Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
DB Engine
SQL ServerMSDESQL Server CE
Services
Analysis (Data Mining)Analysis (OLAP)DTSIntegration ServicesNotification ServicesReporting Services
Programming
CLRConnectivitySQLXML
Other Technologies
ClusteringEnglish QueryFull-Text SearchReplicationService Broker
General
Data WarehousingPerformanceSecuritySetupSQL Server ToolsOther SQL Server Topics
DirectoryUser Groups
Related Topics
MS AccessOther DB ProductsMS Server Products.NET DevelopmentVB DevelopmentJava DevelopmentMore Topics ...

SQL Server Forum / DB Engine / SQL Server / March 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Weekly maintenance plan hogging system resources

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
childofthe1980s - 08 Mar 2008 20:50 GMT
Hello:

Our weekly maintenance plan takes up so much RAM on our Windows Server 2003  
with service pack 2 (2 GB of RAM) that we have to reboot the server the next
day in order to free up the RAM.

Besides adding more RAM, is there anything else that can be done to
eliminate this problem?

Thanks!

childofthe1980s
David Portas - 08 Mar 2008 21:29 GMT
> Hello:
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> next
> day in order to free up the RAM.

Why? RAM will be released whenever another application requires it. This
behaviour is perfectly normal shouldn't be any reason for concern. 2GB is
not very much for SQL Server in most circumstances so I would not recommend
trying to restrict memory usage any further.

Signature

David Portas

childofthe1980s - 08 Mar 2008 21:43 GMT
Thanks, David!

childofthe1980s

> > Hello:
> >
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> not very much for SQL Server in most circumstances so I would not recommend
> trying to restrict memory usage any further.
Andrew J. Kelly - 09 Mar 2008 04:35 GMT
As David stated SQL Server will hold the memory it uses until the OS
specifically asks for some of it back again and this is by design. But if
you have any other apps running on that server you might want to set the MAX
Memory of SQL Server so that you always leave x MB's for the other app and
the OS.

Signature

Andrew J. Kelly    SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors

> Hello:
>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> childofthe1980s
Spin - 09 Mar 2008 05:40 GMT
Due to hardware limitations my SQL server 2005 SP2 runs as a VM.  It sits on
server 2003 and that VM only has 512 RAM dedicated to it.  I tried 256 MB
RAM but SSMS took FOREVER to launch and do anything within so I upped the VM
to 512 MB RAM.  Still, that VM is consistently at 90% memory utilization or
more.  I know I can constrain SQL server to use less memory, but how much
less?  Should I constrain to use no more than 256 MB?

> As David stated SQL Server will hold the memory it uses until the OS
> specifically asks for some of it back again and this is by design. But if
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>>
>> childofthe1980s
Andrew J. Kelly - 09 Mar 2008 15:59 GMT
I wouldn't even attempt to run the VM itself with only 512MB. SQL Server
uses several hundred MB's of memory for what used to be called MemToLeave
memory which does not show up as usage for SQL Server in task manager.  The
Max Memory setting is the memory for the buffer pool that does not count the
MemToLeave area. Meaning that if you told SQL Server to use a Max of 256MB
via the Max Memory setting it will in fact use around 500MB in total. So you
would have to limit the Max Memory to far less than 256 to leave enough for
the OS etc. Which makes it pretty much useless for any real processing. I
don't understand the "due to hardware limitations" part. By adding VMware
you automatically make any limitations of hardware much more limiting.

Signature

Andrew J. Kelly    SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors

> Due to hardware limitations my SQL server 2005 SP2 runs as a VM.  It sits
> on server 2003 and that VM only has 512 RAM dedicated to it.  I tried 256
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>>>
>>> childofthe1980s
Spin - 09 Mar 2008 17:33 GMT
Given that I've already told SQL Server to use a Max of 256MB, how would I
"limit the Max Memory to far less than 256 "?

Andrew, this is on a laptop on which I have another VM running.  I carry the
laptop around with me, and that is what constrains me.

>I wouldn't even attempt to run the VM itself with only 512MB. SQL Server
>uses several hundred MB's of memory for what used to be called MemToLeave
[quoted text clipped - 36 lines]
>>>>
>>>> childofthe1980s
Andrew J. Kelly - 09 Mar 2008 22:27 GMT
You would have to lower the setting of MAX Memory from 256 to ??.  But going
too low will limit what you can do with SQL Server without having severe
performance problems. I am afraid you are pushing the limits of what can be
done with the hardware you have and the way in which you choose to configure
it. What I was really asking was why are you using a VM at all?  Why don't
you simply run SQL Server directly from the host OS?

Signature

Andrew J. Kelly    SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors

> Given that I've already told SQL Server to use a Max of 256MB, how would I
> "limit the Max Memory to far less than 256 "?
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
>>>>>
>>>>> childofthe1980s
Spin - 09 Mar 2008 23:06 GMT
I am testing everything inside a confined "network" which means everything
has to be installed on VMs.  Your comments have given me a sanity check.  I
may up the VM to 768 MB RAM.  Can you tell me how I "limit the Max Memory"?

> You would have to lower the setting of MAX Memory from 256 to ??.  But
> going too low will limit what you can do with SQL Server without having
[quoted text clipped - 49 lines]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> childofthe1980s
Andrew J. Kelly - 10 Mar 2008 01:16 GMT
You can do this via sp_configure or from the properties page of the server
instance in SSMS. Have a look at MAX Memory in BooksOnLine for more details.
I try not to have anything less than 1GB of memory for any virtual instance
these days. There are just too many issues and performance problems that you
have to deal with.

Signature

Andrew J. Kelly    SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors

>I am testing everything inside a confined "network" which means everything
>has to be installed on VMs.  Your comments have given me a sanity check.  I
[quoted text clipped - 54 lines]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> childofthe1980s
Spin - 10 Mar 2008 01:36 GMT
I suppose I could drop back down to SQL 2000 Server.  It's faster (the GUI
is much snappier), less resource-intensive, plus it puts that handy little
green arrow icon in the system tray to give you a good feeling that the SQL
server is running!

> You can do this via sp_configure or from the properties page of the server
> instance in SSMS. Have a look at MAX Memory in BooksOnLine for more
[quoted text clipped - 61 lines]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> childofthe1980s
Roy Harvey (SQL Server MVP) - 10 Mar 2008 15:19 GMT
>... plus it puts that handy little
>green arrow icon in the system tray to give you a good feeling that the SQL
>server is running!

There is a free version of that tool which implements it for 2005,
Google SQL Server 2005 Service Manager to find it.

Roy Harvey
Beacon Falls, CT
Spin - 10 Mar 2008 17:23 GMT
Thanks Ron!  I forgot to mention the other advantage of SQL 2000 - on top of
being faster (snappier GUI), less resource-intensive, and the built-in
little green arrow, it doesn't have that annoying dialog box you get every
time you open SQL Mgmt Studio asking you which SQL instance you want to
connect to!

>>... plus it puts that handy little
>>green arrow icon in the system tray to give you a good feeling that the
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> Roy Harvey
> Beacon Falls, CT
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.