Hi everyone,
I need to know what is the relationship between the "Maxium Number of Worker Threads" setting (default = 255) and user connections/sessions/logins.
From time to time, we are experiencing random login failure for several busy databases. On average, we see about 264 total sessions on the box and we were wondering if the max worker threads number, bumping it up would fix the issue.
Can anyone offer any suggestions?
Thanks in advance,
Errol Neal
As long as there are fewer than "Max worker threads" number of connections,
each connection gets its own individual thread... Once you go over that
number, several connections will share the same thread... You can increase
the number of worker threads, but that uses more memory ( even if there are
fewer connections.)
Thread sharing could result in front end timeouts ( especially if the other
connection you are sharing the thread with is a busy one.)
"Errol U. Neal" <eneal@.enhtech.com> wrote in message
news:09B0F39B-1468-4069-A8A1-BF2AF2E645C8@.microsoft.com...
> Hi everyone,
> I need to know what is the relationship between the "Maxium Number of
Worker Threads" setting (default = 255) and user
connections/sessions/logins.
> From time to time, we are experiencing random login failure for several
busy databases. On average, we see about 264 total sessions on the box and
we were wondering if the max worker threads number, bumping it up would fix
the issue.
> Can anyone offer any suggestions?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Errol Neal
|||Okay. I understand that. Thanks!
But why are we having random login failures? We are per-processor licensing so I am confused. Its not that the login is timing out. They are outright failing and I know because I am doing a SQL Server Trace and watching them as they fail.
-- Wayne Snyder wrote: --
As long as there are fewer than "Max worker threads" number of connections,
each connection gets its own individual thread... Once you go over that
number, several connections will share the same thread... You can increase
the number of worker threads, but that uses more memory ( even if there are
fewer connections.)
Thread sharing could result in front end timeouts ( especially if the other
connection you are sharing the thread with is a busy one.)
|||Do you see any errors on the SQL error log e.g. "could not spawn process
login thread" or similar ? We have seen these under conditions of high
memory contention especially in the MemToLeave area where new threads cannot
allocate enough memory to start.
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"Errol Uriel Neal" <eneal@.enhtech.com> wrote in message
news:94D7AB61-A7F2-4FA1-B19C-D79B64B3B23D@.microsoft.com...
> Okay. I understand that. Thanks!
> But why are we having random login failures? We are per-processor
licensing so I am confused. Its not that the login is timing out. They are
outright failing and I know because I am doing a SQL Server Trace and
watching them as they fail.
>
> -- Wayne Snyder wrote: --
> As long as there are fewer than "Max worker threads" number of
connections,
> each connection gets its own individual thread... Once you go over
that
> number, several connections will share the same thread... You can
increase
> the number of worker threads, but that uses more memory ( even if
there are
> fewer connections.)
> Thread sharing could result in front end timeouts ( especially if the
other
> connection you are sharing the thread with is a busy one.)
>
|||No. There is nothing like that or remotely similiar to that in the logs.
I've been having this issue now for over a month. I even completely rebuilt my SQL Server because
of it.
-- Jasper Smith wrote: --
Do you see any errors on the SQL error log e.g. "could not spawn process
login thread" or similar ? We have seen these under conditions of high
memory contention especially in the MemToLeave area where new threads cannot
allocate enough memory to start.
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
Friday, March 30, 2012
Max Num of Worker Threads and User Connections/Logins
Hi everyone,
I need to know what is the relationship between the "Maxium Number of Worker
Threads" setting (default = 255) and user connections/sessions/logins.
From time to time, we are experiencing random login failure for several busy
databases. On average, we see about 264 total sessions on the box and we we
re wondering if the max worker threads number, bumping it up would fix the i
ssue.
Can anyone offer any suggestions?
Thanks in advance,
Errol NealAs long as there are fewer than "Max worker threads" number of connections,
each connection gets its own individual thread... Once you go over that
number, several connections will share the same thread... You can increase
the number of worker threads, but that uses more memory ( even if there are
fewer connections.)
Thread sharing could result in front end timeouts ( especially if the other
connection you are sharing the thread with is a busy one.)
"Errol U. Neal" <eneal@.enhtech.com> wrote in message
news:09B0F39B-1468-4069-A8A1-BF2AF2E645C8@.microsoft.com...
> Hi everyone,
> I need to know what is the relationship between the "Maxium Number of
Worker Threads" setting (default = 255) and user
connections/sessions/logins.
> From time to time, we are experiencing random login failure for several
busy databases. On average, we see about 264 total sessions on the box and
we were wondering if the max worker threads number, bumping it up would fix
the issue.
> Can anyone offer any suggestions?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Errol Neal|||Okay. I understand that. Thanks!
But why are we having random login failures? We are per-processor licensing
so I am confused. Its not that the login is timing out. They are outright fa
iling and I know because I am doing a SQL Server Trace and watching them as
they fail.
-- Wayne Snyder wrote: --
As long as there are fewer than "Max worker threads" number of connections,
each connection gets its own individual thread... Once you go over that
number, several connections will share the same thread... You can increase
the number of worker threads, but that uses more memory ( even if there are
fewer connections.)
Thread sharing could result in front end timeouts ( especially if the other
connection you are sharing the thread with is a busy one.)|||Do you see any errors on the SQL error log e.g. "could not spawn process
login thread" or similar ? We have seen these under conditions of high
memory contention especially in the MemToLeave area where new threads cannot
allocate enough memory to start.
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"Errol Uriel Neal" <eneal@.enhtech.com> wrote in message
news:94D7AB61-A7F2-4FA1-B19C-D79B64B3B23D@.microsoft.com...
> Okay. I understand that. Thanks!
> But why are we having random login failures? We are per-processor
licensing so I am confused. Its not that the login is timing out. They are
outright failing and I know because I am doing a SQL Server Trace and
watching them as they fail.
>
> -- Wayne Snyder wrote: --
> As long as there are fewer than "Max worker threads" number of
connections,
> each connection gets its own individual thread... Once you go over
that
> number, several connections will share the same thread... You can
increase
> the number of worker threads, but that uses more memory ( even if
there are
> fewer connections.)
> Thread sharing could result in front end timeouts ( especially if the
other
> connection you are sharing the thread with is a busy one.)
>|||No. There is nothing like that or remotely similiar to that in the logs.
I've been having this issue now for over a month. I even completely rebuilt
my SQL Server because
of it.
-- Jasper Smith wrote: --
Do you see any errors on the SQL error log e.g. "could not spawn process
login thread" or similar ? We have seen these under conditions of high
memory contention especially in the MemToLeave area where new threads cannot
allocate enough memory to start.
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.orgsql
I need to know what is the relationship between the "Maxium Number of Worker
Threads" setting (default = 255) and user connections/sessions/logins.
From time to time, we are experiencing random login failure for several busy
databases. On average, we see about 264 total sessions on the box and we we
re wondering if the max worker threads number, bumping it up would fix the i
ssue.
Can anyone offer any suggestions?
Thanks in advance,
Errol NealAs long as there are fewer than "Max worker threads" number of connections,
each connection gets its own individual thread... Once you go over that
number, several connections will share the same thread... You can increase
the number of worker threads, but that uses more memory ( even if there are
fewer connections.)
Thread sharing could result in front end timeouts ( especially if the other
connection you are sharing the thread with is a busy one.)
"Errol U. Neal" <eneal@.enhtech.com> wrote in message
news:09B0F39B-1468-4069-A8A1-BF2AF2E645C8@.microsoft.com...
> Hi everyone,
> I need to know what is the relationship between the "Maxium Number of
Worker Threads" setting (default = 255) and user
connections/sessions/logins.
> From time to time, we are experiencing random login failure for several
busy databases. On average, we see about 264 total sessions on the box and
we were wondering if the max worker threads number, bumping it up would fix
the issue.
> Can anyone offer any suggestions?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Errol Neal|||Okay. I understand that. Thanks!
But why are we having random login failures? We are per-processor licensing
so I am confused. Its not that the login is timing out. They are outright fa
iling and I know because I am doing a SQL Server Trace and watching them as
they fail.
-- Wayne Snyder wrote: --
As long as there are fewer than "Max worker threads" number of connections,
each connection gets its own individual thread... Once you go over that
number, several connections will share the same thread... You can increase
the number of worker threads, but that uses more memory ( even if there are
fewer connections.)
Thread sharing could result in front end timeouts ( especially if the other
connection you are sharing the thread with is a busy one.)|||Do you see any errors on the SQL error log e.g. "could not spawn process
login thread" or similar ? We have seen these under conditions of high
memory contention especially in the MemToLeave area where new threads cannot
allocate enough memory to start.
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"Errol Uriel Neal" <eneal@.enhtech.com> wrote in message
news:94D7AB61-A7F2-4FA1-B19C-D79B64B3B23D@.microsoft.com...
> Okay. I understand that. Thanks!
> But why are we having random login failures? We are per-processor
licensing so I am confused. Its not that the login is timing out. They are
outright failing and I know because I am doing a SQL Server Trace and
watching them as they fail.
>
> -- Wayne Snyder wrote: --
> As long as there are fewer than "Max worker threads" number of
connections,
> each connection gets its own individual thread... Once you go over
that
> number, several connections will share the same thread... You can
increase
> the number of worker threads, but that uses more memory ( even if
there are
> fewer connections.)
> Thread sharing could result in front end timeouts ( especially if the
other
> connection you are sharing the thread with is a busy one.)
>|||No. There is nothing like that or remotely similiar to that in the logs.
I've been having this issue now for over a month. I even completely rebuilt
my SQL Server because
of it.
-- Jasper Smith wrote: --
Do you see any errors on the SQL error log e.g. "could not spawn process
login thread" or similar ? We have seen these under conditions of high
memory contention especially in the MemToLeave area where new threads cannot
allocate enough memory to start.
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.orgsql
Max Num of Worker Threads and User Connections/Logins
Hi everyone
I need to know what is the relationship between the "Maxium Number of Worker Threads" setting (default = 255) and user connections/sessions/logins.
From time to time, we are experiencing random login failure for several busy databases. On average, we see about 264 total sessions on the box and we were wondering if the max worker threads number, bumping it up would fix the issue.
Can anyone offer any suggestions
Thanks in advance
Errol NealAs long as there are fewer than "Max worker threads" number of connections,
each connection gets its own individual thread... Once you go over that
number, several connections will share the same thread... You can increase
the number of worker threads, but that uses more memory ( even if there are
fewer connections.)
Thread sharing could result in front end timeouts ( especially if the other
connection you are sharing the thread with is a busy one.)
"Errol U. Neal" <eneal@.enhtech.com> wrote in message
news:09B0F39B-1468-4069-A8A1-BF2AF2E645C8@.microsoft.com...
> Hi everyone,
> I need to know what is the relationship between the "Maxium Number of
Worker Threads" setting (default = 255) and user
connections/sessions/logins.
> From time to time, we are experiencing random login failure for several
busy databases. On average, we see about 264 total sessions on the box and
we were wondering if the max worker threads number, bumping it up would fix
the issue.
> Can anyone offer any suggestions?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Errol Neal|||Do you see any errors on the SQL error log e.g. "could not spawn process
login thread" or similar ? We have seen these under conditions of high
memory contention especially in the MemToLeave area where new threads cannot
allocate enough memory to start.
