Best practice for conditional insert else select?

I have several places where I need to get the id (primary key) of a resource, inserting a row if the resource does not exist (i.e. an artificial key to be used as an FK for another table). I should probably change this varchar key lookup to use a hash index, but that is beside the point.

So the table is essentially like:

CREATE TABLE MyLookup(id int identity primary key nonclustered, mykey varchar(256));

CREATE CLUSTERED INDEX mylookup_cidx_mykey ON MyLookup(mykey);

I see two main approaches for how I can do my get-id-with-insert-if-needed.

(Approach 1)

DECLARE @.id INT;

SELECT @.id = id FROM MyLookup WHERE mykey = 'some key value';

IF (@.id is null)

BEGIN

INSERT MyLookup ('some key value');

SET @.id = SCOPE_IDENTITY();

END

(Approach 2)

DECLARE @.id INT;

INSERT MyLookup SELECT 'some key value' WHERE NOT EXISTS (SELECT id FROM MyLookup WHERE mykey = 'some key value');

IF (@.@.ROWCOUNT = 0)

SELECT @.id = id FROM MyLookup WHERE mykey = 'some key value';

ELSE

SET @.id = SCOPE_IDENTITY();

From some quick tests in profiler, approach 2 seems to be a bit faster and have lower resource utilization. But I'm not sure if it maybe takes some more aggressive locks even in the unnecessary case where the mykey row value of 'some key value' already exists. Approach 2 also looks cleaner to me, but I don't mind a bit of extra code if it gives me better scalability through less lock contention.

Any tip on what is considered the best practice for a conditional insert like this, or a tip on how to get detailed lock info for a query? The lock info for profiler was all greek to me, it just had a hex value with each lock acquired/released, so I have no idea what it was telling me. Is my only solution to just run exhaustive tests and look at the perf numbers from the black box?

I went ahead and did some testing, no big surprises. Although the tests were single client, so it doesn't give me any info about locking.

I found unsurprisingly that the more sparse the table, the narrower the gap between the two options. But as the likelihood of needing an insert went down, the first approach became more effective. In my production environment I would hazard a guess that I need an insert around 5% of the time, so I'll probably go with approach 1 in general. Although I did change my approach 1 to actually incorporate approach 2 with in - first I do a select, and then if the id was null then I do a conditional insert. There is a slight increase in maintenance cost since I have to duplicate the code for the existential check, but I think it is worthwhile in my cases that are fairly high traffic.

Any other points of view on this?

Best method: TOP 1 or DISTINCT or MAX

'TOP 1' or 'DISTINCT' or 'MAX'
Any sugestions on which is better to use if I need to select a record that has the highest value - could be a INT or sometimes a DATETIME.Distinct will not get you a max value, if you use top make sure you use the order by.

HTH|||To select the entire record, use TOP 1 on a sorted recordset. To get just the highest value for the field, use MAX().|||[blindman]: someone else suggested that TOP is more efficient then MAX is that true?|||I don't know. It probably depends on a lot of factors and makes little difference either way.|||Best way to test this is to use the "set stistics IO on" command to check your logical IO (number of times you hit a page)|||Originally posted by rhigdon
Best way to test this is to use the "set stistics IO on" command to check your logical IO (number of times you hit a page)

I used "SET STATISTICS IO ON" command and got a line for each table in query...

Table 'tblUser'. Scan count 1, logical reads 2, physical reads 2, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'ctsJrn_Location'. Scan count 7, logical reads 14, physical reads 2, read-ahead reads 0.
Table 'ctsIndex'. Scan count 8, logical reads 16, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0.

Can anyone tell me what does each count of 'reads' mean?

Thanks,
Lito|||Scan count - number of times data or clustered index pages were scanned;
Logical reads - total number of records read from cache (I think);
Physical reads - total number of pages read from disk (I think);
Read-ahead reads - number of pages optimizer chose to read ahead (I think)

But the point is, you want to minimize the first 2 indicators. And, BTW, scan count does not always mean that the actual scan occurred. It just means that the optimizer had to look at data/clustered index pages of the corresponding table so many times.|||Originally posted by rdjabarov
... But the point is, you want to minimize the first 2 indicators...

