Re: Benchmark for different edition SQL 2000
From: Andrew J. Kelly (sqlmvpnoooospam_at_shadhawk.com)
Date: 05/19/04
- Next message: Andrew J. Kelly: "Re: Transaction log"
- Previous message: srgallan: "Re: Transaction logs getting too large"
- In reply to: Wanchun: "Re: Benchmark for different edition SQL 2000"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 08:47:59 -0400
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 > >>>>
- Next message: Andrew J. Kelly: "Re: Transaction log"
- Previous message: srgallan: "Re: Transaction logs getting too large"
- In reply to: Wanchun: "Re: Benchmark for different edition SQL 2000"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