--
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"Errol Uriel Neal" <eneal@.enhtech.com> wrote in message
news:94D7AB61-A7F2-4FA1-B19C-D79B64B3B23D@.microsoft.com...
> Okay. I understand that. Thanks!
> But why are we having random login failures? We are per-processor
licensing so I am confused. Its not that the login is timing out. They are
outright failing and I know because I am doing a SQL Server Trace and
watching them as they fail.
>
> -- Wayne Snyder wrote: --
> As long as there are fewer than "Max worker threads" number of
connections,
> each connection gets its own individual thread... Once you go over
that
> number, several connections will share the same thread... You can
increase
> the number of worker threads, but that uses more memory ( even if
there are
> fewer connections.)
> Thread sharing could result in front end timeouts ( especially if the
other
> connection you are sharing the thread with is a busy one.)
>|||No. There is nothing like that or remotely similiar to that in the logs.
I've been having this issue now for over a month. I even completely rebuilt my SQL Server because
of it.
-- Jasper Smith wrote: --
Do you see any errors on the SQL error log e.g. "could not spawn proces
login thread" or similar ? We have seen these under conditions of hig
memory contention especially in the MemToLeave area where new threads canno
allocate enough memory to start
--
HT
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP
I support PASS - the definitive, globa
community for SQL Server professionals
http://www.sqlpass.or
I need to know what is the relationship between the "Maxium Number of Worker Threads" setting (default = 255) and user connections/sessions/logins.
From time to time, we are experiencing random login failure for several busy databases. On average, we see about 264 total sessions on the box and we were wondering if the max worker threads number, bumping it up would fix the issue.
Can anyone offer any suggestions
Thanks in advance
Errol NealAs long as there are fewer than "Max worker threads" number of connections,
each connection gets its own individual thread... Once you go over that
number, several connections will share the same thread... You can increase
the number of worker threads, but that uses more memory ( even if there are
fewer connections.)
Thread sharing could result in front end timeouts ( especially if the other
connection you are sharing the thread with is a busy one.)
"Errol U. Neal" <eneal@.enhtech.com> wrote in message
news:09B0F39B-1468-4069-A8A1-BF2AF2E645C8@.microsoft.com...
> Hi everyone,
> I need to know what is the relationship between the "Maxium Number of
Worker Threads" setting (default = 255) and user
connections/sessions/logins.
> From time to time, we are experiencing random login failure for several
busy databases. On average, we see about 264 total sessions on the box and
we were wondering if the max worker threads number, bumping it up would fix
the issue.
> Can anyone offer any suggestions?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Errol Neal|||Do you see any errors on the SQL error log e.g. "could not spawn process
login thread" or similar ? We have seen these under conditions of high
memory contention especially in the MemToLeave area where new threads cannot
allocate enough memory to start.
--
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"Errol Uriel Neal" <eneal@.enhtech.com> wrote in message
news:94D7AB61-A7F2-4FA1-B19C-D79B64B3B23D@.microsoft.com...
> Okay. I understand that. Thanks!
> But why are we having random login failures? We are per-processor
licensing so I am confused. Its not that the login is timing out. They are
outright failing and I know because I am doing a SQL Server Trace and
watching them as they fail.
>
> -- Wayne Snyder wrote: --
> As long as there are fewer than "Max worker threads" number of
connections,
> each connection gets its own individual thread... Once you go over
that
> number, several connections will share the same thread... You can
increase
> the number of worker threads, but that uses more memory ( even if
there are
> fewer connections.)
> Thread sharing could result in front end timeouts ( especially if the
other
> connection you are sharing the thread with is a busy one.)
>|||No. There is nothing like that or remotely similiar to that in the logs.
I've been having this issue now for over a month. I even completely rebuilt my SQL Server because
of it.
-- Jasper Smith wrote: --
Do you see any errors on the SQL error log e.g. "could not spawn proces
login thread" or similar ? We have seen these under conditions of hig
memory contention especially in the MemToLeave area where new threads canno
allocate enough memory to start
--
HT
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP
I support PASS - the definitive, globa
community for SQL Server professionals
http://www.sqlpass.or
max no. of values in WHERE ... IN clause
Hi all,
can anyone tell mey what the maximum number of values (if there is any) which can be used in the WHERE ... IN clause?
ex:
... WHERE ID IN (1, 2, 3 ... , n) ...
what is the maximum number of values which I can put between paranthesis?
10x in advance
mihai.That's decided by the specific DB system.|||10x in advance
"10X" = "thanks"? Whatever next...!|||How many can you put there is one question. How many can you put there and still get an answer while you are young enough to care is a different question. The answer to both questions varies significantly from one query and database engine to another.
-PatP
can anyone tell mey what the maximum number of values (if there is any) which can be used in the WHERE ... IN clause?
ex:
... WHERE ID IN (1, 2, 3 ... , n) ...
what is the maximum number of values which I can put between paranthesis?
10x in advance
mihai.That's decided by the specific DB system.|||10x in advance
"10X" = "thanks"? Whatever next...!|||How many can you put there is one question. How many can you put there and still get an answer while you are young enough to care is a different question. The answer to both questions varies significantly from one query and database engine to another.
-PatP
Max no. of parameters in functions
Hi,
Can anybody tell me the max no of parameters that we can use in a single
UDF?
Thanks!!BOL:
A function can have a maximum of 1,024 parameters.|||BOL:
A function can have a maximum of 1,024 parameters.
Thanks a lot Sean.|||Hi,
Can anybody tell me the max no of parameters that we can use in a single
UDF?
Thanks!!Half of me shudders every time I see a post about SQL Server's maximum capacity, and the other half tingles with excitement at the future potential consulting income.|||anybody ever made a UDF with that many no of parameters ?|||anybody ever made a UDF with that many no of parameters ?|||anybody ever made a UDF with that many no of parameters ?
Plz listen,don't blame me for that,I found the question in an online test for the MCDBA 70-229 exam (Designing and Implementing Databases with Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition).:D
and the other half tingles with excitement at the future potential consulting income.
Batman is an experienced person and has all the future insights which protect him from danger. :D ;)|||not blaming you for anything ... i was just thinking aloud ;)|||not blaming you for anything ... i was just thinking aloud ;)
yea,there you are,I too was running in that same road a few hours ago.:D :D|||I am a late riser ... mostly go out on evening walks :D
Can anybody tell me the max no of parameters that we can use in a single
UDF?
Thanks!!BOL:
A function can have a maximum of 1,024 parameters.|||BOL:
A function can have a maximum of 1,024 parameters.
Thanks a lot Sean.|||Hi,
Can anybody tell me the max no of parameters that we can use in a single
UDF?
Thanks!!Half of me shudders every time I see a post about SQL Server's maximum capacity, and the other half tingles with excitement at the future potential consulting income.|||anybody ever made a UDF with that many no of parameters ?|||anybody ever made a UDF with that many no of parameters ?|||anybody ever made a UDF with that many no of parameters ?
Plz listen,don't blame me for that,I found the question in an online test for the MCDBA 70-229 exam (Designing and Implementing Databases with Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition).:D
and the other half tingles with excitement at the future potential consulting income.
Batman is an experienced person and has all the future insights which protect him from danger. :D ;)|||not blaming you for anything ... i was just thinking aloud ;)|||not blaming you for anything ... i was just thinking aloud ;)
yea,there you are,I too was running in that same road a few hours ago.:D :D|||I am a late riser ... mostly go out on evening walks :D
max no of datafiles
whats the maximum no of datafiles & logfiles sqlserver
supports.
thanksFrom BOL
32,767 files per database
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"kumar" <sqldba2004@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:149c401c414cd$7f963c60$a301280a@.phx
.gbl...
> whats the maximum no of datafiles & logfiles sqlserver
> supports.
> thanks
supports.
thanksFrom BOL
32,767 files per database
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"kumar" <sqldba2004@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:149c401c414cd$7f963c60$a301280a@.phx
.gbl...
> whats the maximum no of datafiles & logfiles sqlserver
> supports.
> thanks
Max mirroring DB on a 64-bit sysstem?
According to BOL we know
"On a 32-bit system, database mirroring can support a maximum of about 10 databases per server instance because of the numbers of worker threads that are consumed by each database mirroring session."
My question is: What is maximum number of mirrored DB we can deploy on 64-bit system per one sql instance?
It depends. Do you have a 64-CPU box with 1 TB of RAM or a 4 CPU box with 4 GB? The variety of 64-bit hardware available makes specific guidance difficult.
You will need to test your configuration appropriately regardless.
|||Peter thanks for you answer.
We have got the next configuration :
HP Superdome (1 cell) 4 CPU?(Dual core Itanium 2 1.6GHz, 24 MB Cache),?32GB.
|||In the case of multiple databases, I use a different tack to overcome the problem. If I find any database failed over, I run SQL commands to fail them all over. "ALTER DATABASE [dbname] SET PARTNER FAILOVER" you must proceed the command with "USE [master]". It works in my case as i am running web code against multiple databases at any given point in time, so I have to have them all failover at the same time anyways. The statement to return the state of each database is "SELECT * from sys.database_mirroring WHERE mirroring_guid IS NOT NULL" I read the values programatically and run the appropriate failover statements depending on the values returned.
|||This was extremely useful, I copied it verbatim into a scheduled task that runs every minute and checks this, because we've had the same issue where only some but not all databases fail over. There should be an SQL Server feature to make multiple databases "atomic" for the purpose of failover.sqlMax mirroring DB on a 64-bit sysstem?
According to BOL we know
"On a 32-bit system, database mirroring can support a maximum of about 10 databases per server instance because of the numbers of worker threads that are consumed by each database mirroring session."
My question is: What is maximum number of mirrored DB we can deploy on 64-bit system per one sql instance?
It depends. Do you have a 64-CPU box with 1 TB of RAM or a 4 CPU box with 4 GB? The variety of 64-bit hardware available makes specific guidance difficult.
You will need to test your configuration appropriately regardless.
|||Peter thanks for you answer.
We have got the next configuration :
HP Superdome (1 cell) 4 CPU?(Dual core Itanium 2 1.6GHz, 24 MB Cache),?32GB.
|||In the case of multiple databases, I use a different tack to overcome the problem. If I find any database failed over, I run SQL commands to fail them all over. "ALTER DATABASE [dbname] SET PARTNER FAILOVER" you must proceed the command with "USE [master]". It works in my case as i am running web code against multiple databases at any given point in time, so I have to have them all failover at the same time anyways. The statement to return the state of each database is "SELECT * from sys.database_mirroring WHERE mirroring_guid IS NOT NULL" I read the values programatically and run the appropriate failover statements depending on the values returned.
|||This was extremely useful, I copied it verbatim into a scheduled task that runs every minute and checks this, because we've had the same issue where only some but not all databases fail over. There should be an SQL Server feature to make multiple databases "atomic" for the purpose of failover.Max mirroring DB on a 64-bit sysstem?
According to BOL we know
"On a 32-bit system, database mirroring can support a maximum of about 10 databases per server instance because of the numbers of worker threads that are consumed by each database mirroring session."
My question is: What is maximum number of mirrored DB we can deploy on 64-bit system per one sql instance?
It depends. Do you have a 64-CPU box with 1 TB of RAM or a 4 CPU box with 4 GB? The variety of 64-bit hardware available makes specific guidance difficult.