What range should those indicators be in, are mine ok?|||It depends on number of rows the tables have vs. number of rows returned.|||but is there a ratio?

I am selecting one row from 9 joint tables with approx. 18k records each|||Then your numbers are actually good.|||The only counter I truly look at is logical IO as it is the number of times a page is hit (not number of pages) the lower you canb get this the better. The problem with physical and read-aheads is they can be optimistic and not exactly accurate.

HTH|||your physical reads should be zero or as close to zero as possible.
this means that you are reading pages from disk into memory.. that is something that you want as little of as possible.

you will want logical reads to be as low as possible as well but those numbers are based on the actual work that SQLSVR had to perform to retrieve your query. so the number is academic based on your query, statistics, indexing etc.

typically you should only retrive the rows that you need in a query result, so if the question is which would be the best query to perform? so if you want to just get one row the logical answer would be an aggregate function

Select Max(Col1) as 'MAXNUM' from table2
this will retrieve a scalar value for you (one row one column)
ex
MAXNUM
=====
100

as far as distinct and top, are concerned
DISTINCT does not give you a max value, it removes duplicates from the columns gueried which i guess you could then sort decending to get the largest value
""select distinct state from table2 order by state Desc""
ex
STATE
====
TX
GA
FL
CA

TOP 'n' is designed to return an restricted set of values
""select TOP 5 col1 from table2 order by col1 desc""

COL1
====
5
4
3
2
1

your best method here would be to run the query with each of the different types of commands
view the stats io and compare all three.|||Thank you all for your comments and sugestions, this helped me alot. Learn something new every day...

Lito

Best method for running several queries?

I have an SQL file saved from QA. It has several queries used for testing.
These are DELETE, UPDATE, INSERT, SELECT of various types. I highlight the
specific statement to run in that file. This keeps everything from running
at once.
Problem is that I access the server from several computers via QA. The SQL
file with all of the above queries is usually on one computer. Should I
just store the SQL file on the SQL Server machine as an SQL file or a stored
procedure? What is best for this? This file isn't something I would ever
want an app to have access to. It's strictly for manual testing purposes
via QA.
Thanks,
BrettScript files are considered source code. So, you would want to put it in a
souce control server somewhere and just grab it when you need it. Storing
the script inside sqlserver is probably not a good idea in this case.
-oj
"Brett" <no@.spam.net> wrote in message
news:ORw4XLLLFHA.2136@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>I have an SQL file saved from QA. It has several queries used for testing.
>These are DELETE, UPDATE, INSERT, SELECT of various types. I highlight the
>specific statement to run in that file. This keeps everything from running
>at once.
> Problem is that I access the server from several computers via QA. The
> SQL file with all of the above queries is usually on one computer. Should
> I just store the SQL file on the SQL Server machine as an SQL file or a
> stored procedure? What is best for this? This file isn't something I
> would ever want an app to have access to. It's strictly for manual
> testing purposes via QA.
> Thanks,
> Brett
>

Best Command to Use for getting first instance of a value

In a select statement, I want to evaluate a value, and when I get that value, I want the value for all other rows to be set to that value so I end up with just one row.

For example:

Meeting# Vote

12345 Yes

12345 Maybe

12345 No

12345 See Comment

12345 Yes

Whenever I get a vote that says, See Comment, I want the end result to look like:

Meeting# Vote

12345 See Comment

If my result does not have See Comment, Yes will be next in line:

Meeting# Vote

12345 Yes

12345 Maybe

12345 No

12345 Yes

Whenever I get a vote that says, Yes, I want the end result to look like:

Meeting# Vote

12345 Yes

And so on.... I hope this makes sense.

