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 15:30:41 +0100, Paul Cahill wrote:
>> script
>> for Full backup|||Are you doing regular transaction log backups?
If you are, don't do backup log with TRUNCATE_ONLY as it will break the log backup sequence.
If not, set the database to simple recovery mode and you don't have to do TRUNCATE_ONLY.
Also, your scripts only includes the system databases.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"API Conektia" <api@.online.nospam> wrote in message
news:k9lcagxl496e$.6ni4bk2xmuzn$.dlg@.40tude.net...
> Now I found 2 ways of doing it thru scripts and really apreciate to know
> the best one:
> first:
> USE Tempdb
> GO
> SELECT GETDATE()
> GO
> SELECT @.@.SERVERNAME
> GO
> BACKUP DATABASE Master TO DISK => 'g:\temp\sql\BackupsMaster.bak'
> WITH INIT
> GO
> BACKUP DATABASE MSDB TO DISK => 'g:\temp\sql\BackupsMSDB.bak'
> WITH INIT
> GO
> BACKUP DATABASE Model TO DISK => 'g:\temp\sql\BackupsModel.bak'
> WITH INIT
> GO
> SELECT GETDATE()
> GO
>
> and the other:
> -- Start by truncating the logs.
> BACKUP LOG MASTER WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
> BACKUP LOG MODEL WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
> BACKUP LOG MSDB WITH TRUNCATE_ONLY
> GO
> -- Now backup each database in turn.
> BACKUP DATABASE MASTER TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\master.bak' WITH NAME='MASTER
> COMPLETE', NOUNLOAD
> BACKUP DATABASE MODEL TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\model.bak' WITH NAME='MODEL
> COMPLETE'
> BACKUP DATABASE MSDB TO DISK='G:\temp\SQL\msdb.bak' WITH NAME='MSDB
> COMPLETE'
> GO
>
> On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 15:34:49 +0200, API Conektia wrote:
>> Yes, Hari if you could post any samples of scripts.
>> Well I found something in the net witch I will give it a try.
>> http://www.cryer.co.uk/brian/sqlserver/howtofullw2ksql2000bkp.htm
>> On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 15:30:41 +0100, Paul Cahill wrote:
>> script
>> for Full backup

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Best Performance

quote:

> We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two options - A dual
> processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
> running standard edition.
> The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster - Obvious
ly
> Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
> hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four processors...
.
> Help !!!
> Andy

|||the corrent answer to almost any performance queestion is 'it depends'. <g>
I don't have enough info to say with certainty... no one does...
but generally speaking... I would be SHOCKED if the 4X Standard box didn't
perform better than the 2X Enterprise. Enterprise can support more mem,
but... the Standard limits are pretty darn good. IF you can get adequte
performance on a 2X box... that almost implies to me that your app and data
set isn't bing enough to worry about going beyond 2G anyway...
Brian Moran
Principal Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
SQL Server MVP
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Andy Reilly" <ReillyA@.ThomasNoSpam-Sanderson.co.uk> wrote in message
news:%23F4GHBC5DHA.2188@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

quote:

> We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two options - A dual
> processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
> running standard edition.
> The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster -

Obviously

quote:

> Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
> hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four

processors...

quote:

> Help !!!
> Andy
>

Best Performance

We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two options - A dual
processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
running standard edition.
The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster - Obviously
Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four processors...
Help !!!
AndyEnterprise is not necessarily faster than standard.
Check the following for further details :-
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?
url=/technet/prodtechnol/sql/evaluate/choose.asp
If you think about it for a moment the speed of any
application is going to as fast as the slowest component,
which is normally (in order of slowest) Network, Hard
Disk, then CPU.
So before getting your CPU's sorted you should have a look
at the other two.
If you would like further details then feel free to email
me at little_flowery_me<REMOVETHIS>.@.hotmail.com
In the meanwhile have a quick look at this...
http://www.tpc.org/
J
>--Original Message--
>We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two
options - A dual
>processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad
processor machine
>running standard edition.
>The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the
faster - Obviously
>Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and
should therefore
>hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having
four processors...
>Help !!!
>Andy
>
>.
>|||FYI: There can be many reasons for a recompile. But you must be using
really many stored procedures and very little memory. SQL-Server will
make the tradeoff how to use the available memory and it knows a
recompilation is expensive. Because of that, there will be few
recompiles because of memory constraints.
Gert-Jan
Andy Reilly wrote:
> We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two options - A dual
> processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
> running standard edition.
> The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster - Obviously
> Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
> hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four processors...
> Help !!!
> Andy|||the corrent answer to almost any performance queestion is 'it depends'. <g>
I don't have enough info to say with certainty... no one does...
but generally speaking... I would be SHOCKED if the 4X Standard box didn't
perform better than the 2X Enterprise. Enterprise can support more mem,
but... the Standard limits are pretty darn good. IF you can get adequte
performance on a 2X box... that almost implies to me that your app and data
set isn't bing enough to worry about going beyond 2G anyway...
--
Brian Moran
Principal Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
SQL Server MVP
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Andy Reilly" <ReillyA@.ThomasNoSpam-Sanderson.co.uk> wrote in message
news:%23F4GHBC5DHA.2188@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> We're looking to upgrade our SQL Server - We have two options - A dual
> processor machine running Enterprise edition, or a quad processor machine
> running standard edition.
> The question I'd like to ask is which is likely to be the faster -
Obviously
> Enterprise edition will allow us to have more memory and should therefore
> hopefully cut down the number of recompiles, but having four
processors...
> Help !!!
> Andy
>

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Best Enterprise Manager clone/wannabe?