You will need to test your configuration appropriately regardless.
|||Peter thanks for you answer.
We have got the next configuration :
HP Superdome (1 cell) 4 CPU?(Dual core Itanium 2 1.6GHz, 24 MB Cache),?32GB.
|||In the case of multiple databases, I use a different tack to overcome the problem. If I find any database failed over, I run SQL commands to fail them all over. "ALTER DATABASE [dbname] SET PARTNER FAILOVER" you must proceed the command with "USE [master]". It works in my case as i am running web code against multiple databases at any given point in time, so I have to have them all failover at the same time anyways. The statement to return the state of each database is "SELECT * from sys.database_mirroring WHERE mirroring_guid IS NOT NULL" I read the values programatically and run the appropriate failover statements depending on the values returned.
|||This was extremely useful, I copied it verbatim into a scheduled task that runs every minute and checks this, because we've had the same issue where only some but not all databases fail over. There should be an SQL Server feature to make multiple databases "atomic" for the purpose of failover.Max memory usage for SQL Server 2K on Windows 2K3
What is the max memory (RAM) SQL Server 2000 SP3 can use
when installed on a Windows 2K3 Enterprise Edition with 16
Gb of memory?
On the properties of the server it only displays 3,5 Gb!!
Thanks
CaioStandard edition can use 2GB. Enterprise Edition can use up to 64GB, depending on the limitations of
the OS. For SQL Server to use more than 2GB (or 3GB, depending on whether boot.ini has the /3GB
switch), then you need to PAE and AWE memory addressing.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"Caio" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:030601c398ea$18301780$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> What is the max memory (RAM) SQL Server 2000 SP3 can use
> when installed on a Windows 2K3 Enterprise Edition with 16
> Gb of memory?
> On the properties of the server it only displays 3,5 Gb!!
> Thanks
> Caio|||Hi Caio,
If you want to use large memory configurations with SQL(>3gb) you will need
to use /PAE in the boot.ini file, and enable AWE within SQL, then set a Max
Server Memory to the memory that you want to allocate to SQL, but there are
some things to note
1) You could also use /3GB to limit the kernel space to 1GB and give you an
extra 1GB, but this only works up to 16GB, your server is right on that
limit and running with these settings can cause problems as you aproach
this limit. So I would let the kernel have its 2GB
2) AWE is not dynamic so SQL will take that memory and it won't give it
back, if AWE is not used SQL will release memory as the OS comes under
pressure. So if you have other applications running on the server you may
want to set the max server memory a little lower.
3) If this server is clustered how many instances of SQL are running ?
Hope this helps
Regards
Clive Challinor [MSFT]
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.|||I am confused: why do I need the PAE switch on if Windows
2003 Enterprise Edition by default recognize 32GB of RAM?
Shouldn't SQL Server Enterprise Edition automatically
recognize all available memory?
Thanks
Caio
>--Original Message--
>Standard edition can use 2GB. Enterprise Edition can use
up to 64GB, depending on the limitations of
>the OS. For SQL Server to use more than 2GB (or 3GB,
depending on whether boot.ini has the /3GB
>switch), then you need to PAE and AWE memory addressing.
>--
>Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?
oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
>
>"Caio" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
>news:030601c398ea$18301780$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
>> What is the max memory (RAM) SQL Server 2000 SP3 can use
>> when installed on a Windows 2K3 Enterprise Edition with
16
>> Gb of memory?
>> On the properties of the server it only displays 3,5
Gb!!
>> Thanks
>> Caio
>
>.
>|||Hi Clive, thanks for the reply.
To answer your question: this server is not clustered so
we only have one instance of SQL Server.
Why do I need the PAE switch if Win 2003 Enterprise
Edition by default recognizes up to 32 GB of memory?
Shouldn't SQL SErver automatically see that the operating
system can provide more memory than the 2 or 3 GB?
Thanks again
Caio
>--Original Message--
>Hi Caio,
>If you want to use large memory configurations with SQL
(>3gb) you will need
>to use /PAE in the boot.ini file, and enable AWE within
SQL, then set a Max
>Server Memory to the memory that you want to allocate to
SQL, but there are
>some things to note
>1) You could also use /3GB to limit the kernel space to
1GB and give you an
>extra 1GB, but this only works up to 16GB, your server is
right on that
>limit and running with these settings can cause problems
as you aproach
>this limit. So I would let the kernel have its 2GB
>2) AWE is not dynamic so SQL will take that memory and it
won't give it
>back, if AWE is not used SQL will release memory as the
OS comes under
>pressure. So if you have other applications running on
the server you may
>want to set the max server memory a little lower.
>3) If this server is clustered how many instances of SQL
are running ?
>Hope this helps
>Regards
>Clive Challinor [MSFT]
>This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no rights.
>.
>|||See my other reply.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
<anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0b3b01c3997c$7f1d58d0$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi Clive, thanks for the reply.
> To answer your question: this server is not clustered so
> we only have one instance of SQL Server.
> Why do I need the PAE switch if Win 2003 Enterprise
> Edition by default recognizes up to 32 GB of memory?
> Shouldn't SQL SErver automatically see that the operating
> system can provide more memory than the 2 or 3 GB?
> Thanks again
> Caio
> >--Original Message--
> >Hi Caio,
> >If you want to use large memory configurations with SQL
> (>3gb) you will need
> >to use /PAE in the boot.ini file, and enable AWE within
> SQL, then set a Max
> >Server Memory to the memory that you want to allocate to
> SQL, but there are
> >some things to note
> >
> >1) You could also use /3GB to limit the kernel space to
> 1GB and give you an
> >extra 1GB, but this only works up to 16GB, your server is
> right on that
> >limit and running with these settings can cause problems
> as you aproach
> >this limit. So I would let the kernel have its 2GB
> >
> >2) AWE is not dynamic so SQL will take that memory and it
> won't give it
> >back, if AWE is not used SQL will release memory as the
> OS comes under
> >pressure. So if you have other applications running on
> the server you may
> >want to set the max server memory a little lower.
> >
> >3) If this server is clustered how many instances of SQL
> are running ?
> >
> >Hope this helps
> >
> >Regards
> >Clive Challinor [MSFT]
> >This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
> confers no rights.
> >
> >.
> >|||> I am confused: why do I need the PAE switch on if Windows
> 2003 Enterprise Edition by default recognize 32GB of RAM?
> Shouldn't SQL Server Enterprise Edition automatically
> recognize all available memory?
If you have 64 bit SQL Server, yes. Remember that "ordinary" SQL Server is a 32 bit app, and the
address space for a 32 bit app is 4GB. Of these 4GB either 2 or 3 GB are reserved for the system
(depends on the 3GB switch in boot.ini). So, to get to more then 2 or 3 GB, you need the windowing
technique that PAE gives you.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"Caio" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0be801c39978$694dd6a0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> I am confused: why do I need the PAE switch on if Windows
> 2003 Enterprise Edition by default recognize 32GB of RAM?
> Shouldn't SQL Server Enterprise Edition automatically
> recognize all available memory?
> Thanks
> Caio
> >--Original Message--
> >Standard edition can use 2GB. Enterprise Edition can use
> up to 64GB, depending on the limitations of
> >the OS. For SQL Server to use more than 2GB (or 3GB,
> depending on whether boot.ini has the /3GB
> >switch), then you need to PAE and AWE memory addressing.
> >
> >--
> >Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> >Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?
> oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
> >
> >
> >"Caio" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message
> >news:030601c398ea$18301780$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> >> What is the max memory (RAM) SQL Server 2000 SP3 can use
> >> when installed on a Windows 2K3 Enterprise Edition with
> 16
> >> Gb of memory?
> >>
> >> On the properties of the server it only displays 3,5
> Gb!!
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Caio
> >
> >
> >.
> >
when installed on a Windows 2K3 Enterprise Edition with 16
Gb of memory?
On the properties of the server it only displays 3,5 Gb!!
Thanks
CaioStandard edition can use 2GB. Enterprise Edition can use up to 64GB, depending on the limitations of
the OS. For SQL Server to use more than 2GB (or 3GB, depending on whether boot.ini has the /3GB
switch), then you need to PAE and AWE memory addressing.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"Caio" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:030601c398ea$18301780$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> What is the max memory (RAM) SQL Server 2000 SP3 can use
> when installed on a Windows 2K3 Enterprise Edition with 16
> Gb of memory?
> On the properties of the server it only displays 3,5 Gb!!
> Thanks
> Caio|||Hi Caio,
If you want to use large memory configurations with SQL(>3gb) you will need
to use /PAE in the boot.ini file, and enable AWE within SQL, then set a Max
Server Memory to the memory that you want to allocate to SQL, but there are
some things to note
1) You could also use /3GB to limit the kernel space to 1GB and give you an
extra 1GB, but this only works up to 16GB, your server is right on that
limit and running with these settings can cause problems as you aproach
this limit. So I would let the kernel have its 2GB
2) AWE is not dynamic so SQL will take that memory and it won't give it
back, if AWE is not used SQL will release memory as the OS comes under
pressure. So if you have other applications running on the server you may
want to set the max server memory a little lower.
3) If this server is clustered how many instances of SQL are running ?
Hope this helps
Regards
Clive Challinor [MSFT]
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.|||I am confused: why do I need the PAE switch on if Windows
2003 Enterprise Edition by default recognize 32GB of RAM?
Shouldn't SQL Server Enterprise Edition automatically
recognize all available memory?
Thanks
Caio
>--Original Message--
>Standard edition can use 2GB. Enterprise Edition can use
up to 64GB, depending on the limitations of
>the OS. For SQL Server to use more than 2GB (or 3GB,
depending on whether boot.ini has the /3GB
>switch), then you need to PAE and AWE memory addressing.
>--
>Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?
oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
>
>"Caio" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
>news:030601c398ea$18301780$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
>> What is the max memory (RAM) SQL Server 2000 SP3 can use
>> when installed on a Windows 2K3 Enterprise Edition with
16
>> Gb of memory?
>> On the properties of the server it only displays 3,5
Gb!!
>> Thanks
>> Caio
>
>.
>|||Hi Clive, thanks for the reply.
To answer your question: this server is not clustered so
we only have one instance of SQL Server.
Why do I need the PAE switch if Win 2003 Enterprise
Edition by default recognizes up to 32 GB of memory?
Shouldn't SQL SErver automatically see that the operating
system can provide more memory than the 2 or 3 GB?
Thanks again
Caio
>--Original Message--
>Hi Caio,
>If you want to use large memory configurations with SQL
(>3gb) you will need
>to use /PAE in the boot.ini file, and enable AWE within
SQL, then set a Max
>Server Memory to the memory that you want to allocate to
SQL, but there are
>some things to note
>1) You could also use /3GB to limit the kernel space to
1GB and give you an
>extra 1GB, but this only works up to 16GB, your server is
right on that
>limit and running with these settings can cause problems
as you aproach
>this limit. So I would let the kernel have its 2GB
>2) AWE is not dynamic so SQL will take that memory and it
won't give it
>back, if AWE is not used SQL will release memory as the
OS comes under
>pressure. So if you have other applications running on
the server you may
>want to set the max server memory a little lower.
>3) If this server is clustered how many instances of SQL
are running ?
>Hope this helps
>Regards
>Clive Challinor [MSFT]
>This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no rights.
>.