Thanks, Iris

Try:

select

*

from

dbo.t1 as a

where

Vote = (

select top 1 Vote

from dbo.t1 as b

where b.Meeting# = a.Meeting#

order by

case

when Vote = 'See Comment' then 1

when Vote = 'Yes' then 2

when Vote = 'Maybe' then 3

when Vote = 'No' then 4

else 5

end

)

-- 2005

;with cte

(

select

Meeting#,

Vote,

row_number() over(partition by Meeting# order by

case

when Vote = 'See Comment' then 1

when Vote = 'Yes' then 2

when Vote = 'Maybe' then 3

when Vote = 'No' then 4

else 5

end

) as rn

from

dbo.t1

)

select

Meeting#, Vote

from

cte

where

rn = 1

go

AMB

|||

The first row for all of my meeting#'s was 'No'. So when select top 1 Vote is used, it got 'No' everytime, and set everything to no.

For the first meeting#, it looked like:

Meeting# Vote

12345 No

12345 Yes

12345 See Comment

12345 Yes

It took 'No' first, and went on to the next Meeting#. What I want it to do is be selective. If 'See Comment' exists, it takes precedent over 'Yes' and 'No'. If 'See Comment' does not exist, it will then look for 'Yes'. Then if 'Yes' or 'See Comment' does not exist, it will then set to 'No'.

Thanks, Iris

|||

It works for as expected for the sample data. If it is not what you expect, then post sample data and expected result.

use northwind

go

Code Snippet

createtable #t (

Meeting# intnotnull,

Vote varchar(25)notnull

)

insertinto #t values(12345,'No')

insertinto #t values(12345,'Yes')

insertinto #t values(12345,'See Comment')

insertinto #t values(12345,'Yes')

insertinto #t values(12346,'No')

insertinto #t values(12346,'Yes')

insertinto #t values(12346,'Yes')

insertinto #t values(12347,'No')

insertinto #t values(12347,'Maybe')

insertinto #t values(12348,'No')

selectdistinct

*

from

#t as a

where

Vote =(

selecttop 1 Vote

from #t as b

where b.Meeting# = a.Meeting#

orderby

case

when Vote ='See Comment'then 1

when Vote ='Yes'then 2

when Vote ='Maybe'then 3

when Vote ='No'then 4

else 5

end

)

orderby

Meeting#

;with cte

as

(

select

Meeting#,

Vote,

row_number()over(partitionby Meeting# orderby

case

when Vote ='See Comment'then 1

when Vote ='Yes'then 2

when Vote ='Maybe'then 3

when Vote ='No'then 4

else 5

end

)as rn

from

#t

)

select

Meeting#, Vote

from

cte

where

rn = 1

orderby

Meeting#

droptable #t

go

AMB

|||

Thanks, that worked.