Hi,
When working with environments that use the MSDE, we usually plug a laptop
into their network that has Enterprise Manager on it, and work that way.
Is there a good possibly third partry product that is not too expensive and
can be loaded on their machine so we don't have to do this? That way I could
go in via the Net and work with out going to their location.
I know there are a couple out there, I just haven't been able to find anyone
who has experience with them.
Thanks,
Steve
Why can't you load EM (Client Tools) only?
http://sqlservercode.blogspot.com/
"SteveInBeloit" wrote:

> Hi,
> When working with environments that use the MSDE, we usually plug a laptop
> into their network that has Enterprise Manager on it, and work that way.
> Is there a good possibly third partry product that is not too expensive and
> can be loaded on their machine so we don't have to do this? That way I could
> go in via the Net and work with out going to their location.
> I know there are a couple out there, I just haven't been able to find anyone
> who has experience with them.
> Thanks,
> Steve
|||My ignorance maybe. . . I was under the impression that legally you could not.
Steve
"SQL" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Why can't you load EM (Client Tools) only?
> http://sqlservercode.blogspot.com/
> "SteveInBeloit" wrote:
|||Legally you may not be allowed to so you aren't being
ignorant. Check the following articles for an explanation
and tools to manage MSDE- there are some free ones listed.
Of the third party tools, DbaMgr is good.
If you are just looking for a query tool, Toad for SQL
Server works well.
-Sue
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 13:59:06 -0700, "SteveInBeloit"
<SteveInBeloit@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>My ignorance maybe. . . I was under the impression that legally you could not.
>Steve
>
>"SQL" wrote:
|||SteveInBeloit wrote:

> Is there a good possibly third partry product that is not too expensive and
http://www.sqlmanager.net/
|||Sorry...forgot the link:
http://www.aspfaq.com/show.asp?id=2442
-Sue
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 22:44:08 -0600, Sue Hoegemeier
<Sue_H@.nomail.please> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>Legally you may not be allowed to so you aren't being
>ignorant. Check the following articles for an explanation
>and tools to manage MSDE- there are some free ones listed.
>Of the third party tools, DbaMgr is good.
>If you are just looking for a query tool, Toad for SQL
>Server works well.
>-Sue
>On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 13:59:06 -0700, "SteveInBeloit"
><SteveInBeloit@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
|||SteveInBeloit wrote:
> Hi,
> When working with environments that use the MSDE, we usually plug a laptop
> into their network that has Enterprise Manager on it, and work that way.
> Is there a good possibly third partry product that is not too expensive and
> can be loaded on their machine so we don't have to do this? That way I could
> go in via the Net and work with out going to their location.
Buy SQL Server Developer Edition for $50 and get it all.
Steve Troxell
|||Have you tried, EMS sql manager lite
http://www.hotscripts.com/Detailed/47270.html
"SteveInBeloit" <SteveInBeloit@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:196C5DC7-6942-4EF3-A057-1126BDE7BC20@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> When working with environments that use the MSDE, we usually plug a laptop
> into their network that has Enterprise Manager on it, and work that way.
> Is there a good possibly third partry product that is not too expensive
> and
> can be loaded on their machine so we don't have to do this? That way I
> could
> go in via the Net and work with out going to their location.
> I know there are a couple out there, I just haven't been able to find
> anyone
> who has experience with them.
> Thanks,
> Steve

Best Enterprise Datawarehouse

We currently run a MASSIVE enterprise data warehouse on SQL Server 2000 and it is struggling a bit with both user queries and daily loads.
Need opinions on
1. Is SQL Server the best product for the job
2. What are the alternatives
CheersWhat is massive ? Also, what is your hardware specs ?|||And what are you doing with it? Are you creating cubes off of it?|||Have about 7 + Terabytes of data - growing at 100 gb a month

Team of dedicated App Dev staff designing and developing OLAP cubes and publishing on the intranet using third party software|||What type of cubes ? What version of sql are you using ?|||What window do you have available to perform the daily loads? Approx how long does each load take?|||At that size I am sure MS would love to help you (and use you in their marketing :) )|||You can easily deploy SQL Analaysis Services in this case, check ver 2000 for more enhancements and information on MS SQL homepage.

HTH|||No one seems to have opinions on any other products other than SQL Server? I guess it is a SQL Server forum but like I have already said - this is our current platform and is Struggling !!!!|||Originally posted by aldo_2003
Have about 7 + Terabytes of data - growing at 100 gb a month

Team of dedicated App Dev staff designing and developing OLAP cubes and publishing on the intranet using third party software

Gotta ask...what's the subject of the data?

3rd party software?

I don't think (damn it, again) that ANY 3rd party software plans for anything that massive...

And EVERYONE is writting adhoc queries...right?

"This sounds like a job for "Super-Silver bullet""

And yes, MS would love to talk to you....|||Originally posted by aldo_2003
No one seems to have opinions on any other products other than SQL Server? I guess it is a SQL Server forum but like I have already said - this is our current platform and is Struggling !!!!

Be happy using Sybase IQ (http://www.sybase.com/products/bi/sybaseiq) !
=> T-SQL compliance
=> DSS database
=> performance++|||You have given very few information regarding your environment and the reasons you are struggling, other blaming SQL. We would be glad to help you if you could tell us more about your data warehouse. So we can see where your bottleneck is. But if you are looking for the answer of 'Yes, you need to switch to O.... and S.. platform', please go to O.... forum. Thanks.