>|||See my other reply.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
<anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0b3b01c3997c$7f1d58d0$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi Clive, thanks for the reply.
> To answer your question: this server is not clustered so
> we only have one instance of SQL Server.
> Why do I need the PAE switch if Win 2003 Enterprise
> Edition by default recognizes up to 32 GB of memory?
> Shouldn't SQL SErver automatically see that the operating
> system can provide more memory than the 2 or 3 GB?
> Thanks again
> Caio
> >--Original Message--
> >Hi Caio,
> >If you want to use large memory configurations with SQL
> (>3gb) you will need
> >to use /PAE in the boot.ini file, and enable AWE within
> SQL, then set a Max
> >Server Memory to the memory that you want to allocate to
> SQL, but there are
> >some things to note
> >
> >1) You could also use /3GB to limit the kernel space to
> 1GB and give you an
> >extra 1GB, but this only works up to 16GB, your server is
> right on that
> >limit and running with these settings can cause problems
> as you aproach
> >this limit. So I would let the kernel have its 2GB
> >
> >2) AWE is not dynamic so SQL will take that memory and it
> won't give it
> >back, if AWE is not used SQL will release memory as the
> OS comes under
> >pressure. So if you have other applications running on
> the server you may
> >want to set the max server memory a little lower.
> >
> >3) If this server is clustered how many instances of SQL
> are running ?
> >
> >Hope this helps
> >
> >Regards
> >Clive Challinor [MSFT]
> >This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
> confers no rights.
> >
> >.
> >|||> I am confused: why do I need the PAE switch on if Windows
> 2003 Enterprise Edition by default recognize 32GB of RAM?
> Shouldn't SQL Server Enterprise Edition automatically
> recognize all available memory?
If you have 64 bit SQL Server, yes. Remember that "ordinary" SQL Server is a 32 bit app, and the
address space for a 32 bit app is 4GB. Of these 4GB either 2 or 3 GB are reserved for the system
(depends on the 3GB switch in boot.ini). So, to get to more then 2 or 3 GB, you need the windowing
technique that PAE gives you.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"Caio" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0be801c39978$694dd6a0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> I am confused: why do I need the PAE switch on if Windows
> 2003 Enterprise Edition by default recognize 32GB of RAM?
> Shouldn't SQL Server Enterprise Edition automatically
> recognize all available memory?
> Thanks
> Caio
> >--Original Message--
> >Standard edition can use 2GB. Enterprise Edition can use
> up to 64GB, depending on the limitations of
> >the OS. For SQL Server to use more than 2GB (or 3GB,
> depending on whether boot.ini has the /3GB
> >switch), then you need to PAE and AWE memory addressing.
> >
> >--
> >Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> >Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?
> oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
> >
> >
> >"Caio" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message
> >news:030601c398ea$18301780$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> >> What is the max memory (RAM) SQL Server 2000 SP3 can use
> >> when installed on a Windows 2K3 Enterprise Edition with
> 16
> >> Gb of memory?
> >>
> >> On the properties of the server it only displays 3,5
> Gb!!
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Caio
> >
> >
> >.
> >
Max Memory Support of SQL 2000 Enterprise on Windows 2003 Enterpri
Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
32GB on Win 2003 Enterprise
64GB on Win 2003 Datacenter
(I think.)
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Marks70 wrote:
>Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
>Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
>refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
>
|||The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003 is
4 GB.
Refer => http://support.microsoft.com/?id=274750
Thanks,
Sree
"Marks70" wrote:
> Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
> Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
> refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
|||Yes but the question was about Windows 2003 Enterprise which is 32GB in the
same article.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"Sreejith G" <SreejithG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3DB7B61C-D8DF-4846-8A68-596D683CA237@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003
> is
> 4 GB.
> Refer => http://support.microsoft.com/?id=274750
> Thanks,
> Sree
>
> "Marks70" wrote:
|||Thanks guys!
"Marks70" wrote:
> Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
> Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
> refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
32GB on Win 2003 Enterprise
64GB on Win 2003 Datacenter
(I think.)
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Marks70 wrote:
>Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
>Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
>refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
>
|||The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003 is
4 GB.
Refer => http://support.microsoft.com/?id=274750
Thanks,
Sree
"Marks70" wrote:
> Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
> Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
> refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
|||Yes but the question was about Windows 2003 Enterprise which is 32GB in the
same article.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"Sreejith G" <SreejithG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3DB7B61C-D8DF-4846-8A68-596D683CA237@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003
> is
> 4 GB.
> Refer => http://support.microsoft.com/?id=274750
> Thanks,
> Sree
>
> "Marks70" wrote:
|||Thanks guys!
"Marks70" wrote:
> Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
> Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
> refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
Max Memory Support of SQL 2000 Enterprise on Windows 2003 Enterpri
Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--090006090404030906000503
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
32GB on Win 2003 Enterprise
64GB on Win 2003 Datacenter
(I think.)
--
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Marks70 wrote:
>Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
>Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
>refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
>
--090006090404030906000503
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<tt>32GB on Win 2003 Enterprise<br>
64GB on Win 2003 Datacenter<br>
<br>
(I think.)<br>
</tt>
<div class="moz-signature">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<p><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">--<br>
</font></span> <b><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">mike
hodgson</font></span></b><span lang="en-au"><br>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>
</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
Marks70 wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid91F52420-72D3-4203-BE73-5C9A3AD9783A@.microsoft.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--090006090404030906000503--|||The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003 is
4 GB.
Refer => http://support.microsoft.com/?id=274750
Thanks,
Sree
"Marks70" wrote:
> Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
> Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
> refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!|||Yes but the question was about Windows 2003 Enterprise which is 32GB in the
same article.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"Sreejith G" <SreejithG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3DB7B61C-D8DF-4846-8A68-596D683CA237@.microsoft.com...
> The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003
> is
> 4 GB.
> Refer => http://support.microsoft.com/?id=274750
> Thanks,
> Sree
>
> "Marks70" wrote:
>> Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
>> Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
>> refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!|||Correction :) =>
The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003
is 4 GB. However, Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition supports 32 GB of
physical RAM.
Thanks,
Sree
"Sreejith G" wrote:
> The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003 is
> 4 GB.
> Refer => http://support.microsoft.com/?id=274750
> Thanks,
> Sree
>
> "Marks70" wrote:
> > Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
> > Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
> > refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!|||Thanks guys!
"Marks70" wrote:
> Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
> Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
> refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!sql
Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--090006090404030906000503
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
32GB on Win 2003 Enterprise
64GB on Win 2003 Datacenter
(I think.)
--
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Marks70 wrote:
>Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
>Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
>refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
>
--090006090404030906000503
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<tt>32GB on Win 2003 Enterprise<br>
64GB on Win 2003 Datacenter<br>
<br>
(I think.)<br>
</tt>
<div class="moz-signature">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<p><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">--<br>
</font></span> <b><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">mike
hodgson</font></span></b><span lang="en-au"><br>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>
</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
Marks70 wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid91F52420-72D3-4203-BE73-5C9A3AD9783A@.microsoft.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--090006090404030906000503--|||The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003 is
4 GB.
Refer => http://support.microsoft.com/?id=274750
Thanks,
Sree
"Marks70" wrote:
> Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
> Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
> refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!|||Yes but the question was about Windows 2003 Enterprise which is 32GB in the
same article.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"Sreejith G" <SreejithG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3DB7B61C-D8DF-4846-8A68-596D683CA237@.microsoft.com...
> The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003
> is
> 4 GB.
> Refer => http://support.microsoft.com/?id=274750
> Thanks,
> Sree
>
> "Marks70" wrote:
>> Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
>> Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
>> refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!|||Correction :) =>
The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003
is 4 GB. However, Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition supports 32 GB of
physical RAM.
Thanks,
Sree
"Sreejith G" wrote:
> The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003 is
> 4 GB.
> Refer => http://support.microsoft.com/?id=274750
> Thanks,
> Sree
>
> "Marks70" wrote:
> > Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
> > Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
> > refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!|||Thanks guys!
"Marks70" wrote:
> Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
> Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
> refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!sql
Max Memory Support of SQL 2000 Enterprise on Windows 2003 Enterpri
Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!32GB on Win 2003 Enterprise
64GB on Win 2003 Datacenter
(I think.)
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Marks70 wrote:
>Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
>Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
>refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
>|||The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003 is
4 GB.
Refer => http://support.microsoft.com/?id=274750
Thanks,
Sree
"Marks70" wrote:
> Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
> Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
> refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!|||Yes but the question was about Windows 2003 Enterprise which is 32GB in the
same article.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"Sreejith G" <SreejithG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3DB7B61C-D8DF-4846-8A68-596D683CA237@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003
> is
> 4 GB.
> Refer => http://support.microsoft.com/?id=274750
> Thanks,
> Sree
>
> "Marks70" wrote:
>|||Thanks guys!
"Marks70" wrote:
> Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
> Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
> refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!32GB on Win 2003 Enterprise
64GB on Win 2003 Datacenter
(I think.)
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Marks70 wrote:
>Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
>Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
>refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
>|||The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003 is
4 GB.
Refer => http://support.microsoft.com/?id=274750
Thanks,
Sree
"Marks70" wrote:
> Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
> Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
> refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!|||Yes but the question was about Windows 2003 Enterprise which is 32GB in the
same article.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"Sreejith G" <SreejithG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3DB7B61C-D8DF-4846-8A68-596D683CA237@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows Server 2003
> is
> 4 GB.
> Refer => http://support.microsoft.com/?id=274750
> Thanks,
> Sree
>
> "Marks70" wrote:
>|||Thanks guys!
"Marks70" wrote:
> Pretty simple question, what is the maximum amount of memory SQL 2000
> Enterprise Edition can support on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition (all
> refering to the 32-bit versions). Thanks!
Max memory support in SQL Server 2008
Hello,
Are there any extension of max memory support ?
At SQL Server 2005.
Express Edition x86 = 1GB
Workgroup Edition x86 = 3GB
Standard Edition x86 = os limit
Standard Edition x64 = 32TB
Developer Edition x86 = os limit
Developer Edition x64 = 32TB
Enterprise Edition x86, x64 = os limitDatacenter Edition x86, x64 = os limit
ref: Memory Supported by the Editions of SQL Server 2005
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-US/library/ms143685.aspx
Especially , My wish is.
Express Edition x64 (native, non wow) , and 2GB support.
Workgroup Edition x64 (native, non wow), and 8GB support.
For SQL Express the memory limits will remain the same. I don't know about the other editions. The jury is still out on x64 native Express, keep your fingers crossed.
Mike
|||What I would really like to see is increased database size limits.
|||(akula@.discussions.microsoft.com) writes: > What I would really like to see is increased database size limits. Isn't the limit 4GB? While this not a very big database, I still think it's a reasonable limit for a free product. Yes, it would be nice if SQL Express could handle TB database, but after all MS needs to make money in some way, so that the SQL Server developers can get bread on the table. :-) -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books.mspx Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspx|||Well the thing about the size limit is that it is simply annoying but easy to bypass. All you have to do is break your large database into several smaller databases and combine the results. I'm not asking for a TB because it wouldn't work well with the memory limitation. But something in the 8GB-32GB range would be helpful especially if you are in a situation where you have a readonly database that is updated quarterly.|||(akula@.discussions.microsoft.com) writes: > Well the thing about the size limit is that it is simply annoying but > easy to bypass. All you have to do is break your large database into > several smaller databases and combine the results. I'm not asking for a > TB because it wouldn't work well with the memory limitation. But > something in the 8GB-32GB range would be helpful especially if you are > in a situation where you have a readonly database that is updated > quarterly. Each time you get annoyed, think of the license fee you paid! :-) Whatever limit there is, there will always be a point where you need to decide: apply a kludge or cough up money for a paid-for edition? -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books.mspx Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspxMax memory support in SQL Server 2008
Hello,
Are there any extension of max memory support ?
