Showing posts with label sp3. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sp3. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Performance drecrease

Hello, I'm executing a sql sentence on my sql server 2000 sp3, and some times It takes about 3 sec to execute It... and some times It takes about 5 min and later 3 sec again and so on ....

Could you please explain me this behavior ? This is so confusing cause It souldn't be happening and I'm working alone in this server... then no other process is running here...

any suggestion?

Thanks,

is it the same query/procedure ... Update the statistics and check the indexes also... if need rebuilt that

Madhu

|||

Hello Julian,

As suggested by Madhu,please reindex and update stats before running the query again.

Is it a select statement with full outer joins and functions like convert etc.

There is a bug in SP3 that causes such behaviour with optimizer.

This has been fixed in SP4 + 2187.

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/830298/EN-US/

regards

Jag

|||

Hello Jag...

What does + 2187 mean?

|||

refer this:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=9C9AB140-BDEE-44DF-B7A3-E6849297754A&displaylang=en

Madhu

|||It means SP4 plus a hotfix to bring it up to build 2187|||Cheers Glen

Monday, March 26, 2012

performance degradation after several inserts

We have a VB6 app that uses an MSDE SP3 database. We use a process with
transactions to add data to the database. As several similar packets of data
are added we've noticed a degradation in the speed of loading the
information. We've also noticed that if at the end of the insert of several
packets of data we get a 30 second upload time per packet, then shut down
MSDE, start it up again and then insert in an almost identical packet of
data, it will run twice to 3 times faster.
We tried turning autoshrink and auclose off but that didn't seem to help.
Thanks,
Terry
hi Terry,
tgrignon wrote:
> We have a VB6 app that uses an MSDE SP3 database. We use a process
> with transactions to add data to the database. As several similar
> packets of data are added we've noticed a degradation in the speed of
> loading the information. We've also noticed that if at the end of
> the insert of several packets of data we get a 30 second upload time
> per packet, then shut down MSDE, start it up again and then insert in
> an almost identical packet of data, it will run twice to 3 times
> faster.
> We tried turning autoshrink and auclose off but that didn't seem to
> help.
it can depend on the transaction... if you load a big transaction, you will
see a degradation as the transaction size increses... you can perhaps
separate the load into separated transactions..
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.14.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.59.0
(my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
interface)
-- remove DMO to reply
|||Thanks for the reply Andrea!
The loads are separated into different transactions. If I use a monitor I
can see that memory use continues to grow with each load so it seems like
there is a memory leak somewhere.
We are planning to try:
DBCC FREEPROCCACHE
&
DBCC DROPCLEANBUFFERS
in between loads with our next build. Do you have any other suggestions?
multo grazie,
Terry
"Andrea Montanari" wrote:

> hi Terry,
> it can depend on the transaction... if you load a big transaction, you will
> see a degradation as the transaction size increses... you can perhaps
> separate the load into separated transactions..
> --
> Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
> http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
> DbaMgr2k ver 0.14.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.59.0
> (my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
> interface)
|||hi Terry,
tgrignon wrote:
> Thanks for the reply Andrea!
> The loads are separated into different transactions. If I use a
> monitor I can see that memory use continues to grow with each load so
> it seems like there is a memory leak somewhere.
not a memory leak (or at least...) ... just the standard SQL Server
behavior... plese see http://tinyurl.com/bvpg9 for some details on SQL
Server memory management...

> We are planning to try:
> DBCC FREEPROCCACHE
> &
> DBCC DROPCLEANBUFFERS
> in between loads with our next build. Do you have any other
> suggestions?
do not know I I like that
those to DBCC commands will actually clear the procedure cache... that
usually includes penalty executing statements due to recompilations of
stored procedures, plans, more I/O activity due to refetching of database
pages...
and more, a nasty security requirements for them... they require high
privileges...
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de..._dbcc_7q5l.asp
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de..._dbcc_512h.asp
that's to say sysadmins and serveradmins membership...
if I could eventually not speed up operations via separating the job into
multiple transactions, I'd think I'd stay with the time degradation...

