Re: SQL 2000 memory in W2K3

It's up to you to add /3GB.

Kernel Components will be restricted using only 1 GB of RAM in case you add /3GB switch to the boot.ini file.

If you really need more RAM and go for it, if not, let be be without /3GB.

You may want to learn more about /3GB switch from the following link:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms791558.aspx

--
Ekrem Önsoy


"AP" <AP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:DC48DFE1-AF6F-4EB7-BB67-5BB26CFCA01E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Ekrem,

Thank you for confirming my settings were correct, however, in the
sp_configure where I put in 7168, that equates to 7 GB. I thought it would
give SQL 7 GB and keep 1 GB for O/S by using that setting. You say it will
only grab 6 GB with that setting, because it will keep 2 GB for O/S and
Kernel. Which is it?

And do I need to add the /3GB switch? I do not have over 16 GB like the
documentation talsk about, so what would that do?





"Ekrem Önsoy" wrote:

Great work! These information tells everything.

See my comments in line.

--
Ekrem Önsoy



"AP" <AP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:FA008016-38E3-43F8-8764-44DE845C2F75@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Here is the information I have gathered:
>
> From My Computer - System Properties - General Tab
> Microsoft Windows Server 2003 R2
> Enterprise Edtion <=================Edition is enough
> Service Pack 1
> Intel(R)Xeon(R) CPU
> 5110 @ 1.60 GHz 1.60 GHz
> 8.00 GB of RAM<==============================This is your 8GB RAM
> Physical Address Extension<=============== PAE is OK
>
> From Boot.ini
> [boot loader]
> timeout=30
> default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS
> [operating systems]
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Windows Server 2003,
> Enterprise" /noexecute=optout /fastdetect /PAE <=============== PAE is > OK
>
>
> Results of sp_configure
> awe enabled 0 1 1 > 1
> max server memory (MB) 4 2147483647 7168
> 7168 <====== SQL Server sees your 8GB RAM here
>
>
> From SQL error log
> 2007-09-19 08:03:18.64 server Address Windowing Extensions enabled.
>
> Performace Tab of Task Manager
> Physical Memory (K)
> Total 8386228 <==============================This is your 8GB RAM
> Available 3764812 (Changes constantly)< ============ Usable at that > moment
> PF Usage graph 4.26 GB
>
> Performance Monitor
> Added SQLServer:Memory Manager\Total Server Memory (KB)
> Result are:
> Last 4165744 Average 4165744 Minimum 4165744 Maximum 4165744
>
Total Server Memory 's Description:
Total amount of dynamic memory the server is currently consuming

It does not show totally how much memory SQL Server can use, it shows you
how much you are consuming. This is what makes you confused I believe.

As a conclusion: I think everything is OK. Do not worry about SQL Server.
It's going to use 6GB of your RAM when needed. 2 GB of RAM belongs to Kernel
and OS unless you specify /3GB switch in boot.ini (Do not use this switch
when you decide to use more than 16GB on your system.) You may find more
info about this topic from the following link:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750

>
>
>
>
> "Ekrem Önsoy" wrote:
>
>> Your Windows Server 2003 System must be Enterprise or Datacenter >> Edition.
>> Windows Server 2003 SE has a 4 GB of RAM limitation. You wouldn't be >> able
>> to
>> see more than 4 GB of RAM even if you'd be added PAE switch to the
>> boot.ini.
>>
>> If it's EE or DE then you must be sure that PAE switch is added by
>> openning
>> boot.ini file after restart.
>>
>> Can you tell me what counter did you use to analyze this?
>>
>> Also, please go to SSMS and Server Properties and then Memory and >> click
>> Running Values to see if AWE is actually enabled ot not. Besides, >> check
>> Max.
>> Server Memory value as well.
>>
>> -- >> Ekrem Önsoy
>>
>>
>>
>> "AP" <AP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:09F7A5D4-E089-483E-B040-62A263E061F6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > 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
>> >> > >> >> >> >> > physical
>> >> > >> >> >> >> > 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
>> >> > >> >> >> >> IIRC, SQL2000 can't use more than 2GB RAM.....
>> >> > >> >> >> >>
>> >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> > >> >> >> >>
>> >> > >> >> >> >> Regards,
>> >> > >> >> >> >> Hank Arnold
>> >> > >> >> >> >> Microsoft MVP
>> >> > >> >> >> >> Windows Server - Directory Services
>> >> > >> >> >> >>
>> >> > >> >> >>
>> >> > >> >>
>> >> > >>
>> >> >
>>



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Page file
    ... This will increase the size of the virtual address space available to SQL Server and should reduce paging activity. ... If some of the "jobs" are using all the available pagefile, I suggest adding more RAM to the server, if the hardware and the Windows Server version installed support it. ... If the hardware can not support more than 4 GB of RAM, if the budget allows it, I suggest replacing it - almost any "server" hardware you could buy today can have more than 4 GB of RAM - you don't need a "high end" system to get that (for example the two "desktop" machines I have at home both have 8 GB RAM and cost about $1200 CDN each. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.general)
  • Re: Virtual Memory Error
    ... One thing he could, according to that article is upgrade to 2003, which does have the /3GB switch in all versions. ... than 1GB of RAM it thinks that it hit the jackpot all will try to grab as much RAM as it can. ... If you have an Advanced Server you can us the /3GB switch in the boot.ini file and it helps keep things under control. ... The problem is, a few hours after a reboot, the following error appears: "Your system is low on virtual memory. ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.general)
  • Re: Full Text - Index Population - HDD Access
    ... Have you implemented the /3GB switch in the OS boot.ini? ... 2GB is set aside for apps and 2GB for OS. ... This probably explains why SQL Server is only ... using 1.7GB RAM. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.fulltext)
  • Re: Configuring SQL 2005 Memory
    ... I'm also trying to limit allocation of ram to SQL. ... I guess that I'm struggling with whether SQL (without this switch) limits itself to less than 2GB in aggregate of ram or does each instance stand on its own. ... Exchange isn't the only major application on SBS -- SQL Server is also running and my question was related to SQL and the 3/GB switch. ... The Address Windowing Extensions API that Microsoft Windows exposes allows application developers to access more than 2 GB of memory on 32-bit systems. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Configuring SQL 2005 Memory
    ... "It appears from the reference I mentioned below, that SQL Server wouldn't ... The /3GB switch does not control whether a system uses RAM above 2GB, ... switch but where several applications are in use it is better to use an OS ... Exchange isn't the only major application on SBS -- SQL Server ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)