Memory settings on 2005 32 bit where >4gb ram?
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup only
 
Advanced search
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

microsoft ... sqlserver.setup Profile…
 Up
Memory settings on 2005 32 bit where >4gb ram?         


Date: Aug 29, 2007 12:02

Ok, I've got a SQL cluster where the nodes:
Windows 2003 R2 Enterprise (32 bit)
SQL 2005 Enterprise
Quad processors
24gb Ram

These boxes are dedicated SQL boxes, no other meaningful roles. And I can't
quite figure out the best way to configure the Ram. I have it so:

Boot.ini (added the /PAE switch)
SQL enabled the AWE

But I'm starting to see:
Process physical/virtual memory pressure: 0/0 System physical memory
pressure: 0
and (at different times)
There is insufficient system memory to run this query.

What is the appropriate configuration for memory here? Unfortunately, we're
running on a 32 bit hardward platform, so upgrading to 64 at this point is
not an option.

Thanks for any input!

Bob Coppedge
6 Comments
Re: Memory settings on 2005 32 bit where >4gb ram?         


Author: Andrew J. Kelly
Date: Aug 29, 2007 12:19

Is there just one instance or is this a multi-instance cluster? What is
the MAX Memory set to?

--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors

"RL Coppedge" hotmail.com.(nospam)> wrote in message
news:DEB7D508-7554-4801-8F32-A83794779FEB@microsoft.com...
> Ok, I've got a SQL cluster where the nodes:
> Windows 2003 R2 Enterprise ...
Show full article (1.06Kb)
no comments
Re: Memory settings on 2005 32 bit where >4gb ram?         


Date: Aug 29, 2007 12:34

Thanks for the fast reply:

One instance
Min 10240 MB
Max 25600 MB

Bob

"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> Is there just one instance or is this a multi-instance cluster? What is
> the MAX Memory set to?
>
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> Solid Quality Mentors
>
>
> "RL Coppedge"
Show full article (1.25Kb)
no comments
Re: Memory settings on 2005 32 bit where >4gb ram?         


Author: Andrew J. Kelly
Date: Aug 29, 2007 14:06

That's your problem. You need to leave a generous amount of memory to the OS
and any other apps that may require it. You set the limit to 25GB which is
more than what you say you have. If you really only have 24GB on the server
I would set it no higher than 21GB to begin with. Why are you setting a MIN
if this is the only thing on the server?

--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors

"RL Coppedge" hotmail.com.(nospam)> wrote in message
news:AA92C862-C11C-4ACF-B026-C8081C07148D@microsoft.com...
> Thanks for the fast reply:
>
> One instance
> Min 10240 MB
> Max 25600 MB...
Show full article (1.84Kb)
no comments
Re: Memory settings on 2005 32 bit where >4gb ram?         


Date: Aug 30, 2007 07:18

I read on one article that setting helped performance starting up. It was on
the Internet, so I figured it to be right.

Ok (and yes, we have 24gb, scout's honor), so you're recommending changing to:

min: 0
max: 21gb?

(thanks for your help)
Bob

"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> That's your problem. You need to leave a generous amount of memory to the OS
> and any other apps that may require it. You set the limit to 25GB which is
> more than what you say you have. If you really...
Show full article (2.26Kb)
no comments
Re: Memory settings on 2005 32 bit where >4gb ram?         


Author: Andrew J. Kelly
Date: Aug 30, 2007 08:31

I don't expect the MIN to make too much of a difference one way or the other
but it is unnecessary in your case and why change a default when you don't
need to. But the MAX is a problem and yes I would start at 21GB. You may
be able to bump it up a little more later on but I would want 2GB for the OS
and the other 1GB for misc to start.

--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors

"RL Coppedge" hotmail.com.(nospam)> wrote in message
news:13D13AE0-D60A-44F3-BB71-9C5DDA7432AB@microsoft.com...
>I read on one article that setting helped performance starting up. It was...
Show full article (2.93Kb)
no comments
Re: Memory settings on 2005 32 bit where >4gb ram?         


Date: Aug 30, 2007 08:48

We'll give it a shot. Thanks!

Bob

"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> I don't expect the MIN to make too much of a difference one way or the other
> but it is unnecessary in your case and why change a default when you don't
> need to. But the MAX is a problem and yes...
Show full article (3.20Kb)
no comments