Connect to REMOTE SQL server

Hello!
I have a SQL server standard Edition installed in a Server, and the other
( Standard Edition - but only client tool) installed in a Client (using
Windows XP). Please tell me how to connect from Client computer to Server(
in local network) , When I was trying to connect, it could not connect and
return a message:" Can not found server. ConnectionOpen(Connect())"
Pls help me!
Thanks in advance!
Hi,
This error can come in below situations:-
1. SQL Server is down
2. Your client network issues. Try a ping to server and check the network
connection
3. Providing wrong SQL server name.
If all the above is OK, then create a ALIAS server name using the CLient
network utility specifying protocol as TCIP , IP address , port number.
After that try to connect using that ALIAS name.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Chi Pheo" <chipheo2k@.mail.ru> wrote in message
news:e0oYy44vEHA.824@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> I have a SQL server standard Edition installed in a Server, and the other
> ( Standard Edition - but only client tool) installed in a Client (using
> Windows XP). Please tell me how to connect from Client computer to Server(
> in local network) , When I was trying to connect, it could not connect and
> return a message:" Can not found server. ConnectionOpen(Connect())"
> Pls help me!
> Thanks in advance!
>
|||Hi, Thanks so much!
But nothing better.
My SQL Server is installed in a Computer with Win 2000 server , to access to
this Computer (in local network) I must log in as Administrator (means that,
when i use Windows Explorer, and type the IP address as 172.16.18.6, it
requires to enter user name, and i type Administrator). So I don't know if
it prevents us to connect to SQL server or not?
I tried to test by Ping 172.16.18.6, it's OK. I openned CLient Network
utility and in TCP/IP, I type Alias MyServer, IP: 172.16.18.6 and port 1433.
But when I connect as "sa", it shows: login failed for 'sa'. Not associated
with a trusted SQL server connection.
Thanks for all your helps!
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> /
: news:uCmhJq6vEHA.4028@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> This error can come in below situations:-
> 1. SQL Server is down
> 2. Your client network issues. Try a ping to server and check the network
> connection
> 3. Providing wrong SQL server name.
> If all the above is OK, then create a ALIAS server name using the CLient
> network utility specifying protocol as TCIP , IP address , port number.
> After that try to connect using that ALIAS name.
>
> --
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
>
> "Chi Pheo" <chipheo2k@.mail.ru> wrote in message
> news:e0oYy44vEHA.824@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
other[vbcol=seagreen]
Server([vbcol=seagreen]
and
>

Connect to REMOTE SQL server

Hello!
I have a SQL server standard Edition installed in a Server, and the other
( Standard Edition - but only client tool) installed in a Client (using
Windows XP). Please tell me how to connect from Client computer to Server(
in local network) , When I was trying to connect, it could not connect and
return a message:" Can not found server. ConnectionOpen(Connect())"
Pls help me!
Thanks in advance!Hi,
This error can come in below situations:-
1. SQL Server is down
2. Your client network issues. Try a ping to server and check the network
connection
3. Providing wrong SQL server name.
If all the above is OK, then create a ALIAS server name using the CLient
network utility specifying protocol as TCIP , IP address , port number.
After that try to connect using that ALIAS name.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Chi Pheo" <chipheo2k@.mail.ru> wrote in message
news:e0oYy44vEHA.824@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> I have a SQL server standard Edition installed in a Server, and the other
> ( Standard Edition - but only client tool) installed in a Client (using
> Windows XP). Please tell me how to connect from Client computer to Server(
> in local network) , When I was trying to connect, it could not connect and
> return a message:" Can not found server. ConnectionOpen(Connect())"
> Pls help me!
> Thanks in advance!
>|||Hi, Thanks so much!
But nothing better.
My SQL Server is installed in a Computer with Win 2000 server , to access to
this Computer (in local network) I must log in as Administrator (means that,
when i use Windows Explorer, and type the IP address as 172.16.18.6, it
requires to enter user name, and i type Administrator). So I don't know if
it prevents us to connect to SQL server or not'
I tried to test by Ping 172.16.18.6, it's OK. I openned CLient Network
utility and in TCP/IP, I type Alias MyServer, IP: 172.16.18.6 and port 1433.
But when I connect as "sa", it shows: login failed for 'sa'. Not associated
with a trusted SQL server connection.
Thanks for all your helps!
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> /
: news:uCmhJq6vEHA.4028@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> This error can come in below situations:-
> 1. SQL Server is down
> 2. Your client network issues. Try a ping to server and check the network
> connection
> 3. Providing wrong SQL server name.
> If all the above is OK, then create a ALIAS server name using the CLient
> network utility specifying protocol as TCIP , IP address , port number.
> After that try to connect using that ALIAS name.
>
> --
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
>
> "Chi Pheo" <chipheo2k@.mail.ru> wrote in message
> news:e0oYy44vEHA.824@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
other[vbcol=seagreen]
Server([vbcol=seagreen]
and[vbcol=seagreen]
>

Connect to REMOTE SQL server

Hello!
I have a SQL server standard Edition installed in a Server, and the other
( Standard Edition - but only client tool) installed in a Client (using
Windows XP). Please tell me how to connect from Client computer to Server(
in local network) , When I was trying to connect, it could not connect and
return a message:" Can not found server. ConnectionOpen(Connect())"
Pls help me!
Thanks in advance!Hi,
This error can come in below situations:-
1. SQL Server is down
2. Your client network issues. Try a ping to server and check the network
connection
3. Providing wrong SQL server name.
If all the above is OK, then create a ALIAS server name using the CLient
network utility specifying protocol as TCIP , IP address , port number.
After that try to connect using that ALIAS name.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Chi Pheo" <chipheo2k@.mail.ru> wrote in message
news:e0oYy44vEHA.824@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> I have a SQL server standard Edition installed in a Server, and the other
> ( Standard Edition - but only client tool) installed in a Client (using
> Windows XP). Please tell me how to connect from Client computer to Server(
> in local network) , When I was trying to connect, it could not connect and
> return a message:" Can not found server. ConnectionOpen(Connect())"
> Pls help me!
> Thanks in advance!
>|||Hi, Thanks so much!
But nothing better.
My SQL Server is installed in a Computer with Win 2000 server , to access to
this Computer (in local network) I must log in as Administrator (means that,
when i use Windows Explorer, and type the IP address as 172.16.18.6, it
requires to enter user name, and i type Administrator). So I don't know if
it prevents us to connect to SQL server or not'
I tried to test by Ping 172.16.18.6, it's OK. I openned CLient Network
utility and in TCP/IP, I type Alias MyServer, IP: 172.16.18.6 and port 1433.
But when I connect as "sa", it shows: login failed for 'sa'. Not associated
with a trusted SQL server connection.
Thanks for all your helps!
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌ/ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌÁ × ÎÏ×ÏÓÔÑÈ
ÓÌÅÄÕÀÝÅÅ: news:uCmhJq6vEHA.4028@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> This error can come in below situations:-
> 1. SQL Server is down
> 2. Your client network issues. Try a ping to server and check the network
> connection
> 3. Providing wrong SQL server name.
> If all the above is OK, then create a ALIAS server name using the CLient
> network utility specifying protocol as TCIP , IP address , port number.
> After that try to connect using that ALIAS name.
>
> --
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
>
> "Chi Pheo" <chipheo2k@.mail.ru> wrote in message
> news:e0oYy44vEHA.824@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > Hello!
> > I have a SQL server standard Edition installed in a Server, and the
other
> > ( Standard Edition - but only client tool) installed in a Client (using
> > Windows XP). Please tell me how to connect from Client computer to
Server(
> > in local network) , When I was trying to connect, it could not connect
and
> > return a message:" Can not found server. ConnectionOpen(Connect())"
> > Pls help me!
> > Thanks in advance!
> >
> >
>sqlsql