Sunday, February 19, 2012

Benchmark for different edition SQL 2000

We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our usage:
1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
2) 5000 row insert per day
3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000 server
4) One database will be installed
5) The size of the database around 10GB
Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRAM database server.
Please advise. Thanks
Hi,
Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to go for SQL
Server standard edition.
Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sql server:-
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...skChooseEd.asp
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our usage:
> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
> 2) 5000 row insert per day
> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000 server
> 4) One database will be installed
> 5) The size of the database around 10GB
> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRAM
database server.
> Please advise. Thanks
|||Hari,
Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and without any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standard edition and enterprise edition is no different except?
--Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine with 512MRAM)
--Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby or cluster machine)
--Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
--Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are just using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or standard edition is easy to down?
Wanchun
-- Hari Prasad wrote: --
Hi,
Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to go for SQL
Server standard edition.
Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sql server:-
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...skChooseEd.asp
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our usage:
> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
> 2) 5000 row insert per day
> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000 server
> 4) One database will be installed
> 5) The size of the database around 10GB
database server.
> Please advise. Thanks
|||No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainly
features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...
> Hari,
> Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and without
any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standard
edition and enterprise edition is no different except?
> --Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine with
512MRAM)
> --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby or
cluster machine)
> --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.5
version now with no complain)
> --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are just
using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
> I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or standard
edition is easy to down?
> Wanchun
>
> -- Hari Prasad wrote: --
> Hi,
> Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to go
for SQL
> Server standard edition.
> Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sql
server:-[vbcol=seagreen]
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...skChooseEd.asp
> Thanks
> Hari
> MCDBA
>
> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
usage:[vbcol=seagreen]
server
> database server.
>
>
|||Andrew,
That mean from our requirement, standard edition is enough for us?
Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and enterprise? I am testing with standard edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 records. After I re-boot the machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I nee
d to re-boot the machine every week to prevent the memory to grow? Or enterprise edition can handle it better?
Any other Enterprise features that better than Standard?
Thanks
-- Andrew J. Kelly wrote: --
No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainly
features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hari,
any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standard
edition and enterprise edition is no different except?[vbcol=seagreen]
512MRAM)
> --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby or
cluster machine)
> --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.5
version now with no complain)
> --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are just
using the 6.5 version now with no complain)[vbcol=seagreen]
edition is easy to down?[vbcol=seagreen]
for SQL[vbcol=seagreen]
> Server standard edition.
server:-[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hari
> MCDBA
> news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
usage:[vbcol=seagreen]
server[vbcol=seagreen]
> database server.
|||Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You find them at:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...ar_ts_1cdv.asp
As for memory, please read below:
INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
http://support.microsoft.com/default...;en-us;q321363
http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/troub...memoryleak.asp
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
> Andrew,
> That mean from our requirement, standard edition is enough for us?
> Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and enterprise? I am testing with standard
edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 records. After I re-boot the
machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine every week to prevent the memory to
grow? Or enterprise edition can handle it better?[vbcol=seagreen]
> Any other Enterprise features that better than Standard?
> Thanks
>
>
> -- Andrew J. Kelly wrote: --
> No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainly
> features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...
> any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standard
> edition and enterprise edition is no different except?
> 512MRAM)
> cluster machine)
> version now with no complain)
> using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
> edition is easy to down?
> for SQL
> server:-
> usage:
> server
|||Tibor,
My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory usage continuously? Or We need to reboot the machine periodically? Please advise.
Wanchun
-- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You find them at:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...ar_ts_1cdv.asp
As for memory, please read below:
INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
http://support.microsoft.com/default...;en-us;q321363
http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/troub...memoryleak.asp
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
> Andrew,
> Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and enterprise? I am testing with standard
edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 records. After I re-boot the
machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine every week to prevent the memory to
grow? Or enterprise edition can handle it better?[vbcol=seagreen]
> features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs.
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...
> any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standard
> edition and enterprise edition is no different except?
> 512MRAM)
> cluster machine)
> version now with no complain)
> using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
> edition is easy to down?
> for SQL
> server:-
> usage:
> server
|||Please read the links I posted about memory allocation algorithms in SQL Server. This is normal, and no reboot
is necessary.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DF073FD2-4A17-4122-BCEC-E9FB5E5AF5EF@.microsoft.com...
> Tibor,
> My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory usage continuously? Or We need to
reboot the machine periodically? Please advise.
> Wanchun
> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
> Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You find them at:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...ar_ts_1cdv.asp
> As for memory, please read below:
> INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...;en-us;q321363
> http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/troub...memoryleak.asp
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
> edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 records. After I re-boot
the
> machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine every week to prevent the
memory to[vbcol=seagreen]
> grow? Or enterprise edition can handle it better?
|||As Tibor points out that is normal behavior and will be the same for both
Std and EE.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DF073FD2-4A17-4122-BCEC-E9FB5E5AF5EF@.microsoft.com...
> Tibor,
> My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory
usage continuously? Or We need to reboot the machine periodically? Please
advise.
> Wanchun
> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
> Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You
find them at:
>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...ar_ts_1cdv.asp[vbcol=seagreen]
> As for memory, please read below:
> INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...;en-us;q321363
> http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/troub...memoryleak.asp
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
enterprise? I am testing with standard
> edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I
inserted 3000 records. After I re-boot the
> machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the
machine every week to prevent the memory to[vbcol=seagreen]
> grow? Or enterprise edition can handle it better?
mainly[vbcol=seagreen]
your needs.[vbcol=seagreen]
message[vbcol=seagreen]
without[vbcol=seagreen]
the standard[vbcol=seagreen]
with[vbcol=seagreen]
standby or[vbcol=seagreen]
the 6.5[vbcol=seagreen]
just[vbcol=seagreen]
standard[vbcol=seagreen]
you to go[vbcol=seagreen]
sql[vbcol=seagreen]
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...skChooseEd.asp[vbcol=seagreen]
message[vbcol=seagreen]
Our[vbcol=seagreen]
2000[vbcol=seagreen]
256MRAM[vbcol=seagreen]
|||Thanks again Tibor, however, if SQL used all the physical memory of the machine, then the SQL can still run smoothly? or better reboot the machine?
Wanchun
-- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
Please read the links I posted about memory allocation algorithms in SQL Server. This is normal, and no reboot
is necessary.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DF073FD2-4A17-4122-BCEC-E9FB5E5AF5EF@.microsoft.com...
> Tibor,
> My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory usage continuously? Or We need to
reboot the machine periodically? Please advise.
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...ar_ts_1cdv.asp
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...;en-us;q321363
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
> edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 records. After I re-boot
the
> machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine every week to prevent the
memory to[vbcol=seagreen]
> grow? Or enterprise edition can handle it better?