At SQL Server 2005.
Express Edition x86 = 1GB
Workgroup Edition x86 = 3GB
Standard Edition x86 = os limit
Standard Edition x64 = 32TB
Developer Edition x86 = os limit
Developer Edition x64 = 32TB
Enterprise Edition x86, x64 = os limitDatacenter Edition x86, x64 = os limit
ref: Memory Supported by the Editions of SQL Server 2005
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-US/library/ms143685.aspx
Especially , My wish is.
Express Edition x64 (native, non wow) , and 2GB support.
Workgroup Edition x64 (native, non wow), and 8GB support.
For SQL Express the memory limits will remain the same. I don't know about the other editions. The jury is still out on x64 native Express, keep your fingers crossed.
Mike
|||What I would really like to see is increased database size limits.
|||(akula@.discussions.microsoft.com) writes: > What I would really like to see is increased database size limits. Isn't the limit 4GB? While this not a very big database, I still think it's a reasonable limit for a free product. Yes, it would be nice if SQL Express could handle TB database, but after all MS needs to make money in some way, so that the SQL Server developers can get bread on the table. :-) -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books.mspx Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspx|||Well the thing about the size limit is that it is simply annoying but easy to bypass. All you have to do is break your large database into several smaller databases and combine the results. I'm not asking for a TB because it wouldn't work well with the memory limitation. But something in the 8GB-32GB range would be helpful especially if you are in a situation where you have a readonly database that is updated quarterly.|||(akula@.discussions.microsoft.com) writes: > Well the thing about the size limit is that it is simply annoying but > easy to bypass. All you have to do is break your large database into > several smaller databases and combine the results. I'm not asking for a > TB because it wouldn't work well with the memory limitation. But > something in the 8GB-32GB range would be helpful especially if you are > in a situation where you have a readonly database that is updated > quarterly. Each time you get annoyed, think of the license fee you paid! :-) Whatever limit there is, there will always be a point where you need to decide: apply a kludge or cough up money for a paid-for edition? -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books.mspx Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspxMax memory support in SQL Server 2008
Hello,
Are there any extension of max memory support ?
At SQL Server 2005.
Express Edition x86 = 1GB
Workgroup Edition x86 = 3GB
Standard Edition x86 = os limit
Standard Edition x64 = 32TB
Developer Edition x86 = os limit
Developer Edition x64 = 32TB
Enterprise Edition x86, x64 = os limitDatacenter Edition x86, x64 = os limit
ref: Memory Supported by the Editions of SQL Server 2005
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-US/library/ms143685.aspx
Especially , My wish is.
Express Edition x64 (native, non wow) , and 2GB support.
Workgroup Edition x64 (native, non wow), and 8GB support.
For SQL Express the memory limits will remain the same. I don't know about the other editions. The jury is still out on x64 native Express, keep your fingers crossed.
Mike
|||What I would really like to see is increased database size limits.
|||(akula@.discussions.microsoft.com) writes: > What I would really like to see is increased database size limits. Isn't the limit 4GB? While this not a very big database, I still think it's a reasonable limit for a free product. Yes, it would be nice if SQL Express could handle TB database, but after all MS needs to make money in some way, so that the SQL Server developers can get bread on the table. :-) -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books.mspx Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspx|||Well the thing about the size limit is that it is simply annoying but easy to bypass. All you have to do is break your large database into several smaller databases and combine the results. I'm not asking for a TB because it wouldn't work well with the memory limitation. But something in the 8GB-32GB range would be helpful especially if you are in a situation where you have a readonly database that is updated quarterly.|||(akula@.discussions.microsoft.com) writes: > Well the thing about the size limit is that it is simply annoying but > easy to bypass. All you have to do is break your large database into > several smaller databases and combine the results. I'm not asking for a > TB because it wouldn't work well with the memory limitation. But > something in the 8GB-32GB range would be helpful especially if you are > in a situation where you have a readonly database that is updated > quarterly. Each time you get annoyed, think of the license fee you paid! :-) Whatever limit there is, there will always be a point where you need to decide: apply a kludge or cough up money for a paid-for edition? -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books.mspx Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspx
Max Memory SQL2K EE on W2K3 EE
This is what I have
Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (x86)
SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (x86)
What I'm trying to clarify is if I have a W2K3 EE system with 32GB of RAM
can a single instanace of SQL2K EE access the entire 32GB
or
Will the single instance only access 8GB and therefore only if I had 4
instances would SQL Server use 32GB
Thanks,
Paul
SP3 and higher will address 32 GB of RAM on W2k3EE. I wouldn't set total
SQL memory for all instances higher than 28GB on such a system. Setting
memory higher can starve necessary OS functions like AWE mapping which will
kill performance and stability
GNH
"Paul Ward" <Paul Ward@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:79DC5A4B-BE32-4770-861F-ACFD2D08DB00@.microsoft.com...
> This is what I have
> Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (x86)
> SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (x86)
>
> What I'm trying to clarify is if I have a W2K3 EE system with 32GB of RAM
> can a single instanace of SQL2K EE access the entire 32GB
> or
> Will the single instance only access 8GB and therefore only if I had 4
> instances would SQL Server use 32GB
> Thanks,
> Paul
|||Thanks Geoff.
I've looked through the release notes for SP3 and can't find any reference
to this.
Have you seen this documented somewhere or is your answer based on a system
you have worked with?
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> SP3 and higher will address 32 GB of RAM on W2k3EE. I wouldn't set total
> SQL memory for all instances higher than 28GB on such a system. Setting
> memory higher can starve necessary OS functions like AWE mapping which will
> kill performance and stability
> GNH
>
> "Paul Ward" <Paul Ward@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:79DC5A4B-BE32-4770-861F-ACFD2D08DB00@.microsoft.com...
>
|||Is a Microsoft KB article good enough?
How to configure SQL Server to use more than 2 GB of physical memory
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750
Click on the scrolldown link to Windows 2000 Advanced Server or Windows 2000
Datacenter or Windows Server 2003
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:43B4240B-1E41-4BA3-B068-CF048598E1AD@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks Geoff.
> I've looked through the release notes for SP3 and can't find any reference
> to this.
> Have you seen this documented somewhere or is your answer based on a
> system
> you have worked with?
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
|||I've seen this before and although it states that W2K3 EE supports 32GB using
PAE it doesn't actually make it clear that SQL2K EE can use (the majority) of
this.
Have you been involved with a system running W2K3 EE and SQL2K EE with a
large amount of RAM?
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> Is a Microsoft KB article good enough?
> How to configure SQL Server to use more than 2 GB of physical memory
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750
> Click on the scrolldown link to Windows 2000 Advanced Server or Windows 2000
> Datacenter or Windows Server 2003
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
> "Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:43B4240B-1E41-4BA3-B068-CF048598E1AD@.microsoft.com...
>
|||Yes. I have built a system with 32GB of physical RAM , W2K3EE and SQL2K EE,
It happened to be a four-node cluster with 8 procs per node, just to make it
more complex.
So much of my advice in this area is from hard-earned
direct knowledge.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4B55AA08-7B48-4221-BBA3-8B0D4AFA7906@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> I've seen this before and although it states that W2K3 EE supports 32GB
> using
> PAE it doesn't actually make it clear that SQL2K EE can use (the majority)
> of
> this.
> Have you been involved with a system running W2K3 EE and SQL2K EE with a
> large amount of RAM?
>
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
|||Thanks for help and sharing your knowledge on this
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> Yes. I have built a system with 32GB of physical RAM , W2K3EE and SQL2K EE,
> It happened to be a four-node cluster with 8 procs per node, just to make it
> more complex. So much of my advice in this area is from hard-earned
> direct knowledge.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:4B55AA08-7B48-4221-BBA3-8B0D4AFA7906@.microsoft.com...
>
sql
Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (x86)
SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (x86)
What I'm trying to clarify is if I have a W2K3 EE system with 32GB of RAM
can a single instanace of SQL2K EE access the entire 32GB
or
Will the single instance only access 8GB and therefore only if I had 4
instances would SQL Server use 32GB
Thanks,
Paul
SP3 and higher will address 32 GB of RAM on W2k3EE. I wouldn't set total
SQL memory for all instances higher than 28GB on such a system. Setting
memory higher can starve necessary OS functions like AWE mapping which will
kill performance and stability
GNH
"Paul Ward" <Paul Ward@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:79DC5A4B-BE32-4770-861F-ACFD2D08DB00@.microsoft.com...
> This is what I have
> Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (x86)
> SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (x86)
>
> What I'm trying to clarify is if I have a W2K3 EE system with 32GB of RAM
> can a single instanace of SQL2K EE access the entire 32GB
> or
> Will the single instance only access 8GB and therefore only if I had 4
> instances would SQL Server use 32GB
> Thanks,
> Paul
|||Thanks Geoff.
I've looked through the release notes for SP3 and can't find any reference
to this.
Have you seen this documented somewhere or is your answer based on a system
you have worked with?
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> SP3 and higher will address 32 GB of RAM on W2k3EE. I wouldn't set total
> SQL memory for all instances higher than 28GB on such a system. Setting
> memory higher can starve necessary OS functions like AWE mapping which will
> kill performance and stability
> GNH
>
> "Paul Ward" <Paul Ward@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:79DC5A4B-BE32-4770-861F-ACFD2D08DB00@.microsoft.com...
>
|||Is a Microsoft KB article good enough?
How to configure SQL Server to use more than 2 GB of physical memory
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750
Click on the scrolldown link to Windows 2000 Advanced Server or Windows 2000
Datacenter or Windows Server 2003
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:43B4240B-1E41-4BA3-B068-CF048598E1AD@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks Geoff.
> I've looked through the release notes for SP3 and can't find any reference
> to this.
> Have you seen this documented somewhere or is your answer based on a
> system
> you have worked with?
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
|||I've seen this before and although it states that W2K3 EE supports 32GB using
PAE it doesn't actually make it clear that SQL2K EE can use (the majority) of
this.
Have you been involved with a system running W2K3 EE and SQL2K EE with a
large amount of RAM?
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> Is a Microsoft KB article good enough?
> How to configure SQL Server to use more than 2 GB of physical memory
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750
> Click on the scrolldown link to Windows 2000 Advanced Server or Windows 2000
> Datacenter or Windows Server 2003
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
> "Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:43B4240B-1E41-4BA3-B068-CF048598E1AD@.microsoft.com...
>
|||Yes. I have built a system with 32GB of physical RAM , W2K3EE and SQL2K EE,
It happened to be a four-node cluster with 8 procs per node, just to make it
more complex.
So much of my advice in this area is from hard-earneddirect knowledge.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4B55AA08-7B48-4221-BBA3-8B0D4AFA7906@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> I've seen this before and although it states that W2K3 EE supports 32GB
> using
> PAE it doesn't actually make it clear that SQL2K EE can use (the majority)
> of
> this.