Connect to remote instance of SSIS from SSMS using SQL Login?

I have installed a SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition instance with SSIS on Window Server 2003 x64. From my PC, I am able to connect to the Integration Services on the server using Windows Authentication but not with a local SQL login - and the option to change authentication methods is greyed out.

Is it possible to remotely connect to SSIS using a SQL login rather than a Windows login? If so, any ideas or references for configuring it as such?

Thanks.

- Lance

Per the post linked below, it's not supported.

http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=316143&SiteID=1

Connect to CE Remotely

If I have SQL 2005 Standard installed on a server and I log on locally to that server. Can I connect to other machines through Management Studio-->Object Explorer that have SQLCE installed and manage the CE DB?

I think you can only connect to either local .sdf files or ones located on a device attached by USB to the local machine, but I have had some difficulty finding a definitive statement on that.

Thanks

SQL CE is in process database (a bunch of DLLs loaded by your application) , it has no remote connectivity. There’s a very special remote provider which allows you to access files on device from desktop.

You also might be able to “connect” (quoted because you’re not really connecting to anything – SQL CE is within your process) to the database located on a file shares though it might have some issues like sharing.

Connect to another server?

I am developing on a 2005 SQL Server Developer edition and trying to connnect
to a 2005 SQL Server Standard edition.
I have set up an alias to the Standard machine on the Developer machine, using
an IP address and port 1433. But this server does not show up when Browsing for
Servers from the Developer machine. And, yes, I can ping from Developer to
Standard. The connection is a VPN.
Strangely, I can Browse for Servers from the Standard to Developer - but only
see 8.0 instances on the Developer, not the 9.0 instance on the Developer.
Are you not allowed to see other servers from Developer?
Thanks, Flomo
Niall,
Surface Area on the Developer machine was already set to use TCP/IP for remote
connections. And I can see the Developer machine from the Standard machine, but
only v8.0 instances.
Thanks, Flomo
In article <uXSlJzsbHHA.2088@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl>, ei.2o@.naganalfdn says...
> Flomo,
> SQL Sever 2005 Surface Area Configuration for Express, Evaluation &
> Developer Editions allows local connections only by default. This can be
> changed under remote connections. This is is why you cannot see the SQL
> Servef 2005 developer edition from any other machine.
> It might also impact the aliasing.
> regards,
> Niall Flanagan.
> SQL Server MVP, Ireland.
> "Flomo Togba Kwele" <flomo@.community.nospam> wrote in message
> news:MPG.206fa1f2eaa2eb9f9896a4@.news.covad.net...
>
>
|||Hello Flomo,
Could you please refer this article to troubleshoot the connectivity issue?
827422How to troubleshoot connectivity issues in SQL Server 2000
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;827422
Although this article is about SQL 2000, it also applied for sql 2005.
Sincerely,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Community Support
==================================================
Get notification to my posts through email? Please refer to
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/managednewsgroups/default.aspx#notif
ications.
Note: The MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues
where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support
Engineer within 1 business day is acceptable. Please note that each follow
up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support
professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the
most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations
that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions or complex
project analysis and dump analysis issues. Issues of this nature are best
handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer by contacting
Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/support/default.aspx.
==================================================
(This posting is provided "AS IS", with no warranties, and confers no
rights.)
|||If you are using named instances, SQL Browser service must be enabled and
started.
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
"Larry Marshall" <flomo@.community.nospam> wrote in message
news:MPG.207060e91e90042f989680@.news.giganews.com. ..[vbcol=seagreen]
> Niall,
> Surface Area on the Developer machine was already set to use TCP/IP for
> remote
> connections. And I can see the Developer machine from the Standard
> machine, but
> only v8.0 instances.
> Thanks, Flomo
> In article <uXSlJzsbHHA.2088@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl>, ei.2o@.naganalfdn
> says...
|||Hi ,
How is everything going? Please feel free to let me know if you need any
assistance.
Sincerely,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Community Support
==================================================
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
==================================================
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Connect to another server?