Benchmark for different edition SQL 2000

We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our usage:
1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
2) 5000 row insert per day
3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000 server
4) One database will be installed
5) The size of the database around 10GB
Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRAM database
server.
Please advise. ThanksHi,
Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to go for SQL
Server standard edition.
Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sql server:-
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin...eskChooseEd.asp
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our usage:
> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
> 2) 5000 row insert per day
> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000 server
> 4) One database will be installed
> 5) The size of the database around 10GB
> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRAM
database server.
> Please advise. Thanks|||Hari,
Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and without any
idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standard editi
on and enterprise edition is no different except?
--Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine with 512MRA
M)
--Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby or clus
ter machine)
--Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.5 ver
sion now with no complain)
--Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are just using
the 6.5 version now with no complain)
I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or standard edition
is easy to down?
Wanchun
-- Hari Prasad wrote: --
Hi,
Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to go for SQL
Server standard edition.
Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sql server:-
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin...eskChooseEd.asp
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our usage:
> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
> 2) 5000 row insert per day
> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000 server
> 4) One database will be installed
> 5) The size of the database around 10GB
database server.[vbcol=seagreen]
> Please advise. Thanks|||No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainly
features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...
> Hari,
> Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and without
any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standard
edition and enterprise edition is no different except?
> --Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine with
512MRAM)
> --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby or
cluster machine)
> --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.5
version now with no complain)
> --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are just
using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
> I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or standard
edition is easy to down?
> Wanchun
>
> -- Hari Prasad wrote: --
> Hi,
> Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to go
for SQL
> Server standard edition.
> Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sql
server:-
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin...eskChooseEd.asp
> Thanks
> Hari
> MCDBA
>
> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
usage:[vbcol=seagreen]
server[vbcol=seagreen]
> database server.
>
>|||Andrew,
That mean from our requirement, standard edition is enough for us?
Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and enterprise? I
am testing with standard edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 11
0M after I inserted 3000 records. After I re-boot the machine, the memory ba
ck to 10M..... Is it I nee
d to re-boot the machine every week to prevent the memory to grow' Or enter
prise edition can handle it better?
Any other Enterprise features that better than Standard?
Thanks
-- Andrew J. Kelly wrote: --
No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainly
features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...
> Hari,
any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standard
edition and enterprise edition is no different except?[vbcol=seagreen]
512MRAM)[vbcol=seagreen]
> --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby or
cluster machine)
> --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.5
version now with no complain)
> --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are just
using the 6.5 version now with no complain)[vbcol=seagreen]
edition is easy to down?[vbcol=seagreen]
for SQL[vbcol=seagreen]
> Server standard edition.
server:-[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hari
> MCDBA
> news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
usage:[vbcol=seagreen]
server[vbcol=seagreen]
> database server.|||Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You find them
at:
1cdv.asp" target="_blank">http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...br />
1cdv.asp
As for memory, please read below:
INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...b;en-us;q321363
http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/trou...-memoryleak.asp
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
> Andrew,
> That mean from our requirement, standard edition is enough for us?
> Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and enterprise? I am tes
ting with standard
edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000
records. After I re-boot the
machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine ev
ery week to prevent the memory to
grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better?[vbcol=seagreen]
> Any other Enterprise features that better than Standard?
> Thanks
>
>
> -- Andrew J. Kelly wrote: --
> No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainly
> features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your n
eeds.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...
> any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the stan
dard
> edition and enterprise edition is no different except?
> 512MRAM)
> cluster machine)
> version now with no complain)
> using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
> edition is easy to down?
> for SQL
> server:-
> usage:
> server|||Tibor,
My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory usage c
ontinuously? Or We need to reboot the machine periodically? Please advise.
Wanchun
-- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You find them
at:
1cdv.asp" target="_blank">http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...br />
1cdv.asp
As for memory, please read below:
INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...b;en-us;q321363
http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/trou...-memoryleak.asp
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
> Andrew,
> Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and enterprise? I am tes
ting with standard
edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000
records. After I re-boot the
machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine ev
ery week to prevent the memory to
grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better?[vbcol=seagreen]
> features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your n
eeds.
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...
> any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the stan
dard
> edition and enterprise edition is no different except?
> 512MRAM)
> cluster machine)
> version now with no complain)
> using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
> edition is easy to down?
> for SQL
> server:-
> usage:
> server|||Please read the links I posted about memory allocation algorithms in SQL Ser
ver. This is normal, and no reboot
is necessary.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DF073FD2-4A17-4122-BCEC-E9FB5E5AF5EF@.microsoft.com...
> Tibor,
> My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory usage con
tinuously? Or We need to
reboot the machine periodically? Please advise.
> Wanchun
> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
> Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You fi
nd them at:
> _ar_ts_1cdv.asp" target="_blank">http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d..._ar_ts_1cdv.asp
> As for memory, please read below:
> INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...b;en-us;q321363
> http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/trou...-memoryleak.asp
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
> edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 r
ecords. After I re-boot
the
> machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine eve
ry week to prevent the
memory to[vbcol=seagreen]
> grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better?|||As Tibor points out that is normal behavior and will be the same for both
Std and EE.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DF073FD2-4A17-4122-BCEC-E9FB5E5AF5EF@.microsoft.com...
> Tibor,
> My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory
usage continuously? Or We need to reboot the machine periodically? Please
advise.
> Wanchun
> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
> Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You
find them at:
>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d..._ar_ts_1cdv.asp[v
bcol=seagreen]
> As for memory, please read below:
> INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...b;en-us;q321363
> http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/trou...-memoryleak.asp
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
enterprise? I am testing with standard
> edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I
inserted 3000 records. After I re-boot the
> machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the
machine every week to prevent the memory to[vbcol=seagreen]
> grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better?
mainly[vbcol=seagreen]
your needs.[vbcol=seagreen]
message[vbcol=seagreen]
without[vbcol=seagreen]
the standard[vbcol=seagreen]
with[vbcol=seagreen]
standby or[vbcol=seagreen]
the 6.5[vbcol=seagreen]
just[vbcol=seagreen]
standard[vbcol=seagreen]
you to go[vbcol=seagreen]
sql[vbcol=seagreen]
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin...eskChooseEd.asp[vbcol=seagreen]
message[vbcol=seagreen]
Our[vbcol=seagreen]
2000[vbcol=seagreen]
256MRAM[vbcol=seagreen]|||Thanks again Tibor, however, if SQL used all the physical memory of the mach
ine, then the SQL can still run smoothly? or better reboot the machine?
Wanchun
-- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
Please read the links I posted about memory allocation algorithms in SQL Ser
ver. This is normal, and no reboot
is necessary.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DF073FD2-4A17-4122-BCEC-E9FB5E5AF5EF@.microsoft.com...
> Tibor,
> My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory usage con
tinuously? Or We need to
reboot the machine periodically? Please advise.
> _ar_ts_1cdv.asp" target="_blank">http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d..._ar_ts_1cdv.asp
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...b;en-us;q321363
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
> edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 r
ecords. After I re-boot
the
> machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine eve
ry week to prevent the
memory to[vbcol=seagreen]
> grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better?

