Percentage of total: applied

Showing posts with label applied. Show all posts

Monday, March 26, 2012

Performance degradation on sql server 2005

Moved from sql server 2000 to 2005 .Applied snapshot isolation to
reduce blocking...
>From most indicators return times are not any faster
In 2000 we had awe enabled and in 2005 64 bit on 64 bit os non of that
is
We have 32G of ram on a xeon
4 cpu hyperthreaded
Config
lock pages in memory granted to sql server account ...
max memory 25G
Min memory 1G
Not sure what I am missing here
Your input will be highly appreciatedMass
After upgrading to SQL Server 2005 , did you update statistics as well as
rebuilding indexes on the databases?
"Massa Batheli" <mngong@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1159184263.874445.285230@.i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Moved from sql server 2000 to 2005 .Applied snapshot isolation to
> reduce blocking...
>>From most indicators return times are not any faster
> In 2000 we had awe enabled and in 2005 64 bit on 64 bit os non of that
> is
> We have 32G of ram on a xeon
> 4 cpu hyperthreaded
> Config
> lock pages in memory granted to sql server account ...
> max memory 25G
> Min memory 1G
> Not sure what I am missing here
> Your input will be highly appreciated
>|||Thanks for your response Uri
I did not rebuild indexes but for sure update statistics every day or
some analyst will call me on that .Is it necessary to rebuild indexes?
Uri Dimant wrote:
> Mass
> After upgrading to SQL Server 2005 , did you update statistics as well as
> rebuilding indexes on the databases?
>
>
> "Massa Batheli" <mngong@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1159184263.874445.285230@.i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> > Moved from sql server 2000 to 2005 .Applied snapshot isolation to
> > reduce blocking...
> >>From most indicators return times are not any faster
> >
> > In 2000 we had awe enabled and in 2005 64 bit on 64 bit os non of that
> > is
> >
> > We have 32G of ram on a xeon
> > 4 cpu hyperthreaded
> > Config
> > lock pages in memory granted to sql server account ...
> > max memory 25G
> > Min memory 1G
> >
> > Not sure what I am missing here
> > Your input will be highly appreciated
> >|||Hi
Yes , it is. I'd sugget you rebuild a heavy updated/inserted tables to do
that on weekly period
"Massa Batheli" <mngong@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1159187341.666362.282160@.i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Thanks for your response Uri
> I did not rebuild indexes but for sure update statistics every day or
> some analyst will call me on that .Is it necessary to rebuild indexes?
>
> Uri Dimant wrote:
>> Mass
>> After upgrading to SQL Server 2005 , did you update statistics as well
>> as
>> rebuilding indexes on the databases?
>>
>>
>> "Massa Batheli" <mngong@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1159184263.874445.285230@.i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> > Moved from sql server 2000 to 2005 .Applied snapshot isolation to
>> > reduce blocking...
>> >>From most indicators return times are not any faster
>> >
>> > In 2000 we had awe enabled and in 2005 64 bit on 64 bit os non of that
>> > is
>> >
>> > We have 32G of ram on a xeon
>> > 4 cpu hyperthreaded
>> > Config
>> > lock pages in memory granted to sql server account ...
>> > max memory 25G
>> > Min memory 1G
>> >
>> > Not sure what I am missing here
>> > Your input will be highly appreciated
>> >
>|||On 25.09.2006 14:36, Uri Dimant wrote:
> Yes , it is. I'd sugget you rebuild a heavy updated/inserted tables to do
> that on weekly period
Is that actually common practice with SQL Server? I have never read
such a suggestion in Oracle land and it seems pretty impractical for
DB's that are large or frequently used (24x7).
Kind regards
robert|||Robert Klemme wrote:
> On 25.09.2006 14:36, Uri Dimant wrote:
>> Yes , it is. I'd sugget you rebuild a heavy updated/inserted tables
>> to do that on weekly period
> Is that actually common practice with SQL Server? I have never read
> such a suggestion in Oracle land and it seems pretty impractical for
> DB's that are large or frequently used (24x7).
> Kind regards
> robert
Yes, it is, depending on the type of index, keys involved, etc. For
instance, an index build on a non-sequential key will fragment as new
key values are inserted into middle portions of the index.
Here's an article explaining it in more detail:
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/sj_detect_fragmentation.asp
I have a script that will check the fragmentation of each index,
rebuilding those that are badly fragmented:
http://realsqlguy.com/serendipity/archives/12-Humpty-Dumpty-Sat-On-A-Wall...html
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||I'd beg to differ. A VLDB is a VLDB. Regardless of what platform it is on,
the challenges are the same or similar. In this case, if it is a very large
table with little 'down time' for maintenance, running index rebuilds
regularly (or even occasionally) is just not practical.
Linchi
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:
> Robert Klemme wrote:
> > On 25.09.2006 14:36, Uri Dimant wrote:
> >> Yes , it is. I'd sugget you rebuild a heavy updated/inserted tables
> >> to do that on weekly period
> >
> > Is that actually common practice with SQL Server? I have never read
> > such a suggestion in Oracle land and it seems pretty impractical for
> > DB's that are large or frequently used (24x7).
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> > robert
> Yes, it is, depending on the type of index, keys involved, etc. For
> instance, an index build on a non-sequential key will fragment as new
> key values are inserted into middle portions of the index.
> Here's an article explaining it in more detail:
> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/sj_detect_fragmentation.asp
> I have a script that will check the fragmentation of each index,
> rebuilding those that are badly fragmented:
> http://realsqlguy.com/serendipity/archives/12-Humpty-Dumpty-Sat-On-A-Wall...html
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
>|||here here.. I totally agree with Linchi. Often, the advice to simply rebuild
indexes is given unnecessarily.
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
http://blogs.sqlserver.org.au/blogs/greg_linwood
"Linchi Shea" <LinchiShea@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:07A7E217-1824-4FE4-9367-11DAF263DB83@.microsoft.com...
> I'd beg to differ. A VLDB is a VLDB. Regardless of what platform it is on,
> the challenges are the same or similar. In this case, if it is a very
> large
> table with little 'down time' for maintenance, running index rebuilds
> regularly (or even occasionally) is just not practical.
> Linchi
> "Tracy McKibben" wrote:
>> Robert Klemme wrote:
>> > On 25.09.2006 14:36, Uri Dimant wrote:
>> >> Yes , it is. I'd sugget you rebuild a heavy updated/inserted tables
>> >> to do that on weekly period
>> >
>> > Is that actually common practice with SQL Server? I have never read
>> > such a suggestion in Oracle land and it seems pretty impractical for
>> > DB's that are large or frequently used (24x7).
>> >
>> > Kind regards
>> >
>> > robert
>> Yes, it is, depending on the type of index, keys involved, etc. For
>> instance, an index build on a non-sequential key will fragment as new
>> key values are inserted into middle portions of the index.
>> Here's an article explaining it in more detail:
>> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/sj_detect_fragmentation.asp
>> I have a script that will check the fragmentation of each index,
>> rebuilding those that are badly fragmented:
>> http://realsqlguy.com/serendipity/archives/12-Humpty-Dumpty-Sat-On-A-Wall...html
>>
>> --
>> Tracy McKibben
>> MCDBA
>> http://www.realsqlguy.com