I am developing on a 2005 SQL Server Developer edition and trying to connnec
t
to a 2005 SQL Server Standard edition.
I have set up an alias to the Standard machine on the Developer machine, usi
ng
an IP address and port 1433. But this server does not show up when Browsing
for
Servers from the Developer machine. And, yes, I can ping from Developer to
Standard. The connection is a VPN.
Strangely, I can Browse for Servers from the Standard to Developer - but onl
y
see 8.0 instances on the Developer, not the 9.0 instance on the Developer.
Are you not allowed to see other servers from Developer?
Thanks, FlomoFlomo,
SQL Sever 2005 Surface Area Configuration for Express, Evaluation &
Developer Editions allows local connections only by default. This can be
changed under remote connections. This is is why you cannot see the SQL
Servef 2005 developer edition from any other machine.
It might also impact the aliasing.
regards,
Niall Flanagan.
SQL Server MVP, Ireland.
"Flomo Togba Kwele" <flomo@.community.nospam> wrote in message
news:MPG.206fa1f2eaa2eb9f9896a4@.news.covad.net...
>I am developing on a 2005 SQL Server Developer edition and trying to
>connnect
> to a 2005 SQL Server Standard edition.
> I have set up an alias to the Standard machine on the Developer machine,
> using
> an IP address and port 1433. But this server does not show up when
> Browsing for
> Servers from the Developer machine. And, yes, I can ping from Developer to
> Standard. The connection is a VPN.
> Strangely, I can Browse for Servers from the Standard to Developer - but
> only
> see 8.0 instances on the Developer, not the 9.0 instance on the Developer.
> Are you not allowed to see other servers from Developer?
> Thanks, Flomo|||Niall,
Surface Area on the Developer machine was already set to use TCP/IP for remo
te
connections. And I can see the Developer machine from the Standard machine,
but
only v8.0 instances.
Thanks, Flomo
In article <uXSlJzsbHHA.2088@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl>, ei.2o@.naganalfdn says...
> Flomo,
> SQL Sever 2005 Surface Area Configuration for Express, Evaluation &
> Developer Editions allows local connections only by default. This can be
> changed under remote connections. This is is why you cannot see the SQL
> Servef 2005 developer edition from any other machine.
> It might also impact the aliasing.
> regards,
> Niall Flanagan.
> SQL Server MVP, Ireland.
> "Flomo Togba Kwele" <flomo@.community.nospam> wrote in message
> news:MPG.206fa1f2eaa2eb9f9896a4@.news.covad.net...
>
>|||Hello Flomo,
Could you please refer this article to troubleshoot the connectivity issue?
827422 How to troubleshoot connectivity issues in SQL Server 2000
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;EN-US;827422
Although this article is about SQL 2000, it also applied for sql 2005.
Sincerely,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Community Support
========================================
==========
Get notification to my posts through email? Please refer to
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscript...ault.aspx#notif
ications.
Note: The MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues
where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support
Engineer within 1 business day is acceptable. Please note that each follow
up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support
professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the
most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations
that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions or complex
project analysis and dump analysis issues. Issues of this nature are best
handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer by contacting
Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscript...t/default.aspx.
========================================
==========
(This posting is provided "AS IS", with no warranties, and confers no
rights.)|||If you are using named instances, SQL Browser service must be enabled and
started.
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
"Larry Marshall" <flomo@.community.nospam> wrote in message
news:MPG.207060e91e90042f989680@.news.giganews.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Niall,
> Surface Area on the Developer machine was already set to use TCP/IP for
> remote
> connections. And I can see the Developer machine from the Standard
> machine, but
> only v8.0 instances.
> Thanks, Flomo
> In article <uXSlJzsbHHA.2088@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl>, ei.2o@.naganalfdn
> says...|||Hi ,
How is everything going? Please feel free to let me know if you need any
assistance.
Sincerely,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Community Support
========================================
==========
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
========================================
==========
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Connect to another server?

I am developing on a 2005 SQL Server Developer edition and trying to connnect
to a 2005 SQL Server Standard edition.
I have set up an alias to the Standard machine on the Developer machine, using
an IP address and port 1433. But this server does not show up when Browsing for
Servers from the Developer machine. And, yes, I can ping from Developer to
Standard. The connection is a VPN.
Strangely, I can Browse for Servers from the Standard to Developer - but only
see 8.0 instances on the Developer, not the 9.0 instance on the Developer.
Are you not allowed to see other servers from Developer?
Thanks, FlomoFlomo,
SQL Sever 2005 Surface Area Configuration for Express, Evaluation &
Developer Editions allows local connections only by default. This can be
changed under remote connections. This is is why you cannot see the SQL
Servef 2005 developer edition from any other machine.
It might also impact the aliasing.
regards,
Niall Flanagan.
SQL Server MVP, Ireland.
"Flomo Togba Kwele" <flomo@.community.nospam> wrote in message
news:MPG.206fa1f2eaa2eb9f9896a4@.news.covad.net...
>I am developing on a 2005 SQL Server Developer edition and trying to
>connnect
> to a 2005 SQL Server Standard edition.
> I have set up an alias to the Standard machine on the Developer machine,
> using
> an IP address and port 1433. But this server does not show up when
> Browsing for
> Servers from the Developer machine. And, yes, I can ping from Developer to
> Standard. The connection is a VPN.
> Strangely, I can Browse for Servers from the Standard to Developer - but
> only
> see 8.0 instances on the Developer, not the 9.0 instance on the Developer.
> Are you not allowed to see other servers from Developer?
> Thanks, Flomo|||Niall,
Surface Area on the Developer machine was already set to use TCP/IP for remote
connections. And I can see the Developer machine from the Standard machine, but
only v8.0 instances.
Thanks, Flomo
In article <uXSlJzsbHHA.2088@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl>, ei.2o@.naganalfdn says...
> Flomo,
> SQL Sever 2005 Surface Area Configuration for Express, Evaluation &
> Developer Editions allows local connections only by default. This can be
> changed under remote connections. This is is why you cannot see the SQL
> Servef 2005 developer edition from any other machine.
> It might also impact the aliasing.
> regards,
> Niall Flanagan.
> SQL Server MVP, Ireland.
> "Flomo Togba Kwele" <flomo@.community.nospam> wrote in message
> news:MPG.206fa1f2eaa2eb9f9896a4@.news.covad.net...
> >I am developing on a 2005 SQL Server Developer edition and trying to
> >connnect
> > to a 2005 SQL Server Standard edition.
> >
> > I have set up an alias to the Standard machine on the Developer machine,
> > using
> > an IP address and port 1433. But this server does not show up when
> > Browsing for
> > Servers from the Developer machine. And, yes, I can ping from Developer to
> > Standard. The connection is a VPN.
> >
> > Strangely, I can Browse for Servers from the Standard to Developer - but
> > only
> > see 8.0 instances on the Developer, not the 9.0 instance on the Developer.
> >
> > Are you not allowed to see other servers from Developer?
> >
> > Thanks, Flomo
>
>|||Hello Flomo,
Could you please refer this article to troubleshoot the connectivity issue?
827422 How to troubleshoot connectivity issues in SQL Server 2000
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;827422
Although this article is about SQL 2000, it also applied for sql 2005.
Sincerely,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Community Support
==================================================
Get notification to my posts through email? Please refer to
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/managednewsgroups/default.aspx#notif
ications.
Note: The MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues
where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support
Engineer within 1 business day is acceptable. Please note that each follow
up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support
professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the
most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations
that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions or complex
project analysis and dump analysis issues. Issues of this nature are best
handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer by contacting
Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/support/default.aspx.
==================================================(This posting is provided "AS IS", with no warranties, and confers no
rights.)|||If you are using named instances, SQL Browser service must be enabled and
started.
--
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
"Larry Marshall" <flomo@.community.nospam> wrote in message
news:MPG.207060e91e90042f989680@.news.giganews.com...
> Niall,
> Surface Area on the Developer machine was already set to use TCP/IP for
> remote
> connections. And I can see the Developer machine from the Standard
> machine, but
> only v8.0 instances.
> Thanks, Flomo
> In article <uXSlJzsbHHA.2088@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl>, ei.2o@.naganalfdn
> says...
>> Flomo,
>> SQL Sever 2005 Surface Area Configuration for Express, Evaluation &
>> Developer Editions allows local connections only by default. This can be
>> changed under remote connections. This is is why you cannot see the SQL
>> Servef 2005 developer edition from any other machine.
>> It might also impact the aliasing.
>> regards,
>> Niall Flanagan.
>> SQL Server MVP, Ireland.
>> "Flomo Togba Kwele" <flomo@.community.nospam> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.206fa1f2eaa2eb9f9896a4@.news.covad.net...
>> >I am developing on a 2005 SQL Server Developer edition and trying to
>> >connnect
>> > to a 2005 SQL Server Standard edition.
>> >
>> > I have set up an alias to the Standard machine on the Developer
>> > machine,
>> > using
>> > an IP address and port 1433. But this server does not show up when
>> > Browsing for
>> > Servers from the Developer machine. And, yes, I can ping from Developer
>> > to
>> > Standard. The connection is a VPN.
>> >
>> > Strangely, I can Browse for Servers from the Standard to Developer -
>> > but
>> > only
>> > see 8.0 instances on the Developer, not the 9.0 instance on the
>> > Developer.
>> >
>> > Are you not allowed to see other servers from Developer?
>> >
>> > Thanks, Flomo
>>|||Hi ,
How is everything going? Please feel free to let me know if you need any
assistance.
Sincerely,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Community Support
==================================================
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
==================================================This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Confusion over SQL 2005 Standard CPU Support