Iris

benefits of full recovery**

Hi
What's the benefit usage to select Full recovery model for a database?
I know it's better to select simple mode for developement and test
enviroment.
But I don't know excatly how can the full recovery model be usefull for
critical enviroment?
Can any body give me an example?
Thanks alot
Maryam,
Here is a nice article:
http://insight.zdnet.co.uk/software/...4171-1,00.htm.
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Associate Mentor
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"maryam rezvani" <rezvani@.parskhazar.net> wrote in message
news:uWJq1njwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> What's the benefit usage to select Full recovery model for a database?
> I know it's better to select simple mode for developement and test
> enviroment.
> But I don't know excatly how can the full recovery model be usefull for
> critical enviroment?
> Can any body give me an example?
> Thanks alot
>
|||maryam rezvani wrote:
> Hi
> What's the benefit usage to select Full recovery model for a database?
> I know it's better to select simple mode for developement and test
> enviroment.
> But I don't know excatly how can the full recovery model be usefull
> for critical enviroment?
> Can any body give me an example?
> Thanks alot
short:
if your DB is in full recovery model, you will have to backup the log, if
you can several times/day. In case of a restore, you probably will not lose
any data, and you can recovery to the point in time (useful if someone
deletes something or some other human error)
long:
see BooksOnLine (mssql help)
|||Hi
By using 'FULL recovery' mode you will be able to restore your database at
point time
For example , you do a full backup on sunday night and every hour a log file
backup during the work day ,so on tuesday at 11 AM the database is crashed
..If you have the database in 'SIMPLE recovery' you will be able to get the
database back only from last backup (sunday night) ,that means you lost the
data of monday,tuesday . However , if you have 'FULL recovery' you have to
restore the last database backup and the apply all LOG backups till 11AM
(see more details in the BOL)
Another important point is
Let say you do a FULL backup database every sunday night and every hour a
LOG file backup. Now, you lost the FULL database backup of the second week
and the database is get corrupted now. So what would you do, you are about
to lost the data of two weeks ( if you do only FULL backup database (SIMPLE
recovery) ) ,but in that case you restore the last full backup (two weeks
ago) and the apply all LOG files you perfom till the corruption. You will
lost nothing because LOG file backup contains all info since last LOG file
backup.
"maryam rezvani" <rezvani@.parskhazar.net> wrote in message
news:uWJq1njwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> What's the benefit usage to select Full recovery model for a database?
> I know it's better to select simple mode for developement and test
> enviroment.
> But I don't know excatly how can the full recovery model be usefull for
> critical enviroment?
> Can any body give me an example?
> Thanks alot
>
|||Thanks
Do you mean that if I found that some false insertion happenning to a
special table
in 9:00 am and my db is in full recovery model so I can restore my db to the
point
exaclty before the false insertion through the log file?
but if I set my db to simple mode have to restore the previous backup
related to the day before(cause I back up my db every night)?
"Zarko Jovanovic" <mind_less_NOSPAM_@.bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:1099553502.722414@.internet.fina.hr...
> maryam rezvani wrote:
> short:
> if your DB is in full recovery model, you will have to backup the log, if
> you can several times/day. In case of a restore, you probably will not
lose
> any data, and you can recovery to the point in time (useful if someone
> deletes something or some other human error)
> long:
> see BooksOnLine (mssql help)
>
|||Correct. But for the first scenario, you also need to perform regular transaction log backups. When
you restore a transaction log backup, you can stop at a certain point in time.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"maryam rezvani" <rezvani@.parskhazar.net> wrote in message
news:egP72OkwEHA.4004@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Thanks
> Do you mean that if I found that some false insertion happenning to a
> special table
> in 9:00 am and my db is in full recovery model so I can restore my db to the
> point
> exaclty before the false insertion through the log file?
> but if I set my db to simple mode have to restore the previous backup
> related to the day before(cause I back up my db every night)?
> "Zarko Jovanovic" <mind_less_NOSPAM_@.bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:1099553502.722414@.internet.fina.hr...
> lose
>