Performance degradation on sql server 2005

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Perfomance Questions

I have a few questions.
First: We have a quad Xeon 500MHz server running SQL2K
and Win2K. All SPs are applied. Sometimes the
performance becomes an issue. My boss wants me to go
through and kill some processes when that happens. Are
there any adverse reactions to that?
Second: We also have a Terminal Server with Win2k3
running. Does anyone know of any performance issues with
this?
Thanks.
DonDon,
If the solution is to kill processes, you need a better solution.
Killing a process naturally affects the user of that process. Depending on
how the client and T-SQL code is written this can range from harmless but
annoying to leaving data in a logically incomplete state. (It will not
physically corrupt the database, but logical corruption is just as
troublesome.)
The thing to do is investigate the processes that are candidates for
killing, figure out what is wrong, and help the developer/user to correct
the problems. (Famous bad query: multi-table cartesian product to get just
a few rows. Done by people who do not understand joining.)
Russell Fields
"Don" <donolwert@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0d3301c35c30$a7ecb780$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> I have a few questions.
> First: We have a quad Xeon 500MHz server running SQL2K
> and Win2K. All SPs are applied. Sometimes the
> performance becomes an issue. My boss wants me to go
> through and kill some processes when that happens. Are
> there any adverse reactions to that?
> Second: We also have a Terminal Server with Win2k3
> running. Does anyone know of any performance issues with
> this?
> Thanks.
> Don|||One time I puked because a process was killed.. I couldn't stand it.
MS
"chris" <chrisr@.fingps.com> wrote in message
news:057901c35c45$0c1de350$a101280a@.phx.gbl...
> My boss wants me to go
> >through and kill some processes when that happens. Are
> >there any adverse reactions to that?
> Other than users losing the work they were doing, no.
>
> >--Original Message--
> >I have a few questions.
> >
> >First: We have a quad Xeon 500MHz server running SQL2K
> >and Win2K. All SPs are applied. Sometimes the
> >performance becomes an issue. My boss wants me to go
> >through and kill some processes when that happens. Are
> >there any adverse reactions to that?
> >
> >Second: We also have a Terminal Server with Win2k3
> >running. Does anyone know of any performance issues with
> >this?
> >
> >Thanks.
> >Don
> >.
> >|||Russell,
Thanks for the good detailed information.
Don
>--Original Message--
>Don,
>If the solution is to kill processes, you need a better
solution.
>Killing a process naturally affects the user of that
process. Depending on
>how the client and T-SQL code is written this can range
from harmless but
>annoying to leaving data in a logically incomplete
state. (It will not
>physically corrupt the database, but logical corruption
is just as
>troublesome.)
>The thing to do is investigate the processes that are
candidates for
>killing, figure out what is wrong, and help the
developer/user to correct
>the problems. (Famous bad query: multi-table cartesian
product to get just
>a few rows. Done by people who do not understand
joining.)
>Russell Fields
>"Don" <donolwert@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:0d3301c35c30$a7ecb780$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
>> I have a few questions.
>> First: We have a quad Xeon 500MHz server running SQL2K
>> and Win2K. All SPs are applied. Sometimes the
>> performance becomes an issue. My boss wants me to go
>> through and kill some processes when that happens. Are
>> there any adverse reactions to that?
>> Second: We also have a Terminal Server with Win2k3
>> running. Does anyone know of any performance issues
with
>> this?
>> Thanks.
>> Don
>
>.
>

Monday, March 26, 2012

Performance degradation on sql server 2005

Performance degradation on sql server 2005

Performance degradation on sql server 2005

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Perfomance Questions

Percentage of total

Blog Archive

About Me