I'm a little confused over the maximum CPU count supported by SQL 2005 Standard Edition (this particular edition supports four CPUs).

Does the figure refer to four physical CPUs regardless of whether they are dual-cored or hyperthreaded, or does the figure refer to the number of logical CPUs available to the OS?

Let me cut to the chase - if I purchase a server containing four dual-core CPUs and install SQL Server 2005 Standard, will SQL Server see the eight CPUs and utilise a maximum of four of these, or will it be able to use all eight (because there are actually only four physical CPUs)?

Thanks, Chris.

It's per processor regardless of the number of cores. See the link below.

Doug

http://download.microsoft.com/download/e/c/a/ecafe5d1-b514-48ab-93eb-61377df9c5c2/SQLServer2005Licensingv1.1.doc

On the bottom of page two: Microsoft has been driving thought leadership in this area by charging the same amount per processor, regardless of how many cores are in the processor.

|||

Hi Doug, thanks for the info.

You've actually answered another question that I was going to ask in my original post (but forgot to include).

One thing that's missing is any information regarding SQL Server 2005 Standard's limit of 4 CPUs and whether this limit refers to logical or physical CPUs. I'm now happy with the licensing aspect, they couldn't have made it any clearer, however I don't want to purchase four dual-core CPUs if only four of the eight cores will actually be used by SQL Server.

I have been forwarded the following link that clearly describes SQL Express' behaviour when presented with a single dual-core and/or hyperthreaded CPU, however there seems to be a lack of information as to whether the same rules apply to the Standard and Workgroup editions of SQL Server.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/914278/en-us

Thanks again, Chris.

|||

From emperical evidence, it looks like Standard is restricting on logical processors.

We have a production config with SQL2005-Standard-SP1 on Dell 6850 (quad-socket/dual-core/hyper-threaded [tulsa]) ..... Taskmgr only shows 4 logical cpus busy at any one time.

Also have SQL2005-Standard-SP1 on Dell 2950 (dual-socket/dual-core [woodcrest]) .... Taskmgr shows all 4 cores busy.

Nice confusing tactics ... license on sockets .... tether performance on logicals.

Confusion over SQL 2005 Standard CPU Support

I'm a little confused over the maximum CPU count supported by SQL 2005 Standard Edition (this particular edition supports four CPUs).

Does the figure refer to four physical CPUs regardless of whether they are dual-cored or hyperthreaded, or does the figure refer to the number of logical CPUs available to the OS?

Let me cut to the chase - if I purchase a server containing four dual-core CPUs and install SQL Server 2005 Standard, will SQL Server see the eight CPUs and utilise a maximum of four of these, or will it be able to use all eight (because there are actually only four physical CPUs)?

Thanks, Chris.

It's per processor regardless of the number of cores. See the link below.

Doug

http://download.microsoft.com/download/e/c/a/ecafe5d1-b514-48ab-93eb-61377df9c5c2/SQLServer2005Licensingv1.1.doc

On the bottom of page two: Microsoft has been driving thought leadership in this area by charging the same amount per processor, regardless of how many cores are in the processor.

|||

Hi Doug, thanks for the info.

You've actually answered another question that I was going to ask in my original post (but forgot to include).

One thing that's missing is any information regarding SQL Server 2005 Standard's limit of 4 CPUs and whether this limit refers to logical or physical CPUs. I'm now happy with the licensing aspect, they couldn't have made it any clearer, however I don't want to purchase four dual-core CPUs if only four of the eight cores will actually be used by SQL Server.

I have been forwarded the following link that clearly describes SQL Express' behaviour when presented with a single dual-core and/or hyperthreaded CPU, however there seems to be a lack of information as to whether the same rules apply to the Standard and Workgroup editions of SQL Server.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/914278/en-us

Thanks again, Chris.

|||

From emperical evidence, it looks like Standard is restricting on logical processors.

We have a production config with SQL2005-Standard-SP1 on Dell 6850 (quad-socket/dual-core/hyper-threaded [tulsa]) ..... Taskmgr only shows 4 logical cpus busy at any one time.

Also have SQL2005-Standard-SP1 on Dell 2950 (dual-socket/dual-core [woodcrest]) .... Taskmgr shows all 4 cores busy.

Nice confusing tactics ... license on sockets .... tether performance on logicals.

Confusion over SQL 2005 Standard CPU Support

I'm a little confused over the maximum CPU count supported by SQL 2005 Standard Edition (this particular edition supports four CPUs).

Does the figure refer to four physical CPUs regardless of whether they are dual-cored or hyperthreaded, or does the figure refer to the number of logical CPUs available to the OS?

Let me cut to the chase - if I purchase a server containing four dual-core CPUs and install SQL Server 2005 Standard, will SQL Server see the eight CPUs and utilise a maximum of four of these, or will it be able to use all eight (because there are actually only four physical CPUs)?