benefits of full recovery**

Hi
What's the benefit usage to select Full recovery model for a database?
I know it's better to select simple mode for developement and test
enviroment.
But I don't know excatly how can the full recovery model be usefull for
critical enviroment?
Can any body give me an example?
Thanks alotMaryam,
Here is a nice article:
http://insight.zdnet.co.uk/software...34171-1,00.htm.
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Associate Mentor
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"maryam rezvani" <rezvani@.parskhazar.net> wrote in message
news:uWJq1njwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> What's the benefit usage to select Full recovery model for a database?
> I know it's better to select simple mode for developement and test
> enviroment.
> But I don't know excatly how can the full recovery model be usefull for
> critical enviroment?
> Can any body give me an example?
> Thanks alot
>|||maryam rezvani wrote:
> Hi
> What's the benefit usage to select Full recovery model for a database?
> I know it's better to select simple mode for developement and test
> enviroment.
> But I don't know excatly how can the full recovery model be usefull
> for critical enviroment?
> Can any body give me an example?
> Thanks alot
short:
if your DB is in full recovery model, you will have to backup the log, if
you can several times/day. In case of a restore, you probably will not lose
any data, and you can recovery to the point in time (useful if someone
deletes something or some other human error)
long:
see BooksOnLine (mssql help)|||Hi
By using 'FULL recovery' mode you will be able to restore your database at
point time
For example , you do a full backup on sunday night and every hour a log file
backup during the work day ,so on tuesday at 11 AM the database is crashed
.If you have the database in 'SIMPLE recovery' you will be able to get the
database back only from last backup (sunday night) ,that means you lost the
data of monday,tuesday . However , if you have 'FULL recovery' you have to
restore the last database backup and the apply all LOG backups till 11AM
(see more details in the BOL)
Another important point is
Let say you do a FULL backup database every sunday night and every hour a
LOG file backup. Now, you lost the FULL database backup of the second week
and the database is get corrupted now. So what would you do, you are about
to lost the data of two weeks ( if you do only FULL backup database (SIMPLE
recovery) ) ,but in that case you restore the last full backup (two weeks
ago) and the apply all LOG files you perfom till the corruption. You will
lost nothing because LOG file backup contains all info since last LOG file
backup.
"maryam rezvani" <rezvani@.parskhazar.net> wrote in message
news:uWJq1njwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> What's the benefit usage to select Full recovery model for a database?
> I know it's better to select simple mode for developement and test
> enviroment.
> But I don't know excatly how can the full recovery model be usefull for
> critical enviroment?
> Can any body give me an example?
> Thanks alot
>|||Thanks
Do you mean that if I found that some false insertion happenning to a
special table
in 9:00 am and my db is in full recovery model so I can restore my db to the
point
exaclty before the false insertion through the log file?
but if I set my db to simple mode have to restore the previous backup
related to the day before(cause I back up my db every night)?
"Zarko Jovanovic" <mind_less_NOSPAM_@.bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:1099553502.722414@.internet.fina.hr...
> maryam rezvani wrote:
> short:
> if your DB is in full recovery model, you will have to backup the log, if
> you can several times/day. In case of a restore, you probably will not
lose
> any data, and you can recovery to the point in time (useful if someone
> deletes something or some other human error)
> long:
> see BooksOnLine (mssql help)
>|||Correct. But for the first scenario, you also need to perform regular transa
ction log backups. When
you restore a transaction log backup, you can stop at a certain point in tim
e.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"maryam rezvani" <rezvani@.parskhazar.net> wrote in message
news:egP72OkwEHA.4004@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Thanks
> Do you mean that if I found that some false insertion happenning to a
> special table
> in 9:00 am and my db is in full recovery model so I can restore my db to t
he
> point
> exaclty before the false insertion through the log file?
> but if I set my db to simple mode have to restore the previous backup
> related to the day before(cause I back up my db every night)?
> "Zarko Jovanovic" <mind_less_NOSPAM_@.bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:1099553502.722414@.internet.fina.hr...
> lose
>