> multo grazie,
prego, you are welcome
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.14.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.59.0
(my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
interface)
-- remove DMO to reply
|||I see what you mean about the permissions... but we tried
DBCC FREEPROCCACHE
in between loads and it works perfectly... the separate transaction loads
are back down to a manageable load time. I wonder if a stored procedure is
being left "on" somewhere in the code...
Any other ideas?
Thanks,
Terry
"Andrea Montanari" wrote:

> hi Terry,
> tgrignon wrote:
> not a memory leak (or at least...) ... just the standard SQL Server
> behavior... plese see http://tinyurl.com/bvpg9 for some details on SQL
> Server memory management...
>
> do not know I I like that
> those to DBCC commands will actually clear the procedure cache... that
> usually includes penalty executing statements due to recompilations of
> stored procedures, plans, more I/O activity due to refetching of database
> pages...
> and more, a nasty security requirements for them... they require high
> privileges...
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de..._dbcc_7q5l.asp
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de..._dbcc_512h.asp
> that's to say sysadmins and serveradmins membership...
> if I could eventually not speed up operations via separating the job into
> multiple transactions, I'd think I'd stay with the time degradation...
> prego, you are welcome
> --
> Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
> http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
> DbaMgr2k ver 0.14.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.59.0
> (my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
> interface)
> -- remove DMO to reply
>
>
|||hi,
tgrignon wrote:
> I see what you mean about the permissions... but we tried
> DBCC FREEPROCCACHE
> in between loads and it works perfectly... the separate transaction
> loads are back down to a manageable load time. I wonder if a stored
> procedure is being left "on" somewhere in the code...
no idea... you have to control

> Any other ideas?
nope..
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.14.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.59.0
(my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
interface)
-- remove DMO to reply

performance degradation

I am running a windows 2003 server with sql 2000 sp3.
I have 2 80GB databases. I also have an 8 way processor.
cpu is consistently above 80%.
what can i do to gain some performance improvements?
Thank you
You have to identify what exactly is resulting in high CPU utilization.
I would use Profiler to track down the long running and most CPU intensive
stored procedures and queries, and tune them.
Often, the lack of useful indexes results in performance problems.
You will probably find the following link helpful:
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/analyzing_profiler_output.htm
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Performance Tuning Technical Reference
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/sql_server_...nce_tuning.htm
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
Is .NET important for a database professional?
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/poll.htm
"RobinMC" <RobinMC@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BD5E933B-33C3-4A57-8FEE-C53D3505E1D3@.microsoft.com...
I am running a windows 2003 server with sql 2000 sp3.
I have 2 80GB databases. I also have an 8 way processor.
cpu is consistently above 80%.
what can i do to gain some performance improvements?
Thank you
|||RobinMC,
Have a look at the articles at www.sql-server-performance.com. Your
question is very general, and as such cannot be answered satisfactorily
here.
Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
http://www.markallison.co.uk
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
RobinMC wrote:
> I am running a windows 2003 server with sql 2000 sp3.
> I have 2 80GB databases. I also have an 8 way processor.
> cpu is consistently above 80%.
> what can i do to gain some performance improvements?
> Thank you

performance degradation

I am running a windows 2003 server with sql 2000 sp3.
I have 2 80GB databases. I also have an 8 way processor.
cpu is consistently above 80%.
what can i do to gain some performance improvements?
Thank youYou have to identify what exactly is resulting in high CPU utilization.
I would use Profiler to track down the long running and most CPU intensive
stored procedures and queries, and tune them.
Often, the lack of useful indexes results in performance problems.
You will probably find the following link helpful:
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/analyzing_profiler_output.htm
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Performance Tuning Technical Reference
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/sql_server...ance_tuning.htm
--
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
Is .NET important for a database professional?
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/poll.htm
"RobinMC" <RobinMC@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BD5E933B-33C3-4A57-8FEE-C53D3505E1D3@.microsoft.com...
I am running a windows 2003 server with sql 2000 sp3.
I have 2 80GB databases. I also have an 8 way processor.
cpu is consistently above 80%.
what can i do to gain some performance improvements?
Thank you|||RobinMC,
Have a look at the articles at www.sql-server-performance.com. Your
question is very general, and as such cannot be answered satisfactorily
here.
--
Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
http://www.markallison.co.uk
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
RobinMC wrote:
> I am running a windows 2003 server with sql 2000 sp3.
> I have 2 80GB databases. I also have an 8 way processor.
> cpu is consistently above 80%.
> what can i do to gain some performance improvements?
> Thank you

