Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- From: AP <AP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 21:08:01 -0700
Actually, performance monitor also shows only 4 GB used by SQL. What gives?
"AP" wrote:
So I got a chance to try this on a test server before we do it on the.
production one. When SQL server was re-started, it only grabbed 4 GB of ram
on startup (as inidcated by task manager) and not the 7 GB I set up. Why?
AP
"Ekrem Önsoy" wrote:
As you know, "Administrators" and "Domain Admins" are different groups.
Besides, using an account which has administrative rights for SQL Server is
not recommended. That's why SQL Server 2005 has built-in groups and the
service account that you use for SQL Server is added to that group and gain
necessary permissions to work properly. Using an account that has
administrative rights for SQL Server service is too much. For your
information...
It would be enough to add a group that your SQL Server service is a member
of to Lock Pages in Memory box in policy.
--
Ekrem Önsoy
"AP" <AP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:CDECC0E0-92CD-4AEC-B0EA-4FA0A8744239@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sorry to bug you again. What about modifying the Lock pages in memory
policy
on the server? Currently only the Administrator is in the policy. However,
the SQL server is running under the login of a domain user that is a
member
of the domani admins group. Do I have to explicitly include this domain
user
in the Lock pages in memory policy?
"Ekrem Önsoy" wrote:
Yep, restart it. It will not take effect unless you restart your SQL
Server
service.
--
Ekrem Önsoy
"AP" <AP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:F6EB314C-BB98-4299-AE3F-CB575CADF25F@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
One last item. It looks like even though I execute the sp and
reconfigure,
for the AWE to kick in, I need to stop and re-start SQL, is this
correct?
"Ekrem Önsoy" wrote:
Yes, for sure.
--
Ekrem Önsoy
"AP" <AP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:A3A6EAB7-F94F-4E76-81CD-23AE0E30DBBB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Tibor,
However, EE still requires the AWE to be enabled, and the max server
memory
to be set, correct?
AP
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
Yep. EE can use up to 64 GB (limited by OS and HW). SE is limited
to
2GB.
2005 is another story.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"AP" <AP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:EF425ECB-7690-4730-81A3-2323F6F06ACD@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hank,
The previous reply from Ekrem indicates that SQL 2000 can use
more
than
2 GB
of ram.
AP
"Hank Arnold (MVP)" wrote:
AP wrote:
Just set up a new Dual Xeon Dual Core with 8 GB of physicalIIRC, SQL2000 can't use more than 2GB RAM.....
ram.
It
is
running on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition, and SQL 2000
Enterprise
Edition.
The setup put the /PAE switch in the boot.ini. It only looks
like
the server
is using about 1.7 GB of ram at the moment. I have not changed
any
settings
from the standard CD install. How can I be sure that the
server
will
utilize
more of the ram when it requires it? It is not going to be
running
anything
else other than the SQL.
Thanks
--
Regards,
Hank Arnold
Microsoft MVP
Windows Server - Directory Services
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- From: Ekrem Önsoy
- Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- References:
- Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- From: Hank Arnold (MVP)
- Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- From: Tibor Karaszi
- Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- From: Ekrem Önsoy
- Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- From: AP
- Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- From: Ekrem Önsoy
- Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- From: AP
- Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- From: Ekrem Önsoy
- Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- From: AP
- Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- Prev by Date: RE: task scheduler error during named instance cluster install
- Next by Date: Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- Previous by thread: Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- Next by thread: Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|