3G ram for SQL server: 64bit

Showing posts with label 64bit. Show all posts

Thursday, March 8, 2012

64bit windows and 32bit SQL

I have a 64bit Windows Server machine running a 32bit version of SQL 2000
Standard. I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors. I
upgraded the RAM from 4GB to 8GB, but the problem persists.
Do I need to use the /PAE or /3GB boot switch even though I am running a
64bit version of Windows? Do I need AWE setup for SQL to access more
memory?
I figure this has more to do with the 32 bit version of SQL not being able
to access all the memory. Any ideas?SQL 2000 Standard is limited to 2GB RAM.
--
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Marc Speed" <vw_marc@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:egONT2E$GHA.1220@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a 64bit Windows Server machine running a 32bit version of SQL 2000
>Standard. I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors. I
>upgraded the RAM from 4GB to 8GB, but the problem persists.
> Do I need to use the /PAE or /3GB boot switch even though I am running a
> 64bit version of Windows? Do I need AWE setup for SQL to access more
> memory?
> I figure this has more to do with the 32 bit version of SQL not being able
> to access all the memory. Any ideas?
>
>|||> I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors.
Throwing more memory at the problem is probably not the solution. Have you
installed SP4? Do you get the error with only certain types of queries?
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Marc Speed" <vw_marc@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:egONT2E$GHA.1220@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a 64bit Windows Server machine running a 32bit version of SQL 2000
>Standard. I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors. I
>upgraded the RAM from 4GB to 8GB, but the problem persists.
> Do I need to use the /PAE or /3GB boot switch even though I am running a
> 64bit version of Windows? Do I need AWE setup for SQL to access more
> memory?
> I figure this has more to do with the 32 bit version of SQL not being able
> to access all the memory. Any ideas?
>
>

64bit windows and 32bit SQL

I have a 64bit Windows Server machine running a 32bit version of SQL 2000
Standard. I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors. I
upgraded the RAM from 4GB to 8GB, but the problem persists.
Do I need to use the /PAE or /3GB boot switch even though I am running a
64bit version of Windows? Do I need AWE setup for SQL to access more
memory?
I figure this has more to do with the 32 bit version of SQL not being able
to access all the memory. Any ideas?SQL 2000 Standard is limited to 2GB RAM.
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Marc Speed" <vw_marc@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:egONT2E$GHA.1220@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a 64bit Windows Server machine running a 32bit version of SQL 2000
>Standard. I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors. I
>upgraded the RAM from 4GB to 8GB, but the problem persists.
> Do I need to use the /PAE or /3GB boot switch even though I am running a
> 64bit version of Windows? Do I need AWE setup for SQL to access more
> memory?
> I figure this has more to do with the 32 bit version of SQL not being able
> to access all the memory. Any ideas?
>
>|||> I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors.
Throwing more memory at the problem is probably not the solution. Have you
installed SP4? Do you get the error with only certain types of queries?
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Marc Speed" <vw_marc@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:egONT2E$GHA.1220@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a 64bit Windows Server machine running a 32bit version of SQL 2000
>Standard. I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors. I
>upgraded the RAM from 4GB to 8GB, but the problem persists.
> Do I need to use the /PAE or /3GB boot switch even though I am running a
> 64bit version of Windows? Do I need AWE setup for SQL to access more
> memory?
> I figure this has more to do with the 32 bit version of SQL not being able
> to access all the memory. Any ideas?
>
>