benefits of full recovery**

Hi
What's the benefit usage to select Full recovery model for a database?
I know it's better to select simple mode for developement and test
enviroment.
But I don't know excatly how can the full recovery model be usefull for
critical enviroment?
Can any body give me an example?
Thanks alotMaryam,
Here is a nice article:
http://insight.zdnet.co.uk/software/developer/0,39020469,2134171-1,00.htm.
--
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Associate Mentor
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"maryam rezvani" <rezvani@.parskhazar.net> wrote in message
news:uWJq1njwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> What's the benefit usage to select Full recovery model for a database?
> I know it's better to select simple mode for developement and test
> enviroment.
> But I don't know excatly how can the full recovery model be usefull for
> critical enviroment?
> Can any body give me an example?
> Thanks alot
>|||maryam rezvani wrote:
> Hi
> What's the benefit usage to select Full recovery model for a database?
> I know it's better to select simple mode for developement and test
> enviroment.
> But I don't know excatly how can the full recovery model be usefull
> for critical enviroment?
> Can any body give me an example?
> Thanks alot
short:
if your DB is in full recovery model, you will have to backup the log, if
you can several times/day. In case of a restore, you probably will not lose
any data, and you can recovery to the point in time (useful if someone
deletes something or some other human error)
long:
see BooksOnLine (mssql help)|||Hi
By using 'FULL recovery' mode you will be able to restore your database at
point time
For example , you do a full backup on sunday night and every hour a log file
backup during the work day ,so on tuesday at 11 AM the database is crashed
.If you have the database in 'SIMPLE recovery' you will be able to get the
database back only from last backup (sunday night) ,that means you lost the
data of monday,tuesday . However , if you have 'FULL recovery' you have to
restore the last database backup and the apply all LOG backups till 11AM
(see more details in the BOL)
Another important point is
Let say you do a FULL backup database every sunday night and every hour a
LOG file backup. Now, you lost the FULL database backup of the second week
and the database is get corrupted now. So what would you do, you are about
to lost the data of two weeks ( if you do only FULL backup database (SIMPLE
recovery) ) ,but in that case you restore the last full backup (two weeks
ago) and the apply all LOG files you perfom till the corruption. You will
lost nothing because LOG file backup contains all info since last LOG file
backup.
"maryam rezvani" <rezvani@.parskhazar.net> wrote in message
news:uWJq1njwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> What's the benefit usage to select Full recovery model for a database?
> I know it's better to select simple mode for developement and test
> enviroment.
> But I don't know excatly how can the full recovery model be usefull for
> critical enviroment?
> Can any body give me an example?
> Thanks alot
>|||Thanks
Do you mean that if I found that some false insertion happenning to a
special table
in 9:00 am and my db is in full recovery model so I can restore my db to the
point
exaclty before the false insertion through the log file?
but if I set my db to simple mode have to restore the previous backup
related to the day before(cause I back up my db every night)?
"Zarko Jovanovic" <mind_less_NOSPAM_@.bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:1099553502.722414@.internet.fina.hr...
> maryam rezvani wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > What's the benefit usage to select Full recovery model for a database?
> > I know it's better to select simple mode for developement and test
> > enviroment.
> > But I don't know excatly how can the full recovery model be usefull
> > for critical enviroment?
> >
> > Can any body give me an example?
> > Thanks alot
> short:
> if your DB is in full recovery model, you will have to backup the log, if
> you can several times/day. In case of a restore, you probably will not
lose
> any data, and you can recovery to the point in time (useful if someone
> deletes something or some other human error)
> long:
> see BooksOnLine (mssql help)
>|||Correct. But for the first scenario, you also need to perform regular transaction log backups. When
you restore a transaction log backup, you can stop at a certain point in time.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"maryam rezvani" <rezvani@.parskhazar.net> wrote in message
news:egP72OkwEHA.4004@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Thanks
> Do you mean that if I found that some false insertion happenning to a
> special table
> in 9:00 am and my db is in full recovery model so I can restore my db to the
> point
> exaclty before the false insertion through the log file?
> but if I set my db to simple mode have to restore the previous backup
> related to the day before(cause I back up my db every night)?
> "Zarko Jovanovic" <mind_less_NOSPAM_@.bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:1099553502.722414@.internet.fina.hr...
> > maryam rezvani wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > What's the benefit usage to select Full recovery model for a database?
> > > I know it's better to select simple mode for developement and test
> > > enviroment.
> > > But I don't know excatly how can the full recovery model be usefull
> > > for critical enviroment?
> > >
> > > Can any body give me an example?
> > > Thanks alot
> >
> > short:
> >
> > if your DB is in full recovery model, you will have to backup the log, if
> > you can several times/day. In case of a restore, you probably will not
> lose
> > any data, and you can recovery to the point in time (useful if someone
> > deletes something or some other human error)
> >
> > long:
> >
> > see BooksOnLine (mssql help)
> >
> >
>

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
> >>