Benchmark for different edition SQL 2000

We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our usage
1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same tim
2) 5000 row insert per da
3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000 serve
4) One database will be installe
5) The size of the database around 10G
Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRAM database server
Please advise. ThanksHi,
Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to go for SQL
Server standard edition.
Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sql server:-
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLReskChooseEd.asp
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our usage:
> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
> 2) 5000 row insert per day
> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000 server
> 4) One database will be installed
> 5) The size of the database around 10GB
> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRAM
database server.
> Please advise. Thanks|||Hari
Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and without any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standard edition and enterprise edition is no different except
--Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine with 512MRAM
--Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby or cluster machine
--Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.5 version now with no complain
--Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are just using the 6.5 version now with no complain
I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or standard edition is easy to down
Wanchu
-- Hari Prasad wrote: --
Hi
Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to go for SQ
Server standard edition
Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sql server:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLReskChooseEd.as
Thank
Har
MCDB
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com..
> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our usage
> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same tim
> 2) 5000 row insert per da
> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000 serve
> 4) One database will be installe
> 5) The size of the database around 10G
>> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRA
database server
> Please advise. Thank|||No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainly
features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...
> Hari,
> Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and without
any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standard
edition and enterprise edition is no different except?
> --Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine with
512MRAM)
> --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby or
cluster machine)
> --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.5
version now with no complain)
> --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are just
using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
> I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or standard
edition is easy to down?
> Wanchun
>
> -- Hari Prasad wrote: --
> Hi,
> Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to go
for SQL
> Server standard edition.
> Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sql
server:-
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLReskChooseEd.asp
> Thanks
> Hari
> MCDBA
>
> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
> > We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our
usage:
> > 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
> > 2) 5000 row insert per day
> > 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000
server
> > 4) One database will be installed
> > 5) The size of the database around 10GB
> >> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRAM
> database server.
> > Please advise. Thanks
>
>|||Andrew
That mean from our requirement, standard edition is enough for us
Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and enterprise? I am testing with standard edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 records. After I re-boot the machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine every week to prevent the memory to grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better
Any other Enterprise features that better than Standard
Thank
-- Andrew J. Kelly wrote: --
No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainl
features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MV
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com..
> Hari
>> Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and withou
any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standar
edition and enterprise edition is no different except
>> --Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine wit
512MRAM
> --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby o
cluster machine
> --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.
version now with no complain
> --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are jus
using the 6.5 version now with no complain
>> I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or standar
edition is easy to down
>> Wanchu
>> -- Hari Prasad wrote: --
>> Hi
>> Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to g
for SQ
> Server standard edition
>> Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sq
server:
>> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLReskChooseEd.as
>> Thank
> Har
> MCDB
>> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
> news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com..
>> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Ou
usage
>> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same tim
>> 2) 5000 row insert per da
>> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 200
serve
>> 4) One database will be installe
>> 5) The size of the database around 10G
>> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRA
> database server
>> Please advise. Thank
>>|||Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You find them at:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_1cdv.asp
As for memory, please read below:
INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q321363
http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/troubleshooting-memoryleak.asp
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
> Andrew,
> That mean from our requirement, standard edition is enough for us?
> Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and enterprise? I am testing with standard
edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 records. After I re-boot the
machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine every week to prevent the memory to
grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better?
> Any other Enterprise features that better than Standard?
> Thanks
>
>
> -- Andrew J. Kelly wrote: --
> No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainly
> features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...
> > Hari,
> >> Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and without
> any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standard
> edition and enterprise edition is no different except?
> >> --Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine with
> 512MRAM)
> > --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby or
> cluster machine)
> > --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.5
> version now with no complain)
> > --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are just
> using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
> >> I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or standard
> edition is easy to down?
> >> Wanchun
> >> -- Hari Prasad wrote: --
> >> Hi,
> >> Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to go
> for SQL
> > Server standard edition.
> >> Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sql
> server:-
> >> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLReskChooseEd.asp
> >> Thanks
> > Hari
> > MCDBA
> >> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
> >> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our
> usage:
> >> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
> >> 2) 5000 row insert per day
> >> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000
> server
> >> 4) One database will be installed
> >> 5) The size of the database around 10GB
> >> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRAM
> > database server.
> >> Please advise. Thanks
> >>|||Tibor
My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory usage continuously? Or We need to reboot the machine periodically? Please advise
Wanchu
-- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You find them at
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_1cdv.as
As for memory, please read below
INF: SQL Server Memory Usag
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q32136
http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/troubleshooting-memoryleak.as
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MV
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.as
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com..
> Andrew
>> That mean from our requirement, standard edition is enough for us
> Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and enterprise? I am testing with standar
edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 records. After I re-boot th
machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine every week to prevent the memory t
grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better
>> Any other Enterprise features that better than Standard
>> Thank
>> -- Andrew J. Kelly wrote: --
>> No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainl
> features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs
>> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MV
>> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
> news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com..
>> Hari
>> Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and withou
