Re: Performance on XP
From: StringFellow Hawk (Star_Fleet_Admiral_Q(NOSPAM)_at_(SPAMNOT)hotmail.com)
Date: 12/06/04
- Next message: J. Douglas: "XP System Recovery"
- Previous message: Dawntreader688: "Hijack imposta ayarla felrak eviewset"
- In reply to: David Mohandas: "Performance on XP"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 19:54:54 -0500
In SQL Server Enterprise Manager, how did you configure memory on both -
dynamic or fixed - what did you allow min/max to be if dynamic or what did
you allow memory to be if fixed?
-- StringFellow Hawk "Dom, Give me Turbos" "David Mohandas" <david_mohandas@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:uEat8px2EHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > I am running our application on Windows XP SP1 and Windows 2000 and i see a > lot slower performance on XP than on 2000. XP machine has 1GB RAM and 2000 > machine has 768MB RAM. Our application uses SQL server 2000 SP3A. Our > application on XP to run a process takes 3.5hrs and on 2000 the same process > runs in 1.5hrs. > > Looking at the task manager on XP the sqlservr.exe Mem usage is around 0.5GB > and our application mem usage is 7MB. Wheareas on 2000 sqlservr.exe Mem > usage is around 0.5GB and our application mem usage is around 50MB. > > I don't understand why in XP my application is not getting enough RAM, > because i don't see all of the RAM being used (i.e) i don't see any other > application in the process list that uses a lot of RAM other the sqlservr. > But whereas the available physical memory is 4MB, i wondering where it all > went away. Also i notice heavy page faults in XP and that is leading to > under utilization of CPU which is causing the performance degradation. > > Has anyone seen such a behaviour on XP? > > Thanks, > David > >
- Next message: J. Douglas: "XP System Recovery"
- Previous message: Dawntreader688: "Hijack imposta ayarla felrak eviewset"
- In reply to: David Mohandas: "Performance on XP"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