Friday, March 23, 2012

Performance Counters

Hi all.
I've got a SQL Server 2k sp3 on Win 2003.
It has the Performance Counters listed for SQL Server, but when I select any of the counters, they don't show any activity.
Any ideas?
Thanks,
Rick
Hi
You may want to check your event logs to see if anything is being
logged.
Check sysperfinfo to see what information is there.
Rebuild the performance counters:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;300956
John
|||"John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1109147319.860891.81450@.f14g2000cwb.googlegro ups.com...
> Hi
> You may want to check your event logs to see if anything is being
> logged.
> Check sysperfinfo to see what information is there.
> Rebuild the performance counters:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;300956
> John
>
Okay... nothing in the sysperinfo table. That would explain why the
counters are reading 0. I'm still trying to track down the problems
though. I will try the rebuild later today and see what happens.
Rick

Performance Counters

Hi all.
I've got a SQL Server 2k sp3 on Win 2003.
It has the Performance Counters listed for SQL Server, but when I select any
of the counters, they don't show any activity.
Any ideas?
Thanks,
RickHi
You may want to check your event logs to see if anything is being
logged.
Check sysperfinfo to see what information is there.
Rebuild the performance counters:
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;300956
John|||"John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1109147319.860891.81450@.f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Hi
> You may want to check your event logs to see if anything is being
> logged.
> Check sysperfinfo to see what information is there.
> Rebuild the performance counters:
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;300956
> John
>
Okay... nothing in the sysperinfo table. That would explain why the
counters are reading 0. I'm still trying to track down the problems
though. I will try the rebuild later today and see what happens.
Rick

Performance counter quest

Hi,
SQL2000 Standard sp3.
Windows 2000 server, 2 physical processors, Intel hyper threading tech.
I am running Performance monitor from another machine which is windows 2000 terminal , to monitor the above mentioned sqlserver. The output of the csv file showing total processor time > 300. I dont understand why it is showing instead of values < 100. I
n that machine i can see .NET CLR counters also. Is this behaviour because of .NET?
(PDH-CSV 4.0) (Pacific Daylight Time)(420)\\AB01\Process(_Total)\% Privileged Time\\AB01\Process(_Total)\% Processor Time
4/13/04 5:00 AM349.7912317399.6868476
4/13/04 5:00 AM350399.8958333
4/13/04 5:00 AM399.7918835399.8959417
4/13/04 5:01 AM343.8541667399.6875
How can i take the processor time to calculate cpu usage? Any help appreciated
thanks
kris
Look at the Processor(_Total)\% Processor Time for values that you expect.
Some of the counters are explained at :
http://www.extremeexperts.com/sql/ar...LCounters.aspx
HTH,
Vinod Kumar
MCSE, DBA, MCAD, MCSD
http://www.extremeexperts.com
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...2000/books.asp
"kris" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BF219D19-16FC-40DD-8728-31A2E8E2580A@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> SQL2000 Standard sp3.
> Windows 2000 server, 2 physical processors, Intel hyper threading tech.
> I am running Performance monitor from another machine which is windows
2000 terminal , to monitor the above mentioned sqlserver. The output of the
csv file showing total processor time > 300. I dont understand why it is
showing instead of values < 100. In that machine i can see .NET CLR
counters also. Is this behaviour because of .NET?
> (PDH-CSV 4.0) (Pacific Daylight Time)(420) \\AB01\Process(_Total)\%
Privileged Time \\AB01\Process(_Total)\% Processor Time
> 4/13/04 5:00 AM 349.7912317 399.6868476
> 4/13/04 5:00 AM 350 399.8958333
> 4/13/04 5:00 AM 399.7918835 399.8959417
> 4/13/04 5:01 AM 343.8541667 399.6875
> How can i take the processor time to calculate cpu usage? Any help
appreciated
> thanks
> kris
>
>