> any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standar
> edition and enterprise edition is no different except
>> --Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine wit
> 512MRAM
>> --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby o
> cluster machine
>> --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.
> version now with no complain
>> --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are jus
> using the 6.5 version now with no complain
>> I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or standar
> edition is easy to down
>> Wanchu
>> -- Hari Prasad wrote: --
>> Hi
>> Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to g
> for SQ
>> Server standard edition
>> Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sq
> server:
>> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLReskChooseEd.as
>> Thank
>> Har
>> MCDB
>> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
>> news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com..
>> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Ou
> usage
>> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same tim
>> 2) 5000 row insert per da
>> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 200
> serve
>> 4) One database will be installe
>> 5) The size of the database around 10G
>> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRA
>> database server
>> Please advise. Thank
>>|||Please read the links I posted about memory allocation algorithms in SQL Server. This is normal, and no reboot
is necessary.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DF073FD2-4A17-4122-BCEC-E9FB5E5AF5EF@.microsoft.com...
> Tibor,
> My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory usage continuously? Or We need to
reboot the machine periodically? Please advise.
> Wanchun
> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
> Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You find them at:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_1cdv.asp
> As for memory, please read below:
> INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q321363
> http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/troubleshooting-memoryleak.asp
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
> > Andrew,
> >> That mean from our requirement, standard edition is enough for us?
> > Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and enterprise? I am testing with standard
> edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 records. After I re-boot
the
> machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine every week to prevent the
memory to
> grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better?
> >> Any other Enterprise features that better than Standard?
> >> Thanks
> >> -- Andrew J. Kelly wrote: --
> >> No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainly
> > features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs.
> >> --
> > Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> >> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...
> >> Hari,
> >> Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and without
> > any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standard
> > edition and enterprise edition is no different except?
> >> --Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine with
> > 512MRAM)
> >> --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby or
> > cluster machine)
> >> --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.5
> > version now with no complain)
> >> --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are just
> > using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
> >> I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or standard
> > edition is easy to down?
> >> Wanchun
> >> -- Hari Prasad wrote: --
> >> Hi,
> >> Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to go
> > for SQL
> >> Server standard edition.
> >> Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sql
> > server:-
> >> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLReskChooseEd.asp
> >> Thanks
> >> Hari
> >> MCDBA
> >> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
> >> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our
> > usage:
> >> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
> >> 2) 5000 row insert per day
> >> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000
> > server
> >> 4) One database will be installed
> >> 5) The size of the database around 10GB
> >> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRAM
> >> database server.
> >> Please advise. Thanks
> >>|||As Tibor points out that is normal behavior and will be the same for both
Std and EE.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DF073FD2-4A17-4122-BCEC-E9FB5E5AF5EF@.microsoft.com...
> Tibor,
> My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory
usage continuously? Or We need to reboot the machine periodically? Please
advise.
> Wanchun
> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
> Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You
find them at:
>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_1cdv.asp
> As for memory, please read below:
> INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q321363
> http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/troubleshooting-memoryleak.asp
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
> > Andrew,
> >> That mean from our requirement, standard edition is enough for us?
> > Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and
enterprise? I am testing with standard
> edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I
inserted 3000 records. After I re-boot the
> machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the
machine every week to prevent the memory to
> grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better?
> >> Any other Enterprise features that better than Standard?
> >> Thanks
> >> -- Andrew J. Kelly wrote: --
> >> No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is
mainly
> > features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for
your needs.
> >> --
> > Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> >> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
> > news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...
> >> Hari,
> >> Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and
without
> > any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact,
the standard
> > edition and enterprise edition is no different except?
> >> --Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine
with
> > 512MRAM)
> >> --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a
standby or
> > cluster machine)
> >> --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using
the 6.5
> > version now with no complain)
> >> --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are
just
> > using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
> >> I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or
standard
> > edition is easy to down?
> >> Wanchun
> >> -- Hari Prasad wrote: --
> >> Hi,
> >> Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend
you to go
> > for SQL
> >> Server standard edition.
> >> Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of
sql
> > server:-
> >>
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLReskChooseEd.asp
> >> Thanks
> >> Hari
> >> MCDBA
> >> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
> >> news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
> >> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise.
Our
> > usage:
> >> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
> >> 2) 5000 row insert per day
> >> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window
2000
> > server
> >> 4) One database will be installed
> >> 5) The size of the database around 10GB
> >> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz
256MRAM
> >> database server.
> >> Please advise. Thanks
> >>|||Thanks again Tibor, however, if SQL used all the physical memory of the machine, then the SQL can still run smoothly? or better reboot the machine
Wanchu
-- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
Please read the links I posted about memory allocation algorithms in SQL Server. This is normal, and no reboo
is necessary
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MV
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.as
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
news:DF073FD2-4A17-4122-BCEC-E9FB5E5AF5EF@.microsoft.com..
> Tibor
> My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory usage continuously? Or We need t
reboot the machine periodically? Please advise
>> Wanchu
>> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
>> Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You find them at
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_1cdv.as
>> As for memory, please read below
>> INF: SQL Server Memory Usag
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q32136
>> http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/troubleshooting-memoryleak.as
>> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MV
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.as
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
>> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
> news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com..
>> Andrew
>> That mean from our requirement, standard edition is enough for us
>> Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and enterprise? I am testing with standar
> edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 records. After I re-boo
th
> machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine every week to prevent th
memory t
> grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better
>> Any other Enterprise features that better than Standard
>> Thank
>>> -- Andrew J. Kelly wrote: --
>> No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainl
>> features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MV
>> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
>> news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com..
>> Hari
>> Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and withou
>> any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standar