Thanks, Chris.

Hi,

all is physical CPUs, as well as licencing and limitations.

HTH, Jens K. Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de

|||

Hi Jens, thanks for the reply.

Just to clarify in my own mind - are you saying that an instance of SQL Server 2005 Standard will be able to fully utilise four dual-core CPUs (i.e. all eight logical CPUs)?

Thanks again, Chris.

|||Well, interesting thing, I would assume you could use them as SQL Server starts a separate scheduler for the single core:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/914278/en-us

Don′t thing that this differs much from the full editions.

HTH, Jens K. Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de|||

SQL Server 2005 only counts physical CPU's for licensing purposes, whether they are hyper-threaded, dual-core, or quad-core. SQL Server 2005 will use all of the logical CPU's that are present, based on the physical CPU count limitation.

You should be careful about getting Standard Edition instead of Enterprise Edition. Lots of important features, such as online index rebuild, online restore and fast recovery are only in Enterprise Edition.

http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/compare-features.mspx

Confusion over SQL 2005 Standard CPU Support

I'm a little confused over the maximum CPU count supported by SQL 2005 Standard Edition (this particular edition supports four CPUs).

Does the figure refer to four physical CPUs regardless of whether they are dual-cored or hyperthreaded, or does the figure refer to the number of logical CPUs available to the OS?

Let me cut to the chase - if I purchase a server containing four dual-core CPUs and install SQL Server 2005 Standard, will SQL Server see the eight CPUs and utilise a maximum of four of these, or will it be able to use all eight (because there are actually only four physical CPUs)?

Thanks, Chris.

Hi,

all is physical CPUs, as well as licencing and limitations.

HTH, Jens K. Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de

|||

Hi Jens, thanks for the reply.

Just to clarify in my own mind - are you saying that an instance of SQL Server 2005 Standard will be able to fully utilise four dual-core CPUs (i.e. all eight logical CPUs)?

Thanks again, Chris.

|||Well, interesting thing, I would assume you could use them as SQL Server starts a separate scheduler for the single core:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/914278/en-us

Don′t thing that this differs much from the full editions.

HTH, Jens K. Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de|||

SQL Server 2005 only counts physical CPU's for licensing purposes, whether they are hyper-threaded, dual-core, or quad-core. SQL Server 2005 will use all of the logical CPU's that are present, based on the physical CPU count limitation.

You should be careful about getting Standard Edition instead of Enterprise Edition. Lots of important features, such as online index rebuild, online restore and fast recovery are only in Enterprise Edition.

http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/compare-features.mspx

Conflict Resolution

Is it possible to have a message or notification if/when conflicts occur?
Is this art of any standard resolver or does this require a custom resolver
to be created?
TIA
Tony S.
Tony,
you could use a custom resolver or regularly poll the conflict table.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
|||Thanks Paul
Tony S.
"Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message
news:%23dijkUCxFHA.2212@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Tony,
> you could use a custom resolver or regularly poll the conflict table.
> Cheers,
> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
> (recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
>
|||Hi Paul,
Is there only one conflict table or one conflict table per db table ?
Is the conflict table stored in the SQLCE db or only at the SQL2000 DB ?
Thank you for your time
Panayotis
Paul Ibison wrote:
> Tony,
> you could use a custom resolver or regularly poll the conflict table.
> Cheers,
> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
> (recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
>
|||Panos,
there'll be one per table in the format:
conflict_<PublicationName>_<ArticleName>_usertable name
These tables are stored at the publisher.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)

Confirming Processor Usage

After installing the SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition, how
can one tell that all processors and memory are being used
by SQL Server?
I realize that applications should receive a faster
response time, but there must be a way to check on the
server box itself (or within SQL Server) that it is
utilizing all available processors (or whatever the
maximum number of processors that SQL Server 2000 Standard
Edition is capable of using).
Can someone please let me know as I'm hard pressed right
now to find anything out there that indicates a way of
checking this item.
Thanks.
HouseYou can use the performance monitor tool that comes with Windows. I think
it's actually called System monitor now. There are lots of counters related
to the processors, disks, sql server etc. These may get you going:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/administration/2000/perftuning.asp
Performance WP's
http://www.swynk.com/friends/vandenberg/perfmonitor.asp Perfmon counters
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/sql_server_performance_audit.asp
Hardware Performance CheckList
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/best_sql_server_performance_tips.asp
SQL 2000 Performance tuning tips
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=q224587 Troubleshooting App
Performance
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/adminsql/ad_perfmon_24u1.asp
Disk Monitoring
Andrew J. Kelly
SQL Server MVP
"Jason House" <jason.house@.ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:052301c34be0$0143bd80$a101280a@.phx.gbl...
> After installing the SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition, how
> can one tell that all processors and memory are being used
> by SQL Server?
> I realize that applications should receive a faster
> response time, but there must be a way to check on the
> server box itself (or within SQL Server) that it is
> utilizing all available processors (or whatever the
> maximum number of processors that SQL Server 2000 Standard
> Edition is capable of using).
> Can someone please let me know as I'm hard pressed right
> now to find anything out there that indicates a way of
> checking this item.
> Thanks.
> House