Performance counter quest

Hi
SQL2000 Standard sp3.
Windows 2000 server, 2 physical processors, Intel hyper threading tech
I am running Performance monitor from another machine which is windows 2000 terminal , to monitor the above mentioned sqlserver. The output of the csv file showing total processor time > 300. I dont understand why it is showing instead of values < 100. In that machine i can see .NET CLR counters also. Is this behaviour because of .NET
(PDH-CSV 4.0) (Pacific Daylight Time)(420) \\AB01\Process(_Total)\% Privileged Time \\AB01\Process(_Total)\% Processor Tim
4/13/04 5:00 AM 349.7912317 399.686847
4/13/04 5:00 AM 350 399.895833
4/13/04 5:00 AM 399.7918835 399.895941
4/13/04 5:01 AM 343.8541667 399.687
How can i take the processor time to calculate cpu usage? Any help appreciate
thank
kriLook at the Processor(_Total)\% Processor Time for values that you expect.
Some of the counters are explained at :
http://www.extremeexperts.com/sql/articles/SQLCounters.aspx
--
HTH,
Vinod Kumar
MCSE, DBA, MCAD, MCSD
http://www.extremeexperts.com
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/productdoc/2000/books.asp
"kris" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BF219D19-16FC-40DD-8728-31A2E8E2580A@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> SQL2000 Standard sp3.
> Windows 2000 server, 2 physical processors, Intel hyper threading tech.
> I am running Performance monitor from another machine which is windows
2000 terminal , to monitor the above mentioned sqlserver. The output of the
csv file showing total processor time > 300. I dont understand why it is
showing instead of values < 100. In that machine i can see .NET CLR
counters also. Is this behaviour because of .NET?
> (PDH-CSV 4.0) (Pacific Daylight Time)(420) \\AB01\Process(_Total)\%
Privileged Time \\AB01\Process(_Total)\% Processor Time
> 4/13/04 5:00 AM 349.7912317 399.6868476
> 4/13/04 5:00 AM 350 399.8958333
> 4/13/04 5:00 AM 399.7918835 399.8959417
> 4/13/04 5:01 AM 343.8541667 399.6875
> How can i take the processor time to calculate cpu usage? Any help
appreciated
> thanks
> kris
>
>

Performance counter quest

Hi,
SQL2000 Standard sp3.
Windows 2000 server, 2 physical processors, Intel hyper threading tech.
I am running Performance monitor from another machine which is Windows 2000
terminal , to monitor the above mentioned sqlserver. The output of the csv f
ile showing total processor time > 300. I dont understand why it is showing
instead of values < 100. I
n that machine i can see .NET CLR counters also. Is this behaviour because o
f .NET?
(PDH-CSV 4.0) (Pacific Daylight Time)(420) \\AB01\Process(_Total)\% Privileg
ed Time \\AB01\Process(_Total)\% Processor Time
4/13/04 5:00 AM 349.7912317 399.6868476
4/13/04 5:00 AM 350 399.8958333
4/13/04 5:00 AM 399.7918835 399.8959417
4/13/04 5:01 AM 343.8541667 399.6875
How can i take the processor time to calculate cpu usage? Any help appreciat
ed
thanks
krisLook at the Processor(_Total)\% Processor Time for values that you expect.
Some of the counters are explained at :
http://www.extremeexperts.com/sql/a...QLCounters.aspx
HTH,
Vinod Kumar
MCSE, DBA, MCAD, MCSD
http://www.extremeexperts.com
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp
"kris" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BF219D19-16FC-40DD-8728-31A2E8E2580A@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> SQL2000 Standard sp3.
> Windows 2000 server, 2 physical processors, Intel hyper threading tech.
> I am running Performance monitor from another machine which is windows
2000 terminal , to monitor the above mentioned sqlserver. The output of the
csv file showing total processor time > 300. I dont understand why it is
showing instead of values < 100. In that machine i can see .NET CLR
counters also. Is this behaviour because of .NET?
> (PDH-CSV 4.0) (Pacific Daylight Time)(420) \\AB01\Process(_Total)\%
Privileged Time \\AB01\Process(_Total)\% Processor Time
> 4/13/04 5:00 AM 349.7912317 399.6868476
> 4/13/04 5:00 AM 350 399.8958333
> 4/13/04 5:00 AM 399.7918835 399.8959417
> 4/13/04 5:01 AM 343.8541667 399.6875
> How can i take the processor time to calculate cpu usage? Any help
appreciated
> thanks
> kris
>
>