>> edition and enterprise edition is no different except
>> --Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine wit
>> 512MRAM
>> --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby o
>> cluster machine
>> --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.
>> version now with no complain
>> --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are jus
>> using the 6.5 version now with no complain
>> I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or standar
>> edition is easy to down
>> Wanchu
>> -- Hari Prasad wrote: --
>> Hi
>> Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to g
>> for SQ
>> Server standard edition
>> Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sq
>> server:
>> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLReskChooseEd.as
>> Thank
>> Har
>> MCDB
>> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
>> news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com..
>> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our
>> usage:
>> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
>> 2) 5000 row insert per day
>> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000
>> server
>> 4) One database will be installed
>> 5) The size of the database around 10GB
>> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRAM
>> database server.
>> Please advise. Thanks
>>|||The purpose if buying memory is for it to be used. SQL Server does just that. Yes, it is normal for a SQL
Server installation to see all memory being used. :-)
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Wanhcun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:70CBBAD5-7E54-4EB8-9A9C-3EBDEBF2A674@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks again Tibor, however, if SQL used all the physical memory of the machine, then the SQL can still run
smoothly? or better reboot the machine?
> Wanchun
> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
> Please read the links I posted about memory allocation algorithms in SQL Server. This is normal, and no
reboot
> is necessary.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:DF073FD2-4A17-4122-BCEC-E9FB5E5AF5EF@.microsoft.com...
> > Tibor,
> > My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory usage continuously? Or We
need to
> reboot the machine periodically? Please advise.
> >> Wanchun
> >> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
> >> Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You find them at:
> > http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_1cdv.asp
> >> As for memory, please read below:
> >> INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
> > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q321363
> >> http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/troubleshooting-memoryleak.asp
> >> --
> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
> >> Andrew,
> >> That mean from our requirement, standard edition is enough for us?
> >> Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and enterprise? I am testing with standard
> > edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 records. After I
re-boot
> the
> > machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine every week to prevent
the
> memory to
> > grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better?
> >> Any other Enterprise features that better than Standard?
> >> Thanks
> >>> -- Andrew J. Kelly wrote: --
> >> No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainly
> >> features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs.
> >> --
> >> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> >> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...
> >> Hari,
> >> Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and without
> >> any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standard
> >> edition and enterprise edition is no different except?
> >> --Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine with
> >> 512MRAM)
> >> --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby or
> >> cluster machine)
> >> --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.5
> >> version now with no complain)
> >> --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are just
> >> using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
> >> I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or standard
> >> edition is easy to down?
> >> Wanchun
> >> -- Hari Prasad wrote: --
> >> Hi,
> >> Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to go
> >> for SQL
> >> Server standard edition.
> >> Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sql
> >> server:-
> >> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLReskChooseEd.asp
> >> Thanks
> >> Hari
> >> MCDBA
> >> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
> >> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our
> >> usage:
> >> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
> >> 2) 5000 row insert per day
> >> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000
> >> server
> >> 4) One database will be installed
> >> 5) The size of the database around 10GB
> >> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRAM
> >> database server.
> >> Please advise. Thanks
> >>|||Tibor
This is because my machine only contain 512 MRAM... then we need to set the "maximun memory" of SQL server around 400M and let 100M memory that can be used by the OS? Please advise.Thanks...
Regards
Wanchu
-- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
The purpose if buying memory is for it to be used. SQL Server does just that. Yes, it is normal for a SQ
Server installation to see all memory being used. :-
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MV
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.as
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Wanhcun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
news:70CBBAD5-7E54-4EB8-9A9C-3EBDEBF2A674@.microsoft.com..
> Thanks again Tibor, however, if SQL used all the physical memory of the machine, then the SQL can still ru
smoothly? or better reboot the machine
>> Wanchu
>> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
>> Please read the links I posted about memory allocation algorithms in SQL Server. This is normal, and n
reboo
> is necessary
>> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MV
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.as
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
>> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
> news:DF073FD2-4A17-4122-BCEC-E9FB5E5AF5EF@.microsoft.com..
>> Tibor
>> My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory usage continuously? Or W
need t
> reboot the machine periodically? Please advise
>> Wanchu
>> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
>> Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You find them at
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_1cdv.as
>> As for memory, please read below
>> INF: SQL Server Memory Usag
>> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q32136
>> http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/troubleshooting-memoryleak.as
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MV
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.as
>> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
>> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
>> news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com..
>> Andrew
>> That mean from our requirement, standard edition is enough for us
>> Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and enterprise? I am testing with standar
>> edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 records. After
re-boo
> th
>> machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine every week to preven
th
> memory t
>> grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better
>> Any other Enterprise features that better than Standard
>> Thank
>>> -- Andrew J. Kelly wrote: --
>> No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainl
>> features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MV
>> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
>> news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com..
>> Hari
>> Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and withou
>> any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standar
>> edition and enterprise edition is no different except
>> --Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine wit
>> 512MRAM
>> --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby o
>> cluster machine
>> --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.
>> version now with no complain
>> --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are just
>> using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
>> I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or standard
>> edition is easy to down?
>> Wanchun
>> -- Hari Prasad wrote: --
>> Hi,
>> Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to go
>> for SQL
>> Server standard edition.
>> Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sql
>> server:-
>> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLReskChooseEd.asp
>> Thanks
>> Hari
>> MCDBA
>>> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
>> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our
>> usage:
>> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
>> 2) 5000 row insert per day
>> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000
>> server
>> 4) One database will be installed
>> 5) The size of the database around 10GB
>> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRAM
>> database server.
>> Please advise. Thanks
>>|||The fact that you only have 512 MB doesn't change the memory allocation algorithms. SQL Server will use the
memory in the machine (but of course leave space for OS and a little bit more). But sure, you can set a max if
you absolutely want to...
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3D73FA4A-D85C-40BF-BC30-D2F32E57602B@.microsoft.com...
> Tibor,
> This is because my machine only contain 512 MRAM... then we need to set the "maximun memory" of SQL server
around 400M and let 100M memory that can be used by the OS? Please advise.Thanks....