> Have you been involved with a system running W2K3 EE and SQL2K EE with a
> large amount of RAM?
>
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
|||Thanks for help and sharing your knowledge on this
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> Yes. I have built a system with 32GB of physical RAM , W2K3EE and SQL2K EE,
> It happened to be a four-node cluster with 8 procs per node, just to make it
> more complex.
So much of my advice in this area is from hard-earned> direct knowledge.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:4B55AA08-7B48-4221-BBA3-8B0D4AFA7906@.microsoft.com...
>
sql
Max Memory SQL2K EE on W2K3 EE
This is what I have
Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (x86)
SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (x86)
What I'm trying to clarify is if I have a W2K3 EE system with 32GB of RAM
can a single instanace of SQL2K EE access the entire 32GB
or
Will the single instance only access 8GB and therefore only if I had 4
instances would SQL Server use 32GB
Thanks,
PaulSP3 and higher will address 32 GB of RAM on W2k3EE. I wouldn't set total
SQL memory for all instances higher than 28GB on such a system. Setting
memory higher can starve necessary OS functions like AWE mapping which will
kill performance and stability
GNH
"Paul Ward" <Paul Ward@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:79DC5A4B-BE32-4770-861F-ACFD2D08DB00@.microsoft.com...
> This is what I have
> Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (x86)
> SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (x86)
>
> What I'm trying to clarify is if I have a W2K3 EE system with 32GB of RAM
> can a single instanace of SQL2K EE access the entire 32GB
> or
> Will the single instance only access 8GB and therefore only if I had 4
> instances would SQL Server use 32GB
> Thanks,
> Paul|||Thanks Geoff.
I've looked through the release notes for SP3 and can't find any reference
to this.
Have you seen this documented somewhere or is your answer based on a system
you have worked with?
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> SP3 and higher will address 32 GB of RAM on W2k3EE. I wouldn't set total
> SQL memory for all instances higher than 28GB on such a system. Setting
> memory higher can starve necessary OS functions like AWE mapping which wil
l
> kill performance and stability
> GNH
>
> "Paul Ward" <Paul Ward@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:79DC5A4B-BE32-4770-861F-ACFD2D08DB00@.microsoft.com...
>|||Is a Microsoft KB article good enough?
How to configure SQL Server to use more than 2 GB of physical memory
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750
Click on the scrolldown link to Windows 2000 Advanced Server or Windows 2000
Datacenter or Windows Server 2003
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:43B4240B-1E41-4BA3-B068-CF048598E1AD@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks Geoff.
> I've looked through the release notes for SP3 and can't find any reference
> to this.
> Have you seen this documented somewhere or is your answer based on a
> system
> you have worked with?
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
>|||I've seen this before and although it states that W2K3 EE supports 32GB usin
g
PAE it doesn't actually make it clear that SQL2K EE can use (the majority) o
f
this.
Have you been involved with a system running W2K3 EE and SQL2K EE with a
large amount of RAM?
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> Is a Microsoft KB article good enough?
> How to configure SQL Server to use more than 2 GB of physical memory
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750
> Click on the scrolldown link to Windows 2000 Advanced Server or Windows 20
00
> Datacenter or Windows Server 2003
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
> "Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:43B4240B-1E41-4BA3-B068-CF048598E1AD@.microsoft.com...
>|||Yes. I have built a system with 32GB of physical RAM , W2K3EE and SQL2K EE,
It happened to be a four-node cluster with 8 procs per node, just to make it
more complex. So much of my advice in this area is from hard-earned
direct knowledge.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4B55AA08-7B48-4221-BBA3-8B0D4AFA7906@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> I've seen this before and although it states that W2K3 EE supports 32GB
> using
> PAE it doesn't actually make it clear that SQL2K EE can use (the majority)
> of
> this.
> Have you been involved with a system running W2K3 EE and SQL2K EE with a
> large amount of RAM?
>
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
>|||Thanks for help and sharing your knowledge on this
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> Yes. I have built a system with 32GB of physical RAM , W2K3EE and SQL2K E
E,
> It happened to be a four-node cluster with 8 procs per node, just to make
it
> more complex. So much of my advice in this area is from hard-earned
> direct knowledge.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:4B55AA08-7B48-4221-BBA3-8B0D4AFA7906@.microsoft.com...
>
Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (x86)
SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (x86)
What I'm trying to clarify is if I have a W2K3 EE system with 32GB of RAM
can a single instanace of SQL2K EE access the entire 32GB
or
Will the single instance only access 8GB and therefore only if I had 4
instances would SQL Server use 32GB
Thanks,
PaulSP3 and higher will address 32 GB of RAM on W2k3EE. I wouldn't set total
SQL memory for all instances higher than 28GB on such a system. Setting
memory higher can starve necessary OS functions like AWE mapping which will
kill performance and stability
GNH
"Paul Ward" <Paul Ward@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:79DC5A4B-BE32-4770-861F-ACFD2D08DB00@.microsoft.com...
> This is what I have
> Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition (x86)
> SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (x86)
>
> What I'm trying to clarify is if I have a W2K3 EE system with 32GB of RAM
> can a single instanace of SQL2K EE access the entire 32GB
> or
> Will the single instance only access 8GB and therefore only if I had 4
> instances would SQL Server use 32GB
> Thanks,
> Paul|||Thanks Geoff.
I've looked through the release notes for SP3 and can't find any reference
to this.
Have you seen this documented somewhere or is your answer based on a system
you have worked with?
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> SP3 and higher will address 32 GB of RAM on W2k3EE. I wouldn't set total
> SQL memory for all instances higher than 28GB on such a system. Setting
> memory higher can starve necessary OS functions like AWE mapping which wil
l
> kill performance and stability
> GNH
>
> "Paul Ward" <Paul Ward@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:79DC5A4B-BE32-4770-861F-ACFD2D08DB00@.microsoft.com...
>|||Is a Microsoft KB article good enough?
How to configure SQL Server to use more than 2 GB of physical memory
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750
Click on the scrolldown link to Windows 2000 Advanced Server or Windows 2000
Datacenter or Windows Server 2003
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:43B4240B-1E41-4BA3-B068-CF048598E1AD@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks Geoff.
> I've looked through the release notes for SP3 and can't find any reference
> to this.
> Have you seen this documented somewhere or is your answer based on a
> system
> you have worked with?
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
>|||I've seen this before and although it states that W2K3 EE supports 32GB usin
g
PAE it doesn't actually make it clear that SQL2K EE can use (the majority) o
f
this.
Have you been involved with a system running W2K3 EE and SQL2K EE with a
large amount of RAM?
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> Is a Microsoft KB article good enough?
> How to configure SQL Server to use more than 2 GB of physical memory
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750
> Click on the scrolldown link to Windows 2000 Advanced Server or Windows 20
00
> Datacenter or Windows Server 2003
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
> "Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:43B4240B-1E41-4BA3-B068-CF048598E1AD@.microsoft.com...
>|||Yes. I have built a system with 32GB of physical RAM , W2K3EE and SQL2K EE,
It happened to be a four-node cluster with 8 procs per node, just to make it
more complex.
So much of my advice in this area is from hard-earneddirect knowledge.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4B55AA08-7B48-4221-BBA3-8B0D4AFA7906@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> I've seen this before and although it states that W2K3 EE supports 32GB
> using
> PAE it doesn't actually make it clear that SQL2K EE can use (the majority)
> of
> this.
> Have you been involved with a system running W2K3 EE and SQL2K EE with a
> large amount of RAM?
>
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
>|||Thanks for help and sharing your knowledge on this
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> Yes. I have built a system with 32GB of physical RAM , W2K3EE and SQL2K E
E,
> It happened to be a four-node cluster with 8 procs per node, just to make
it
> more complex.
So much of my advice in this area is from hard-earned> direct knowledge.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Paul Ward" <PaulWard@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:4B55AA08-7B48-4221-BBA3-8B0D4AFA7906@.microsoft.com...
>
max memory setting and /3GB switch
A server with 8 GB RAM and MS SQL only server with one instance, /PAE and AWE
set.
1) Shoud Max Server Memory be set to the full 8 GB or a less amount like 6
GB to account for the OS?
2) Is it necessary to set /3GB switch or does /PAE make it irrelevant?
Thanks.
YOu need PAE to let the OS see more than 4GB. The /3GB is optional but I
would recommend it in most cases with only 8GB of ram. Absolutely set the
max memory setting to less than 8GB. Try 7.0 and see how that works. Once
you turn on AWE the memory is fixed and you need to leave room for the OS
and any other applications or processes.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"sfhank" <sfhank@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E88EF65B-B3A4-4BF4-BC6C-C59A3590049F@.microsoft.com...
>A server with 8 GB RAM and MS SQL only server with one instance, /PAE and
>AWE
> set.
>
> 1) Shoud Max Server Memory be set to the full 8 GB or a less amount like 6
> GB to account for the OS?
> 2) Is it necessary to set /3GB switch or does /PAE make it irrelevant?
> Thanks.
set.
1) Shoud Max Server Memory be set to the full 8 GB or a less amount like 6
GB to account for the OS?
2) Is it necessary to set /3GB switch or does /PAE make it irrelevant?
Thanks.
YOu need PAE to let the OS see more than 4GB. The /3GB is optional but I
would recommend it in most cases with only 8GB of ram. Absolutely set the
max memory setting to less than 8GB. Try 7.0 and see how that works. Once
you turn on AWE the memory is fixed and you need to leave room for the OS
and any other applications or processes.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"sfhank" <sfhank@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E88EF65B-B3A4-4BF4-BC6C-C59A3590049F@.microsoft.com...
>A server with 8 GB RAM and MS SQL only server with one instance, /PAE and
>AWE
> set.
>
> 1) Shoud Max Server Memory be set to the full 8 GB or a less amount like 6
> GB to account for the OS?
> 2) Is it necessary to set /3GB switch or does /PAE make it irrelevant?
> Thanks.
max memory setting and /3GB switch
A server with 8 GB RAM and MS SQL only server with one instance, /PAE and AW
E
set.
1) Shoud Max Server Memory be set to the full 8 GB or a less amount like 6
GB to account for the OS?
2) Is it necessary to set /3GB switch or does /PAE make it irrelevant?
Thanks.YOu need PAE to let the OS see more than 4GB. The /3GB is optional but I
would recommend it in most cases with only 8GB of ram. Absolutely set the
max memory setting to less than 8GB. Try 7.0 and see how that works. Once
you turn on AWE the memory is fixed and you need to leave room for the OS
and any other applications or processes.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"sfhank" <sfhank@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E88EF65B-B3A4-4BF4-BC6C-C59A3590049F@.microsoft.com...
>A server with 8 GB RAM and MS SQL only server with one instance, /PAE and
>AWE
> set.
>
> 1) Shoud Max Server Memory be set to the full 8 GB or a less amount like 6
> GB to account for the OS?
> 2) Is it necessary to set /3GB switch or does /PAE make it irrelevant?
> Thanks.
E
set.
1) Shoud Max Server Memory be set to the full 8 GB or a less amount like 6
GB to account for the OS?
2) Is it necessary to set /3GB switch or does /PAE make it irrelevant?