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

performance condition alerts are not working

Hi,

I've a problem with my alerts on a SQL 2000 SP3.

I can not add sql server performance condition alerts. The table master..Sysperfinfo is empty.
And the existing ones doe not work properly.

I've already tried unlodctr & lodctr en rebooted the server more than once. But it didn't work.

Can someone help me with this problem ? thanks !!!When you open up performance monitor, do you have any performance counters that work?|||the other performance counters are working. It seems that only sql performance counters aren't working.|||If you go to www.microsoft.com and type in "sql server missing performance counters", the first two posts deal with this issue. See if those help you out.|||I work with sql 2000 sp3 and those solutions apply to sql 6.5 and 7.0. But I do have installed a hotfix of Mdac.
Should I try the workaround described in http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;246328 , although it doesn't mention sql 2000 ?|||I'd check a previous thread (http://www.dbforums.com/t1003397.html) for ideas!

To borrow a line from a signature at SQLTeam.com:

<yoda>
Use the search feature you must. Answers you will find.
</yoda>

-PatP|||I've checked the previous threads and tried some ideas (unlodctr and lodctr) but it didn't work.
can anyone give me another solution ?

THANKSsql

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Performance between SP3 and SP4

We have the following select statement
SELECT 1 FROM DAT_SAMPLES D , WRK_SELECT W
WHERE W.TRANSACTIONID = 53364
AND D.ID = W.RECORDID
AND D.APPROVAL IS NOT NULL
AND NOT ( D.APPROVAL = 1 AND D.APPROVEDBY = 'SYSTEM' )
There are approx 350000 records in DAT_SAMPLES with a clustered index
on ID
and 1 record in WRK_SELECT
Executing the above query in SQLServer 2000 with SP3 takes < 1 second
Executing the same query against the same database connected to
SQLServer 2000 SP4 take approx 30 seconds
Looking at the execution plans SP3 performs a Nested Loop/inner join,
but SP4 performs a Merge Join/Inner Loop
I have attempted to rewrite the query using EXISTS and IN with the same
results.
Has anybody else come across similar performance issues with SP4Having you made sure that statistics are up to date on both servers/database
s?
I do recall having read about different algorithms being used between SPs,
but can't remember which SPs (might have been 2 & 3.)
Also, might a FROM...WITH help?
"Warren" wrote:

> We have the following select statement
> SELECT 1 FROM DAT_SAMPLES D , WRK_SELECT W
> WHERE W.TRANSACTIONID = 53364
> AND D.ID = W.RECORDID
> AND D.APPROVAL IS NOT NULL
> AND NOT ( D.APPROVAL = 1 AND D.APPROVEDBY = 'SYSTEM' )
> There are approx 350000 records in DAT_SAMPLES with a clustered index
> on ID
> and 1 record in WRK_SELECT
> Executing the above query in SQLServer 2000 with SP3 takes < 1 second
> Executing the same query against the same database connected to
> SQLServer 2000 SP4 take approx 30 seconds
> Looking at the execution plans SP3 performs a Nested Loop/inner join,
> but SP4 performs a Merge Join/Inner Loop
> I have attempted to rewrite the query using EXISTS and IN with the same
> results.
> Has anybody else come across similar performance issues with SP4
>|||I had updated all statistics and also tried a FROM... WITH, neither had
any effect.
I have identified the problem being that the WRK_SELECT.RECORDID is a
DECIMAL(10,0) and the DAT_SAMPLES.ID is a DECIMAL(9,0). This did not
cause any problem with SP3, but with SP4 it only works if I change
RECORDID to DECIMAL(9,0), or use CONVERT in the query.