Configuring Memory for SQL 2005 Standard on Windows 2003 Enterpris

Hello,
I need some assistance configuring SQL 2005 running on an 8GB server running
Windows 2003 Enterprise. I've read some of the SQL 2005 documentation, but
I'm still confused as to what I need to do. Given this configuration, do I
need to do anything for SQL 2005 to be able to utilize the 8GB of RAM, and if
I do, what exactly needs to be done? Sorry, I'm a newbie when it comes to SQL
2005.
Thanks."Marks70" <Marks70@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:28A505B8-A98A-4394-8802-F04AC63E72B5@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> I need some assistance configuring SQL 2005 running on an 8GB server
> running
> Windows 2003 Enterprise. I've read some of the SQL 2005 documentation, but
> I'm still confused as to what I need to do. Given this configuration, do I
> need to do anything for SQL 2005 to be able to utilize the 8GB of RAM, and
> if
> I do, what exactly needs to be done? Sorry, I'm a newbie when it comes to
> SQL
> 2005.
>
When running 64bit Windows and 64bit SQL Server, nothing special needs to be
done.
On 32bit Windows, or when running 32bit SQL Server on 64bit Windows, see the
following BOL topic:
Using AWE
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms175581.aspx
However, AWE has a performance penalty, so you might be better off just
using the /3GB switch and limiting SQL Server to non-AWE memory. Basically
each server workload will, at some point, experience a diminishing
performance return for incremental memory addition. Under load, measure the
SQLServer:Buffer Manager: Page reads/sec. If adding memory stops materially
affecting this number at or below 3GB, you probably don't want to use AWE.
David|||Thanks for your response. Please let me know if I am understanding this
correctly. If I use the /3GB switch, my OS will have access to 1GB of memory
and SQL 2005 (and other apps) will have access to 3GB. However, the remaining
4GB of the server's total of 8GB will not be used? Am I understanding this
correctly?
Also, if I use the /pae parameter (and therefore should not use the /3GB
parameter), I would have access to the entire 8GB but may not have as good of
performance as with using the /3GB switch? Did I understand you correctly?
Thanks!
"David Browne" wrote:
> "Marks70" <Marks70@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:28A505B8-A98A-4394-8802-F04AC63E72B5@.microsoft.com...
> > Hello,
> >
> > I need some assistance configuring SQL 2005 running on an 8GB server
> > running
> > Windows 2003 Enterprise. I've read some of the SQL 2005 documentation, but
> > I'm still confused as to what I need to do. Given this configuration, do I
> > need to do anything for SQL 2005 to be able to utilize the 8GB of RAM, and
> > if
> > I do, what exactly needs to be done? Sorry, I'm a newbie when it comes to
> > SQL
> > 2005.
> >
> When running 64bit Windows and 64bit SQL Server, nothing special needs to be
> done.
> On 32bit Windows, or when running 32bit SQL Server on 64bit Windows, see the
> following BOL topic:
> Using AWE
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms175581.aspx
>
> However, AWE has a performance penalty, so you might be better off just
> using the /3GB switch and limiting SQL Server to non-AWE memory. Basically
> each server workload will, at some point, experience a diminishing
> performance return for incremental memory addition. Under load, measure the
> SQLServer:Buffer Manager: Page reads/sec. If adding memory stops materially
> affecting this number at or below 3GB, you probably don't want to use AWE.
> David
>
>|||The penalty for AWE is not that heavy that you should ignore it altogether.
The /PAE is so windows can access memory above 4GB and allows apps using AWE
to also access the memory above 4GB as well. The If SQL Server is the only
app on the server then I would set the /3GB and /PAE in the boot.ini. Then
set the MAX Memory setting in SQL Server to 7GB and turn on AWE. You may
have to adjust the max setting down some if you need more memory for the os
or other apps.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Marks70" <Marks70@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8F92E162-EADB-4ECD-A616-A6A5E9ADF7A6@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks for your response. Please let me know if I am understanding this
> correctly. If I use the /3GB switch, my OS will have access to 1GB of
> memory
> and SQL 2005 (and other apps) will have access to 3GB. However, the
> remaining
> 4GB of the server's total of 8GB will not be used? Am I understanding this
> correctly?
> Also, if I use the /pae parameter (and therefore should not use the /3GB
> parameter), I would have access to the entire 8GB but may not have as good
> of
> performance as with using the /3GB switch? Did I understand you correctly?
> Thanks!
> "David Browne" wrote:
>> "Marks70" <Marks70@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:28A505B8-A98A-4394-8802-F04AC63E72B5@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I need some assistance configuring SQL 2005 running on an 8GB server
>> > running
>> > Windows 2003 Enterprise. I've read some of the SQL 2005 documentation,
>> > but
>> > I'm still confused as to what I need to do. Given this configuration,
>> > do I
>> > need to do anything for SQL 2005 to be able to utilize the 8GB of RAM,
>> > and
>> > if
>> > I do, what exactly needs to be done? Sorry, I'm a newbie when it comes
>> > to
>> > SQL
>> > 2005.
>> >
>> When running 64bit Windows and 64bit SQL Server, nothing special needs to
>> be
>> done.
>> On 32bit Windows, or when running 32bit SQL Server on 64bit Windows, see
>> the
>> following BOL topic:
>> Using AWE
>> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms175581.aspx
>>
>> However, AWE has a performance penalty, so you might be better off just
>> using the /3GB switch and limiting SQL Server to non-AWE memory.
>> Basically
>> each server workload will, at some point, experience a diminishing
>> performance return for incremental memory addition. Under load, measure
>> the
>> SQLServer:Buffer Manager: Page reads/sec. If adding memory stops
>> materially
>> affecting this number at or below 3GB, you probably don't want to use
>> AWE.
>> David
>>|||Thanks Andrew. You actually answered a follow-up question I had reqarding
whether or not I should be using both the /3GB and /PAE in the boot.ini file.
Do you know what the affect would be if I only added the /PAE switch without
the /3GB switch?
"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> The penalty for AWE is not that heavy that you should ignore it altogether.
> The /PAE is so windows can access memory above 4GB and allows apps using AWE
> to also access the memory above 4GB as well. The If SQL Server is the only
> app on the server then I would set the /3GB and /PAE in the boot.ini. Then
> set the MAX Memory setting in SQL Server to 7GB and turn on AWE. You may
> have to adjust the max setting down some if you need more memory for the os
> or other apps.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "Marks70" <Marks70@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:8F92E162-EADB-4ECD-A616-A6A5E9ADF7A6@.microsoft.com...
> > Thanks for your response. Please let me know if I am understanding this
> > correctly. If I use the /3GB switch, my OS will have access to 1GB of
> > memory
> > and SQL 2005 (and other apps) will have access to 3GB. However, the
> > remaining
> > 4GB of the server's total of 8GB will not be used? Am I understanding this
> > correctly?
> >
> > Also, if I use the /pae parameter (and therefore should not use the /3GB
> > parameter), I would have access to the entire 8GB but may not have as good
> > of
> > performance as with using the /3GB switch? Did I understand you correctly?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > "David Browne" wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> "Marks70" <Marks70@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:28A505B8-A98A-4394-8802-F04AC63E72B5@.microsoft.com...
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > I need some assistance configuring SQL 2005 running on an 8GB server
> >> > running
> >> > Windows 2003 Enterprise. I've read some of the SQL 2005 documentation,
> >> > but
> >> > I'm still confused as to what I need to do. Given this configuration,
> >> > do I
> >> > need to do anything for SQL 2005 to be able to utilize the 8GB of RAM,
> >> > and
> >> > if
> >> > I do, what exactly needs to be done? Sorry, I'm a newbie when it comes
> >> > to
> >> > SQL
> >> > 2005.
> >> >
> >>
> >> When running 64bit Windows and 64bit SQL Server, nothing special needs to
> >> be
> >> done.
> >>
> >> On 32bit Windows, or when running 32bit SQL Server on 64bit Windows, see
> >> the
> >> following BOL topic:
> >> Using AWE
> >> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms175581.aspx
> >>
> >>
> >> However, AWE has a performance penalty, so you might be better off just
> >> using the /3GB switch and limiting SQL Server to non-AWE memory.
> >> Basically
> >> each server workload will, at some point, experience a diminishing
> >> performance return for incremental memory addition. Under load, measure
> >> the
> >> SQLServer:Buffer Manager: Page reads/sec. If adding memory stops
> >> materially
> >> affecting this number at or below 3GB, you probably don't want to use
> >> AWE.
> >>
> >> David
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>|||"Marks70" <Marks70@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3D3541BC-D7AA-43FD-881E-19FBDE54BFF9@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks Andrew. You actually answered a follow-up question I had reqarding
> whether or not I should be using both the /3GB and /PAE in the boot.ini
> file.
> Do you know what the affect would be if I only added the /PAE switch
> without
> the /3GB switch?
>
SQL Server would use a 2GB user mode address space and access the rest of
the memory through AWE.
David|||As opposed to using a 3GB user mode address space if the /3GB switch was
used? I guess I'm trying to get a better idea of why I would use the /3GB
switch in conjunction with using the /PAE switch as opposed to just using the
/PAE switch by itself.
"David Browne" wrote:
> "Marks70" <Marks70@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:3D3541BC-D7AA-43FD-881E-19FBDE54BFF9@.microsoft.com...
> > Thanks Andrew. You actually answered a follow-up question I had reqarding
> > whether or not I should be using both the /3GB and /PAE in the boot.ini
> > file.
> > Do you know what the affect would be if I only added the /PAE switch
> > without
> > the /3GB switch?
> >
> SQL Server would use a 2GB user mode address space and access the rest of
> the memory through AWE.
> David
>
>|||"Marks70" <Marks70@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4E5ACEB7-F6F1-47BA-A867-33664F4362A2@.microsoft.com...
> As opposed to using a 3GB user mode address space if the /3GB switch was
> used?
>I guess I'm trying to get a better idea of why I would use the /3GB
> switch in conjunction with using the /PAE switch as opposed to just using
> the
> /PAE switch by itself.
>
Using /3GB gives SQL Server a larger user mode address space (which is
good), but constricts to total kernel memory to 1GB. This limits the total
physical memory usable on the server to (I think) 16GB.
David
> "David Browne" wrote:
>> "Marks70" <Marks70@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:3D3541BC-D7AA-43FD-881E-19FBDE54BFF9@.microsoft.com...
>> > Thanks Andrew. You actually answered a follow-up question I had
>> > reqarding
>> > whether or not I should be using both the /3GB and /PAE in the boot.ini
>> > file.
>> > Do you know what the affect would be if I only added the /PAE switch
>> > without
>> > the /3GB switch?
>> >
>> SQL Server would use a 2GB user mode address space and access the rest of
>> the memory through AWE.
>> David
>>|||For one that is 1GB more that SQL Server can address directly (without using
AWE) and 1 GB less that needs to be managed by AWE. But it can also come in
handy if you need more directly addressable memory than just 2GB. The data
buffer is the only part of SQL Server than can use the AWE memory.
Everything else needs to use the 2 or 3GB (depending on the /3GB) so it can
get tight with only 2GB in some cases.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Marks70" <Marks70@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4E5ACEB7-F6F1-47BA-A867-33664F4362A2@.microsoft.com...
> As opposed to using a 3GB user mode address space if the /3GB switch was
> used? I guess I'm trying to get a better idea of why I would use the /3GB
> switch in conjunction with using the /PAE switch as opposed to just using
> the
> /PAE switch by itself.
> "David Browne" wrote:
>> "Marks70" <Marks70@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:3D3541BC-D7AA-43FD-881E-19FBDE54BFF9@.microsoft.com...
>> > Thanks Andrew. You actually answered a follow-up question I had
>> > reqarding
>> > whether or not I should be using both the /3GB and /PAE in the boot.ini
>> > file.
>> > Do you know what the affect would be if I only added the /PAE switch
>> > without
>> > the /3GB switch?
>> >
>> SQL Server would use a 2GB user mode address space and access the rest of
>> the memory through AWE.
>> David
>>