Thanks.YOu need PAE to let the OS see more than 4GB. The /3GB is optional but I
would recommend it in most cases with only 8GB of ram. Absolutely set the
max memory setting to less than 8GB. Try 7.0 and see how that works. Once
you turn on AWE the memory is fixed and you need to leave room for the OS
and any other applications or processes.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"sfhank" <sfhank@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E88EF65B-B3A4-4BF4-BC6C-C59A3590049F@.microsoft.com...
>A server with 8 GB RAM and MS SQL only server with one instance, /PAE and
>AWE
> set.
>
> 1) Shoud Max Server Memory be set to the full 8 GB or a less amount like 6
> GB to account for the OS?
> 2) Is it necessary to set /3GB switch or does /PAE make it irrelevant?
> Thanks.
max memory setting and /3GB switch
A server with 8 GB RAM and MS SQL only server with one instance, /PAE and AWE
set.
1) Shoud Max Server Memory be set to the full 8 GB or a less amount like 6
GB to account for the OS?
2) Is it necessary to set /3GB switch or does /PAE make it irrelevant?
Thanks.YOu need PAE to let the OS see more than 4GB. The /3GB is optional but I
would recommend it in most cases with only 8GB of ram. Absolutely set the
max memory setting to less than 8GB. Try 7.0 and see how that works. Once
you turn on AWE the memory is fixed and you need to leave room for the OS
and any other applications or processes.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"sfhank" <sfhank@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E88EF65B-B3A4-4BF4-BC6C-C59A3590049F@.microsoft.com...
>A server with 8 GB RAM and MS SQL only server with one instance, /PAE and
>AWE
> set.
>
> 1) Shoud Max Server Memory be set to the full 8 GB or a less amount like 6
> GB to account for the OS?
> 2) Is it necessary to set /3GB switch or does /PAE make it irrelevant?
> Thanks.
set.
1) Shoud Max Server Memory be set to the full 8 GB or a less amount like 6
GB to account for the OS?
2) Is it necessary to set /3GB switch or does /PAE make it irrelevant?
Thanks.YOu need PAE to let the OS see more than 4GB. The /3GB is optional but I
would recommend it in most cases with only 8GB of ram. Absolutely set the
max memory setting to less than 8GB. Try 7.0 and see how that works. Once
you turn on AWE the memory is fixed and you need to leave room for the OS
and any other applications or processes.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"sfhank" <sfhank@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E88EF65B-B3A4-4BF4-BC6C-C59A3590049F@.microsoft.com...
>A server with 8 GB RAM and MS SQL only server with one instance, /PAE and
>AWE
> set.
>
> 1) Shoud Max Server Memory be set to the full 8 GB or a less amount like 6
> GB to account for the OS?
> 2) Is it necessary to set /3GB switch or does /PAE make it irrelevant?
> Thanks.
Max Memory per SQL instance
Hi
I have a SQL 7 and SQL 2000 instance on one server with a
total of 2Gb of physical ram.
Currently all the physical ram is used up by both
instances causing SQL to run slowly.
My question is: Is the 2Gb ram limit a server limit or a
instance limit ie if I add an additional 2 Gb of ram will
each instance use a maximum of 2Gb each or will the
additional ram be a waste of time?
Thanks in advance.
DarylThanks for your reply. You have confirmed what I believe
is the case so I will proceed and add the additional
memory. For your reference the OS is Win Server 2000 and
the SQL 2000 instance is the standard edition.
Thanks again.
Daryl
>--Original Message--
>It depends on the OS and edition of sql server you have
as to how much ram
>they can access but yes, each instance should be able to
use 2GB.
>--
>Andrew J. Kelly
>SQL Server MVP
>
>"dazza" <darylg@.intergen.co.nz> wrote in message
>news:018001c35228$af340fa0$7d02280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Hi
>> I have a SQL 7 and SQL 2000 instance on one server with
a
>> total of 2Gb of physical ram.
>> Currently all the physical ram is used up by both
>> instances causing SQL to run slowly.
>> My question is: Is the 2Gb ram limit a server limit or a
>> instance limit ie if I add an additional 2 Gb of ram
will
>> each instance use a maximum of 2Gb each or will the
>> additional ram be a waste of time?
>> Thanks in advance.
>> Daryl
>
>.
>sql
I have a SQL 7 and SQL 2000 instance on one server with a
total of 2Gb of physical ram.
Currently all the physical ram is used up by both
instances causing SQL to run slowly.
My question is: Is the 2Gb ram limit a server limit or a
instance limit ie if I add an additional 2 Gb of ram will
each instance use a maximum of 2Gb each or will the
additional ram be a waste of time?
Thanks in advance.
DarylThanks for your reply. You have confirmed what I believe
is the case so I will proceed and add the additional
memory. For your reference the OS is Win Server 2000 and
the SQL 2000 instance is the standard edition.
Thanks again.
Daryl
>--Original Message--
>It depends on the OS and edition of sql server you have
as to how much ram
>they can access but yes, each instance should be able to
use 2GB.
>--
>Andrew J. Kelly
>SQL Server MVP
>
>"dazza" <darylg@.intergen.co.nz> wrote in message
>news:018001c35228$af340fa0$7d02280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Hi
>> I have a SQL 7 and SQL 2000 instance on one server with
a
>> total of 2Gb of physical ram.
>> Currently all the physical ram is used up by both
>> instances causing SQL to run slowly.
>> My question is: Is the 2Gb ram limit a server limit or a
>> instance limit ie if I add an additional 2 Gb of ram
will
>> each instance use a maximum of 2Gb each or will the
>> additional ram be a waste of time?
>> Thanks in advance.
>> Daryl
>
>.
>sql
Max memory on 32/64 bit
I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer
What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I tell
my customer what to buy...
Thanks!
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
These should provide the definitive answer you seek.
Configuration -Maximum Capacity Specifications
2000
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_8dbn.asp
2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143287.aspx
2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer
> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
> tell my customer what to buy...
> Thanks!
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
>
|||With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs
with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit. 64
bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer
> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
> tell my customer what to buy...
> Thanks!
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
>
|||A leetle confused here:
with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
Seems like the first option there is missing something...
Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
nonetheless...
Thanks
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
> With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
> With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32
> Gigs with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64
> bit. 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thanks Arnie, but the BOL link does not specifically reference Windows 2003
EE, 64 bit (or any other Win2K3 versions...)
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
news:eaVxm0kEHHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> These should provide the definitive answer you seek.
> Configuration -Maximum Capacity Specifications
> 2000
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_8dbn.asp
> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143287.aspx
> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
>
> --
> Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
> Westwood Consulting, Inc
> Most good judgment comes from experience.
> Most experience comes from bad judgment.
> - Anonymous
> You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to
> the top yourself.
> - H. Norman Schwarzkopf
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
|||That doesn't read well - try this
With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>A leetle confused here:
> with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
> Seems like the first option there is missing something...
> Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
> nonetheless...
> Thanks
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
> "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
|||Oops, sorry Kevin, this is a better source for you.
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:e2a1oSlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Arnie, but the BOL link does not specifically reference Windows
> 2003 EE, 64 bit (or any other Win2K3 versions...)
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
> "Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
> news:eaVxm0kEHHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thanks for the clarification
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OX3SnVlEHHA.3768@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> That doesn't read well - try this
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
> Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
> and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
|||But 64-bit Windows does not support PAE.
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx
Linchi
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:
> That doesn't read well - try this
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
> Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
> and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>
What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I tell
my customer what to buy...
Thanks!
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
These should provide the definitive answer you seek.
Configuration -Maximum Capacity Specifications
2000
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_8dbn.asp
2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143287.aspx
2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer
> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
> tell my customer what to buy...
> Thanks!
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
>
|||With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs
with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit. 64
bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer
> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
> tell my customer what to buy...
> Thanks!
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
>
|||A leetle confused here:
with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
Seems like the first option there is missing something...
Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
nonetheless...
Thanks
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
> With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
> With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32
> Gigs with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64
> bit. 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thanks Arnie, but the BOL link does not specifically reference Windows 2003
EE, 64 bit (or any other Win2K3 versions...)
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
news:eaVxm0kEHHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> These should provide the definitive answer you seek.
> Configuration -Maximum Capacity Specifications
> 2000
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_8dbn.asp
> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143287.aspx
> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
>
> --
> Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
> Westwood Consulting, Inc
> Most good judgment comes from experience.
> Most experience comes from bad judgment.
> - Anonymous
> You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to
> the top yourself.
> - H. Norman Schwarzkopf
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
|||That doesn't read well - try this
With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>A leetle confused here:
> with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
> Seems like the first option there is missing something...
> Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
> nonetheless...
> Thanks
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
> "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
|||Oops, sorry Kevin, this is a better source for you.
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:e2a1oSlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Arnie, but the BOL link does not specifically reference Windows
> 2003 EE, 64 bit (or any other Win2K3 versions...)
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
> "Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
> news:eaVxm0kEHHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thanks for the clarification
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OX3SnVlEHHA.3768@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> That doesn't read well - try this
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
> Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
> and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
|||But 64-bit Windows does not support PAE.
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx
Linchi
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:
> That doesn't read well - try this
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
> Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
> and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>
Max memory on 32/64 bit
I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I tell
my customer what to buy...
Thanks!
--
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.comThese should provide the definitive answer you seek.
Configuration -Maximum Capacity Specifications
2000
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_8dbn.asp
2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143287.aspx
2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
> tell my customer what to buy...
> Thanks!
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
>|||With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs
with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit. 64
bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
--
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
> tell my customer what to buy...
> Thanks!
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
>|||A leetle confused here:
with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
Seems like the first option there is missing something...
Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
nonetheless...
Thanks
--
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
> With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
> With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32
> Gigs with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64
> bit. 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
>> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
>> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
>> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
>> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
>> tell my customer what to buy...
>> Thanks!
>> --
>> Kevin Hill
>> 3NF Consulting
>> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
>> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>>
>|||Thanks Arnie, but the BOL link does not specifically reference Windows 2003
EE, 64 bit (or any other Win2K3 versions...)
--
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
news:eaVxm0kEHHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> These should provide the definitive answer you seek.
> Configuration -Maximum Capacity Specifications
> 2000
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_8dbn.asp
> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143287.aspx
> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
>
> --
> Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
> Westwood Consulting, Inc
> Most good judgment comes from experience.
> Most experience comes from bad judgment.
> - Anonymous
> You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to
> the top yourself.
> - H. Norman Schwarzkopf
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
>> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
>> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
>> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
>> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
>> tell my customer what to buy...
>> Thanks!
>> --
>> Kevin Hill
>> 3NF Consulting
>> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
>> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>>
>|||That doesn't read well - try this
With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
--
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>A leetle confused here:
> with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
> Seems like the first option there is missing something...
> Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
> nonetheless...
> Thanks
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
> "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
>> With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
>> With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32
>> Gigs with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64
>> bit. 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
>> --
>> Hilary Cotter
>> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
>> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
>> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
>> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>>
>> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
>> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
>> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
>> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
>> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
>> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
>> tell my customer what to buy...
>> Thanks!
>> --
>> Kevin Hill
>> 3NF Consulting
>> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
>> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>|||Oops, sorry Kevin, this is a better source for you.
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:e2a1oSlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Arnie, but the BOL link does not specifically reference Windows
> 2003 EE, 64 bit (or any other Win2K3 versions...)
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
> "Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
> news:eaVxm0kEHHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> These should provide the definitive answer you seek.