Friday, March 9, 2012

Performance - SQLServer:Buffer Manager Free pages

Hi
Envinnment : Windows 2003 SQLServer 2000 sp3 with AWE enabled
While performance monitoring in the low peak time, I saw the SQLServer:
Buffer Manager - Free pages = 1768 and came down till 500 and back to 1398.
I gathered form sysperfinfo the following
Buffer Cache database pages8360 MB
Free pages10 MB
Procedure Cache Allocated1377 MB
Is any thing wrong with Buffer Manger? because of free space came down? Is
there any lower limit for free pages?
Thanks for looking this issue
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200510/1
sorry to add total memory . 12GB
Dedicated to SQL = 10.5 GB
kpxus wrote:
>Hi
>Envinnment : Windows 2003 SQLServer 2000 sp3 with AWE enabled
>While performance monitoring in the low peak time, I saw the SQLServer:
>Buffer Manager - Free pages = 1768 and came down till 500 and back to 1398.
>I gathered form sysperfinfo the following
>Buffer Cache database pages8360 MB
>Free pages10 MB
>Procedure Cache Allocated1377 MB
>Is any thing wrong with Buffer Manger? because of free space came down? Is
>there any lower limit for free pages?
>Thanks for looking this issue
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200510/1
|||Hi
To use the Buffer Cache Hit Ratio.
I use that along with SQLServer:MemoryManager\Total Server Memory(KB)
and SQLServer:MemoryManager\Target Server Memory(KB). Total and Target
values should be equal.
Target should never be higher than Total. Target is how much SQL
Server would like to use and Total is how much it currently has.
HTH
From
Doller
|||Total and target memory are same 10.506 MB
doller wrote:
>Hi
>To use the Buffer Cache Hit Ratio.
>I use that along with SQLServer:MemoryManager\Total Server Memory(KB)
>and SQLServer:MemoryManager\Target Server Memory(KB). Total and Target
>values should be equal.
> Target should never be higher than Total. Target is how much SQL
>Server would like to use and Total is how much it currently has.
>HTH
>From
>Doller
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200510/1

Performance - SQLServer:Buffer Manager Free pages

Hi
Envinnment : Windows 2003 SQLServer 2000 sp3 with AWE enabled
While performance monitoring in the low peak time, I saw the SQLServer:
Buffer Manager - Free pages = 1768 and came down till 500 and back to 1398.
I gathered form sysperfinfo the following
Buffer Cache database pages 8360 MB
Free pages 10 MB
Procedure Cache Allocated 1377 MB
Is any thing wrong with Buffer Manger? because of free space came down? Is
there any lower limit for free pages?
Thanks for looking this issue
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...server/200510/1sorry to add total memory . 12GB
Dedicated to SQL = 10.5 GB
kpxus wrote:
>Hi
>Envinnment : Windows 2003 SQLServer 2000 sp3 with AWE enabled
>While performance monitoring in the low peak time, I saw the SQLServer:
>Buffer Manager - Free pages = 1768 and came down till 500 and back to 1398.
>I gathered form sysperfinfo the following
>Buffer Cache database pages 8360 MB
>Free pages 10 MB
>Procedure Cache Allocated 1377 MB
>Is any thing wrong with Buffer Manger? because of free space came down? Is
>there any lower limit for free pages?
>Thanks for looking this issue
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...server/200510/1|||Hi
To use the Buffer Cache Hit Ratio.
I use that along with SQLServer:MemoryManager\Total Server Memory(KB)
and SQLServer:MemoryManager\Target Server Memory(KB). Total and Target
values should be equal.
Target should never be higher than Total. Target is how much SQL
Server would like to use and Total is how much it currently has.
HTH
From
Doller|||Total and target memory are same 10.506 MB
doller wrote:
>Hi
>To use the Buffer Cache Hit Ratio.
>I use that along with SQLServer:MemoryManager\Total Server Memory(KB)
>and SQLServer:MemoryManager\Target Server Memory(KB). Total and Target
>values should be equal.
> Target should never be higher than Total. Target is how much SQL
>Server would like to use and Total is how much it currently has.
>HTH
>From
>Doller
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...server/200510/1