> Regards,
> Wanchun
> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
> The purpose if buying memory is for it to be used. SQL Server does just that. Yes, it is normal for a
SQL
> Server installation to see all memory being used. :-)
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Wanhcun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:70CBBAD5-7E54-4EB8-9A9C-3EBDEBF2A674@.microsoft.com...
> > Thanks again Tibor, however, if SQL used all the physical memory of the machine, then the SQL can
still run
> smoothly? or better reboot the machine?
> >> Wanchun
> >> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
> >> Please read the links I posted about memory allocation algorithms in SQL Server. This is
normal, and no
> reboot
> > is necessary.
> >> --
> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:DF073FD2-4A17-4122-BCEC-E9FB5E5AF5EF@.microsoft.com...
> >> Tibor,
> >> My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the memory usage continuously? Or We
> need to
> > reboot the machine periodically? Please advise.
> >> Wanchun
> >> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
> >> Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE doesn't. You find them at:
> >> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_1cdv.asp
> >> As for memory, please read below:
> >> INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
> >> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q321363
> >> http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/troubleshooting-memoryleak.asp
> >> --
> >> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> >> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> >> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
> >> Andrew,
> >> That mean from our requirement, standard edition is enough for us?
> >> Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and enterprise? I am testing with
standard
> >> edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I inserted 3000 records. After I
> re-boot
> > the
> >> machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot the machine every week to prevent
> the
> > memory to
> >> grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better?
> >> Any other Enterprise features that better than Standard?
> >> Thanks
> >>> -- Andrew J. Kelly wrote: --
> >> No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It is mainly
> >> features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine for your needs.
> >> --
> >> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> >> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...
> >> Hari,
> >> Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before and without
> >> any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact, the standard
> >> edition and enterprise edition is no different except?
> >> --Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU machine with
> >> 512MRAM)
> >> --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a standby or
> >> cluster machine)
> >> --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using the 6.5
> >> version now with no complain)
> >> --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are just
> >> using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
> >> I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or standard
> >> edition is easy to down?
> >> Wanchun
> >> -- Hari Prasad wrote: --
> >> Hi,
> >> Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend you to go
> >> for SQL
> >> Server standard edition.
> >> Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of sql
> >> server:-
> >> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLReskChooseEd.asp
> >> Thanks
> >> Hari
> >> MCDBA
> >>> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
> >> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise. Our
> >> usage:
> >> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
> >> 2) 5000 row insert per day
> >> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window 2000
> >> server
> >> 4) One database will be installed
> >> 5) The size of the database around 10GB
> >> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz 256MRAM
> >> database server.
> >> Please advise. Thanks
> >>|||The max memory only sets an upper limit for the memory pool. There is an
area called the mem to leave that gets allocated first. By default it can
use to to 256MB so if you set the max memory to 400 you will most likely
still swap with the OS. While it may be better than not changing anything I
would set it even lower. You stated you only do 5000 inserts a day so you
should not require a lot of memory to operate properly. Try setting it to
300MB and see if that helps. Memory is cheap these days and you might want
to look into adding more later on.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3D73FA4A-D85C-40BF-BC30-D2F32E57602B@.microsoft.com...
> Tibor,
> This is because my machine only contain 512 MRAM... then we need to set
the "maximun memory" of SQL server around 400M and let 100M memory that can
be used by the OS? Please advise.Thanks....
> Regards,
> Wanchun
> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
> The purpose if buying memory is for it to be used. SQL Server does
just that. Yes, it is normal for a SQL
> Server installation to see all memory being used. :-)
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Wanhcun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:70CBBAD5-7E54-4EB8-9A9C-3EBDEBF2A674@.microsoft.com...
> > Thanks again Tibor, however, if SQL used all the physical memory of
the machine, then the SQL can still run
> smoothly? or better reboot the machine?
> >> Wanchun
> >> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
> >> Please read the links I posted about memory allocation
algorithms in SQL Server. This is normal, and no
> reboot
> > is necessary.
> >> --
> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
> > news:DF073FD2-4A17-4122-BCEC-E9FB5E5AF5EF@.microsoft.com...
> >> Tibor,
> >> My concern is how to prevent the SQL server that increase the
memory usage continuously? Or We
> need to
> > reboot the machine periodically? Please advise.
> >> Wanchun
> >> -- Tibor Karaszi wrote: --
> >> Enterprise edition has some distinct features that SE
doesn't. You find them at:
> >>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_1cdv.asp
> >> As for memory, please read below:
> >> INF: SQL Server Memory Usage
> >>
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q321363
> >>
http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/troubleshooting-memoryleak.asp
> >> --
> >> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> >> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> >> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
> >> news:36E3DDB7-B674-4AFA-8A7C-3B7C1A336E3E@.microsoft.com...
> >> Andrew,
> >> That mean from our requirement, standard edition is enough for
us?
> >> Also, the memory arrangement is the same between standard and
enterprise? I am testing with standard
> >> edition, the memory continue to grow from 10M to 110M after I
inserted 3000 records. After I
> re-boot
> > the
> >> machine, the memory back to 10M..... Is it I need to re-boot
the machine every week to prevent
> the
> > memory to
> >> grow' Or enterprise edition can handle it better?
> >> Any other Enterprise features that better than Standard?
> >> Thanks
> >>> -- Andrew J. Kelly wrote: --
> >> No edition is any more or less stable than any others. It
is mainly
> >> features and capacity. Standard edition will do just fine
for your needs.
> >> --
> >> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> >> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
> >> news:8E5E6311-B5DF-4D1E-9797-92DD6413C57C@.microsoft.com...
> >> Hari,
> >> Thanks for your advice. However, I have read the page before
and without
> >> any idea. The point of availability is confused me. In fact,
the standard
> >> edition and enterprise edition is no different except?
> >> --Scalability ( useless to us because we only have 1 CPU
machine with
> >> 512MRAM)
> >> --Availability/uptime (useless to us because we don't have a
standby or
> >> cluster machine)
> >> --Performance (Time is not so critical because we are just using
the 6.5
> >> version now with no complain)
> >> --Advanced analysis ( Analysis is not so critical because we are
just
> >> using the 6.5 version now with no complain)
> >> I just concern, is it enterprise edition is more stable? or
standard
> >> edition is easy to down?
> >> Wanchun
> >> -- Hari Prasad wrote: --
> >> Hi,
> >> Based on your configurations and settings I will recommend
you to go
> >> for SQL
> >> Server standard edition.
> >> Have a look into the below link in choosing the edition of
sql
> >> server:-
> >>
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLReskChooseEd.asp
> >> Thanks
> >> Hari
> >> MCDBA
> >>> "Wanchun" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
> >> news:08540023-9C99-4569-9A26-F765151912A2@.microsoft.com...
> >> We want to select the edition between standard and enterprise.
Our
> >> usage:
> >> 1) 10 users/application connect to the server at the same time
> >> 2) 5000 row insert per day
> >> 3) Our machine is only 1CPU 2.6GHz and 512 MB RAM with window
2000
> >> server
> >> 4) One database will be installed
> >> 5) The size of the database around 10GB
> >> Because we want to replace the existing SQL6.5 with 400MHz
256MRAM
> >> database server.
> >> Please advise. Thanks
> >>

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Best Strategy to backup the system db

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Best Real Datatype

Thursday, March 22, 2012

Best Practices Question

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Best practice-backup-

Best practice-backup-

Best practice-backup-

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Best Performance

Best Performance

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Best Enterprise Manager clone/wannabe?

Best Enterprise Datawarehouse

Sunday, February 19, 2012

Benchmark for different edition SQL 2000

Benchmark for different edition SQL 2000

Benchmark for different edition SQL 2000

BEFORE Triggers

Blog Archive

About Me