>> Configuration -Maximum Capacity Specifications
>> 2000
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_8dbn.asp
>> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143287.aspx
>> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
>>
>> --
>> Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
>> Westwood Consulting, Inc
>> Most good judgment comes from experience.
>> Most experience comes from bad judgment.
>> - Anonymous
>> You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to
>> the top yourself.
>> - H. Norman Schwarzkopf
>>
>> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
>> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
>> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
>> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
>> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
>> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
>> tell my customer what to buy...
>> Thanks!
>> --
>> Kevin Hill
>> 3NF Consulting
>> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
>> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>|||Thanks for the clarification :)
--
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OX3SnVlEHHA.3768@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> That doesn't read well - try this
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
> Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
> and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>A leetle confused here:
>> with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
>> 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
>> Seems like the first option there is missing something...
>> Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
>> nonetheless...
>> Thanks
>> --
>> Kevin Hill
>> 3NF Consulting
>> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
>> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>>
>> "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
>> With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
>> With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32
>> Gigs with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64
>> bit. 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
>> --
>> Hilary Cotter
>> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
>> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
>> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
>> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>>
>> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
>> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
>> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
>> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
>> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
>> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
>> tell my customer what to buy...
>> Thanks!
>> --
>> Kevin Hill
>> 3NF Consulting
>> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
>> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>>
>|||But 64-bit Windows does not support PAE.
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx
Linchi
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:
> That doesn't read well - try this
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
> Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
> and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> >A leetle confused here:
> >
> > with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> >
> > 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
> >
> > Seems like the first option there is missing something...
> >
> > Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
> > nonetheless...
> >
> > Thanks
> > --
> > Kevin Hill
> > 3NF Consulting
> > http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> >
> > Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> > http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
> >
> >
> > "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> >> With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
> >> With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
> >> With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32
> >> Gigs with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64
> >> bit. 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Hilary Cotter
> >>
> >> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> >> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> >>
> >> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> >> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> >> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> >> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
> >>
> >> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
> >>
> >> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
> >> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
> >>
> >> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
> >> tell my customer what to buy...
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> --
> >> Kevin Hill
> >> 3NF Consulting
> >> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> >>
> >> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> >> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I tell
my customer what to buy...
Thanks!
--
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.comThese should provide the definitive answer you seek.
Configuration -Maximum Capacity Specifications
2000
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_8dbn.asp
2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143287.aspx
2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
> tell my customer what to buy...
> Thanks!
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
>|||With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs
with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit. 64
bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
--
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
> tell my customer what to buy...
> Thanks!
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
>|||A leetle confused here:
with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
Seems like the first option there is missing something...
Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
nonetheless...
Thanks
--
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
> With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
> With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32
> Gigs with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64
> bit. 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
>> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
>> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
>> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
>> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
>> tell my customer what to buy...
>> Thanks!
>> --
>> Kevin Hill
>> 3NF Consulting
>> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
>> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>>
>|||Thanks Arnie, but the BOL link does not specifically reference Windows 2003
EE, 64 bit (or any other Win2K3 versions...)
--
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
news:eaVxm0kEHHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> These should provide the definitive answer you seek.
> Configuration -Maximum Capacity Specifications
> 2000
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_8dbn.asp
> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143287.aspx
> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
>
> --
> Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
> Westwood Consulting, Inc
> Most good judgment comes from experience.
> Most experience comes from bad judgment.
> - Anonymous
> You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to
> the top yourself.
> - H. Norman Schwarzkopf
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
>> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
>> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
>> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
>> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
>> tell my customer what to buy...
>> Thanks!
>> --
>> Kevin Hill
>> 3NF Consulting
>> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
>> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>>
>|||That doesn't read well - try this
With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
--
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>A leetle confused here:
> with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
> Seems like the first option there is missing something...
> Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
> nonetheless...
> Thanks
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
> "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
>> With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
>> With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32
>> Gigs with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64
>> bit. 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
>> --
>> Hilary Cotter
>> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
>> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
>> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
>> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>>
>> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
>> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
>> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
>> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
>> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
>> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
>> tell my customer what to buy...
>> Thanks!
>> --
>> Kevin Hill
>> 3NF Consulting
>> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
>> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>|||Oops, sorry Kevin, this is a better source for you.
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:e2a1oSlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Arnie, but the BOL link does not specifically reference Windows
> 2003 EE, 64 bit (or any other Win2K3 versions...)
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
> "Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
> news:eaVxm0kEHHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> These should provide the definitive answer you seek.
>> Configuration -Maximum Capacity Specifications
>> 2000
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_8dbn.asp
>> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143287.aspx
>> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
>>
>> --
>> Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
>> Westwood Consulting, Inc
>> Most good judgment comes from experience.
>> Most experience comes from bad judgment.
>> - Anonymous
>> You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to
>> the top yourself.
>> - H. Norman Schwarzkopf
>>
>> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
>> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
>> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
>> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
>> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
>> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
>> tell my customer what to buy...
>> Thanks!
>> --
>> Kevin Hill
>> 3NF Consulting
>> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
>> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>|||Thanks for the clarification :)
--
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OX3SnVlEHHA.3768@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> That doesn't read well - try this
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
> Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
> and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>A leetle confused here:
>> with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
>> 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
>> Seems like the first option there is missing something...
>> Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
>> nonetheless...
>> Thanks
>> --
>> Kevin Hill
>> 3NF Consulting
>> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
>> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>>
>> "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
>> With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
>> With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32
>> Gigs with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64
>> bit. 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
>> --
>> Hilary Cotter
>> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
>> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
>> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
>> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>>
>> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
>> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
>> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
>> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
>> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
>> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
>> tell my customer what to buy...
>> Thanks!
>> --
>> Kevin Hill
>> 3NF Consulting
>> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
>> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>>
>|||But 64-bit Windows does not support PAE.
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx
Linchi
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:
> That doesn't read well - try this
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
> Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
> and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> >A leetle confused here:
> >
> > with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> >
> > 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
> >
> > Seems like the first option there is missing something...
> >
> > Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
> > nonetheless...
> >
> > Thanks
> > --
> > Kevin Hill
> > 3NF Consulting
> > http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> >
> > Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> > http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
> >
> >
> > "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> >> With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
> >> With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
> >> With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32
> >> Gigs with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64
> >> bit. 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Hilary Cotter
> >>
> >> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> >> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> >>
> >> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> >> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> >> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> >> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer :)
> >>
> >> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
> >>
> >> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
> >> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
> >>
> >> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
> >> tell my customer what to buy...
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> --
> >> Kevin Hill
> >> 3NF Consulting
> >> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> >>
> >> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> >> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Max memory on 32/64 bit
I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer
What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I tell
my customer what to buy...
Thanks!
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.comThese should provide the definitive answer you seek.
Configuration -Maximum Capacity Specifications
2000
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...br />
8dbn.asp
2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143287.aspx
2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer
> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
> tell my customer what to buy...
> Thanks!
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
>|||With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs
with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit. 64
bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer
> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
> tell my customer what to buy...
> Thanks!
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
>|||A leetle confused here:
with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
Seems like the first option there is missing something...
Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
nonetheless...
Thanks
--
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
> With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
> With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32
> Gigs with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64
> bit. 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>|||Thanks Arnie, but the BOL link does not specifically reference Windows 2003
EE, 64 bit (or any other Win2K3 versions...)
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
news:eaVxm0kEHHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> These should provide the definitive answer you seek.
> Configuration -Maximum Capacity Specifications
> 2000
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d... />
s_8dbn.asp
> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143287.aspx
> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
>
> --
> Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
> Westwood Consulting, Inc
> Most good judgment comes from experience.
> Most experience comes from bad judgment.
> - Anonymous
> You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to
> the top yourself.
> - H. Norman Schwarzkopf
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>|||That doesn't read well - try this
With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>A leetle confused here:
> with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
> Seems like the first option there is missing something...
> Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
> nonetheless...
> Thanks
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
> "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>|||Oops, sorry Kevin, this is a better source for you.
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:e2a1oSlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Arnie, but the BOL link does not specifically reference Windows
> 2003 EE, 64 bit (or any other Win2K3 versions...)
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
> "Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
> news:eaVxm0kEHHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>|||Thanks for the clarification
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OX3SnVlEHHA.3768@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> That doesn't read well - try this
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
> Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
> and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>|||But 64-bit Windows does not support PAE.
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/syste...PAE/PAEmem.mspx
Linchi
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:
> That doesn't read well - try this
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
> Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
> and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>
What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I tell
my customer what to buy...
Thanks!
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.comThese should provide the definitive answer you seek.
Configuration -Maximum Capacity Specifications
2000
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...br />
8dbn.asp
2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143287.aspx
2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer
> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
> tell my customer what to buy...
> Thanks!
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
>|||With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs
with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit. 64
bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm tired of Googling for a definitive answer
> What is the max memory SQL Server can access in this setup:
> SQL 2000, Enterprise edition, 32 bit
> Windows 2003, EE, 64 bit
> I'm thinking 32GB from what I've read, but I want to make sure before I
> tell my customer what to buy...
> Thanks!
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
>|||A leetle confused here:
with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
Seems like the first option there is missing something...
Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
nonetheless...
Thanks
--
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> With no boot ini settings 2 Gigs.
> With /3Gig boot ini 3 Gigs
> With /AWE and SQL Server 2000 32 bit the data cache can see a max of 32
> Gigs with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64
> bit. 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>|||Thanks Arnie, but the BOL link does not specifically reference Windows 2003
EE, 64 bit (or any other Win2K3 versions...)
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
news:eaVxm0kEHHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> These should provide the definitive answer you seek.
> Configuration -Maximum Capacity Specifications
> 2000
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d... />
s_8dbn.asp
> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143287.aspx
> 2005 http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
>
> --
> Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
> Westwood Consulting, Inc
> Most good judgment comes from experience.
> Most experience comes from bad judgment.
> - Anonymous
> You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to
> the top yourself.
> - H. Norman Schwarzkopf
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:OC2SSikEHHA.3524@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>|||That doesn't read well - try this
With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>A leetle confused here:
> with AWE enabled on SQL Server and PAE enabled on Windows 2003 64 bit.
> 64 bit SQL 2000 EE can see 64 Gigs on Windows 2003 64 bit
> Seems like the first option there is missing something...
> Second option is not relevant to my 32 bit SQL scenario, but good info
> nonetheless...
> Thanks
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
> "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:el$vr3kEHHA.4832@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>|||Oops, sorry Kevin, this is a better source for you.
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:e2a1oSlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Arnie, but the BOL link does not specifically reference Windows
> 2003 EE, 64 bit (or any other Win2K3 versions...)
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
> "Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
> news:eaVxm0kEHHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>|||Thanks for the clarification
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OX3SnVlEHHA.3768@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> That doesn't read well - try this
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
> Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
> and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>|||But 64-bit Windows does not support PAE.
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/syste...PAE/PAEmem.mspx
Linchi
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:
> That doesn't read well - try this
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 32 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 32 Gigs.
> With SQL Server 2000 EE 64 bit with AWE enable running on Windows 2003 64
> bit EE with PAE enabled, the data cache can see a max of 64 Gigs.
> Note that the procedure cache and other caches will still see IIRC 2 Gigs
> and most of the OS memory will be used with the 64 address windowing.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:us7AISlEHHA.4380@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)