Performance - SQLServer:Buffer Manager Free pages

Hi
Envinnment : Windows 2003 SQLServer 2000 sp3 with AWE enabled
While performance monitoring in the low peak time, I saw the SQLServer:
Buffer Manager - Free pages = 1768 and came down till 500 and back to 1398.
I gathered form sysperfinfo the following
Buffer Cache database pages 8360 MB
Free pages 10 MB
Procedure Cache Allocated 1377 MB
Is any thing wrong with Buffer Manger? because of free space came down? Is
there any lower limit for free pages?
Thanks for looking this issue
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200510/1sorry to add total memory . 12GB
Dedicated to SQL = 10.5 GB
kpxus wrote:
>Hi
>Envinnment : Windows 2003 SQLServer 2000 sp3 with AWE enabled
>While performance monitoring in the low peak time, I saw the SQLServer:
>Buffer Manager - Free pages = 1768 and came down till 500 and back to 1398.
>I gathered form sysperfinfo the following
>Buffer Cache database pages 8360 MB
>Free pages 10 MB
>Procedure Cache Allocated 1377 MB
>Is any thing wrong with Buffer Manger? because of free space came down? Is
>there any lower limit for free pages?
>Thanks for looking this issue
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200510/1|||Hi
To use the Buffer Cache Hit Ratio.
I use that along with SQLServer:MemoryManager\Total Server Memory(KB)
and SQLServer:MemoryManager\Target Server Memory(KB). Total and Target
values should be equal.
Target should never be higher than Total. Target is how much SQL
Server would like to use and Total is how much it currently has.
HTH
From
Doller|||Total and target memory are same 10.506 MB
doller wrote:
>Hi
>To use the Buffer Cache Hit Ratio.
>I use that along with SQLServer:MemoryManager\Total Server Memory(KB)
>and SQLServer:MemoryManager\Target Server Memory(KB). Total and Target
>values should be equal.
> Target should never be higher than Total. Target is how much SQL
>Server would like to use and Total is how much it currently has.
>HTH
>From
>Doller
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200510/1

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Performace montior

HI..
I have window s server 2003 with swl server 2000 sp3
I need to monitor some sql memory counter for that i have start preformace
counter for sql but when i will try to start that couter in prefomance
monitor it gives me following error
"The service was unable to add the counter '\SQLServer:Memory
Manager\Connection Memory (KB)' to the SQLServerMemory log or alert. This
log or alert will continue, but data for that counter will not be collected.
The error returned is: The specified object is not found on the system.
. "
also i check that i am administrator and i login as administrator
pls help
-TPHi,
I had problem with SQL performance counters and following article helped me
to solve my problem.
If you see any error messages in SQL Error Log like:
Performance monitor shared memory setup failed: -1
Then check the article:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;812915&sd=tech
Which account are you using in Performance Logs and Alerts service?
Did you try LODCTR, UNLODCTR?
"tp" wrote:
> HI..
> I have window s server 2003 with swl server 2000 sp3
> I need to monitor some sql memory counter for that i have start preformace
> counter for sql but when i will try to start that couter in prefomance
> monitor it gives me following error
> "The service was unable to add the counter '\SQLServer:Memory
> Manager\Connection Memory (KB)' to the SQLServerMemory log or alert. This
> log or alert will continue, but data for that counter will not be collected.
> The error returned is: The specified object is not found on the system.
> . "
> also i check that i am administrator and i login as administrator
> pls help
> -TP
>