Configuring Memory for SQL 2005 Standard on Windows 2003 Enterpris

Hello,
I need some assistance configuring SQL 2005 running on an 8GB server running
Windows 2003 Enterprise. I've read some of the SQL 2005 documentation, but
I'm still confused as to what I need to do. Given this configuration, do I
need to do anything for SQL 2005 to be able to utilize the 8GB of RAM, and i
f
I do, what exactly needs to be done? Sorry, I'm a newbie when it comes to SQ
L
2005.
Thanks."Marks70" <Marks70@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:28A505B8-A98A-4394-8802-F04AC63E72B5@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> I need some assistance configuring SQL 2005 running on an 8GB server
> running
> Windows 2003 Enterprise. I've read some of the SQL 2005 documentation, but
> I'm still confused as to what I need to do. Given this configuration, do I
> need to do anything for SQL 2005 to be able to utilize the 8GB of RAM, and
> if
> I do, what exactly needs to be done? Sorry, I'm a newbie when it comes to
> SQL
> 2005.
>
When running 64bit Windows and 64bit SQL Server, nothing special needs to be
done.
On 32bit Windows, or when running 32bit SQL Server on 64bit Windows, see the
following BOL topic:
Using AWE
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms175581.aspx
However, AWE has a performance penalty, so you might be better off just
using the /3GB switch and limiting SQL Server to non-AWE memory. Basically
each server workload will, at some point, experience a diminishing
performance return for incremental memory addition. Under load, measure the
SQLServer:Buffer Manager: Page reads/sec. If adding memory stops materially
affecting this number at or below 3GB, you probably don't want to use AWE.
David

Configuring memory for SQL 2000

I'm planning to install SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition on Windows Server
2003 Standard Edition machine with 8Gb of memory.
How do I force SQL server to use at least 6Gb out of 8Gb?
Thank you in advance!
Leon
Do you mean "at least 6GB" or "up to 6GB"? Either way you'll need the
/pae switch in boot.ini. This allows the OS to see more than 4GB of
physical memory. Then turn on AWE memory and set the min & max memory
settings in SQL Server as appropriate with the sp_configure proc.
For between 6GB and 7GB:
exec sp_configure 'awe enabled', 1
exec sp_configure 'min server memory', 6144
exec sp_configure 'max server memory', 7168
-- then stop & restart the server (needed for the awe enabled option)
For anything up to 6GB:
exec sp_configure 'awe enabled', 1
exec sp_configure 'max server memory', 6144
-- then stop & restart the server (needed for the awe enabled option)
Hope this helps.
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Leon Shargorodsky wrote:

>I'm planning to install SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition on Windows Server
>2003 Standard Edition machine with 8Gb of memory.
>How do I force SQL server to use at least 6Gb out of 8Gb?
>Thank you in advance!
>Leon
>

Configuring memory for SQL 2000

I'm planning to install SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition on Windows Server
2003 Standard Edition machine with 8Gb of memory.
How do I force SQL server to use at least 6Gb out of 8Gb?
Thank you in advance!
LeonThis is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--010707060304040203090309
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Do you mean "at least 6GB" or "up to 6GB"? Either way you'll need the
/pae switch in boot.ini. This allows the OS to see more than 4GB of
physical memory. Then turn on AWE memory and set the min & max memory
settings in SQL Server as appropriate with the sp_configure proc.
For between 6GB and 7GB:
exec sp_configure 'awe enabled', 1
exec sp_configure 'min server memory', 6144
exec sp_configure 'max server memory', 7168
-- then stop & restart the server (needed for the awe enabled option)
For anything up to 6GB:
exec sp_configure 'awe enabled', 1
exec sp_configure 'max server memory', 6144
-- then stop & restart the server (needed for the awe enabled option)
Hope this helps.
--
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Leon Shargorodsky wrote:
>I'm planning to install SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition on Windows Server
>2003 Standard Edition machine with 8Gb of memory.
>How do I force SQL server to use at least 6Gb out of 8Gb?
>Thank you in advance!
>Leon
>
--010707060304040203090309
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<!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>Do you mean "at least 6GB" or "up to 6GB"? Either way you'll need
the /pae switch in boot.ini. This allows the OS to see more than 4GB
of physical memory. Then turn on AWE memory and set the min & max
memory settings in SQL Server as appropriate with the sp_configure proc.<br>
<br>
For between 6GB and 7GB:<br>
   exec sp_configure 'awe enabled', 1<br>
   exec sp_configure 'min server memory', 6144<br>
</tt><tt>Â Â Â exec sp_configure 'max server memory', 7168<br>
   -- then stop & restart the server (needed for the awe enabled
option)<br>
<br>
For anything up to 6GB:<br>
   exec sp_configure 'awe enabled', 1<br>
   exec sp_configure 'max server memory', 6144<br>
</tt><tt>Â Â Â -- then stop & restart the server (needed for the awe
enabled option)<br>
<br>
Hope this helps.</tt><br>
<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>
Leon Shargorodsky wrote:
<blockquote cite="midAD5292DB-518D-4927-A01D-ABCF84E22115@.microsoft.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I'm planning to install SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition on Windows Server
2003 Standard Edition machine with 8Gb of memory.
How do I force SQL server to use at least 6Gb out of 8Gb?
Thank you in advance!
Leon
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--010707060304040203090309--

Configuring memory for SQL 2000

I'm planning to install SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition on Windows Server
2003 Standard Edition machine with 8Gb of memory.
How do I force SQL server to use at least 6Gb out of 8Gb?
Thank you in advance!
LeonDo you mean "at least 6GB" or "up to 6GB"? Either way you'll need the
/pae switch in boot.ini. This allows the OS to see more than 4GB of
physical memory. Then turn on AWE memory and set the min & max memory
settings in SQL Server as appropriate with the sp_configure proc.
For between 6GB and 7GB:
exec sp_configure 'awe enabled', 1
exec sp_configure 'min server memory', 6144
exec sp_configure 'max server memory', 7168
-- then stop & restart the server (needed for the awe enabled option)
For anything up to 6GB:
exec sp_configure 'awe enabled', 1
exec sp_configure 'max server memory', 6144
-- then stop & restart the server (needed for the awe enabled option)
Hope this helps.
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Leon Shargorodsky wrote:

>I'm planning to install SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition on Windows Serve
r
>2003 Standard Edition machine with 8Gb of memory.
>How do I force SQL server to use at least 6Gb out of 8Gb?
>Thank you in advance!
>Leon
>

Configuring AWE and SQL 2005 Memory ! Is this right ?

Hi All

I would appreciate any help from you all with regards to this:

I have a SQL 2005 standard installation with windows server 2003 enterprise Operating system

The server has 7GB of memory available to it, but as I know SQL 2003 standard edition would make use of the total server memory available to it.

Here are the changes that I have made. (I have converted it all to GB for easy reading)

I added the 3GB switch to the boot.ini file

I enabled AWE

I set mini server memory to 5GB

I set max server memory to 6GB

I turned on Performance monitor and the Target server memory counter = 6GB, the total server memory is also set to 6GB.

Now after all the changes above, the server seems to run slower and looking at task manager, the PF usage is around 6GB. If I change the max server memory, the PF usage shoots up again, it MAX server memory is set to 5GB, PF usage jumps to 5GB as well..

Can anyone please confirm that the changes I made were indeed correct and possibly educate me on the configuration and how to make the best use of server memory etc.

I look forward to hearing from you all.

Thanks

"PF Usage" is the amount of memory in use. SQL Server will use every byte of memory you make available to it, so when you set the maximum memory in SQL to 6GB, it used 6 GB. When you set max memory to 5GB, SQL Server used 5GB.

Memory access is 2 or 3 orders of magnitude faster than disk access, so caching more data in memory is usually a good thing for server performance. When you say that the server seems to run slower when you allocate more memory, are you talking about SQL Server serving queries, or the performance of client applications running on the same machine?

The more memory SQL Server uses, the less memory the OS has for other applications to use. On my workstations (which only have development databases on them), I normally limit SQL server to 128 MB of RAM. That leaves plenty of available memory for client applications like Managment Studio and Outlook.

Hope this helps,
Steve

|||

We'll be running SQL Server 2005 Standard edition with Windows Server 2003 Standard edition (32 bit). I'm told by Network Support that our OS is limited to using 4GB of RAM. If we upgrade our OS to Windows Server 2003 Enterprise edition, they say we can up the RAM to 32GB. (Max for our hardware/processor.) My question, though, is if we go to Enterprise edition on the OS, will SQL Server 2005 standard utilize as much RAM as it can? Will it go over 4GB or will we have to change the SQL Server edition to Enterprise as well, in order to take advantage of the extra RAM?

|||

More in this article.

SQL Server 2005 standard use as many RAM get.