64bit vs 32bit

If I create a database on 64bit version of SQL 2005 and then copy it to a
32bit version SQL 2005 will that database still work? and/or will
adminstrators have to make setting changes?All Editions of SQL within a major version maintain user database on-disk
compatibility across all architectures. That is a very complex way of
saying that any database created on any version/edition/processor
combination of SQL 2005 can be restored or copied to a SQL instance on any
other version/edition/processor combination. The sole exception is that SQL
Express will not accept a database over its 4GB size limit.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Sean" <Sean@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C85E4CF8-BA5D-4300-898F-49650A72627C@.microsoft.com...
> If I create a database on 64bit version of SQL 2005 and then copy it to a
> 32bit version SQL 2005 will that database still work? and/or will
> adminstrators have to make setting changes?|||This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--080803020901070905080703
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In other words "yes it will work, all other things being equal".
;)
--
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Geoff N. Hiten wrote:
>All Editions of SQL within a major version maintain user database on-disk
>compatibility across all architectures. That is a very complex way of
>saying that any database created on any version/edition/processor
>combination of SQL 2005 can be restored or copied to a SQL instance on any
>other version/edition/processor combination. The sole exception is that SQL
>Express will not accept a database over its 4GB size limit.
>
>
--080803020901070905080703
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<tt>In other words "yes it will work, all other things being equal". 
 
;) 
</tt>
<div class="moz-signature">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
-- 
 mike
hodgson 
<a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a>

</div>
 
 
Geoff N. Hiten wrote:
<blockquote cite="midOflGC5GoGHA.4172@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">All Editions of SQL within a major version maintain user database on-disk
compatibility across all architectures. That is a very complex way of
saying that any database created on any version/edition/processor
combination of SQL 2005 can be restored or copied to a SQL instance on any
other version/edition/processor combination. The sole exception is that SQL
Express will not accept a database over its 4GB size limit.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--080803020901070905080703--

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

64bit to 32bit connectivity

Main Point: Views I have on my 64bit server will UNION ALL to my 32bit server
to gather core data. The 32bit server view needs some staic data
(CountryCode) so it INNER JOINs back to the 64bit server to get the staic
data. This is extremely slow. On my 32bit => 32bit server it works fine, but
on this new 64bit => 32bit server it's dog slow.
Details:
My 32bit server has SP3a and the InstCat.sql from the 64bit
\SETUP\IA64\Install directory, I can now call my stored procedures that use
distributed views.
My previous server setup was:
Primary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 32bit; 32bit SQL Server Enterprise
Secondary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 32bit; 32bit SQL Server Enterprise
32bit Server (Primary;One Year of Data) + 32bit Server (Secondary; Seven
Years of Data)
My new server setup is:
Primary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 64bit; 64bit SQL Server Enterprise
Secondary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 32bit; 32bit SQL Server Enterprise
64bit Server (Primary;One Year of Data) + 32bit Server (Secondary; Seven
Years of Data)
The big problem: The views on the 64bit machine (64Views) UNION ALL to the
views on the 32bit machine (32Views) to allow me to retrieve data from both
machines. The concept of distributed views won't be discussed here for
brevity. These work fine.
But, as soon as I add to the 32Views, the SQL code that will INNER JOIN to
the CountryCodes static table on the 64bit machine it takes "forever"; 28
minutes to return a handful of records (162 to be exact). The reason for
doing this because I only want one location to store CountryCode details and
the 64bit machine is the primary machine to update these. I do have them on
the 32bit machine and I could change all my production machine databases to
look there, but I don't want to have to deal with this.
Tests:
On my previous setup of 32Views => 32Views => 32CountryCode, it works fine.
On a test of 64Views => 32Views, it works fine
Now, on the new setup of 64Views => 32Views => 64CountryCode, it is DOG SLOW.
Anyone help me. If you need some code I can probably put together a small
sample (instead of my big view sets). I will plan on that, but thought I
would at least get the question out into the newsgroup.
--
dbArchitect
Greg L. Wright"dbArchitect" <dbArchitect@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:EE5AFA0D-BE0C-43F6-B4AE-37D52498A6B2@.microsoft.com...
> Main Point: Views I have on my 64bit server will UNION ALL to my 32bit
> server
> to gather core data. The 32bit server view needs some staic data
> (CountryCode) so it INNER JOINs back to the 64bit server to get the staic
> data. This is extremely slow. On my 32bit => 32bit server it works fine,
> but
> on this new 64bit => 32bit server it's dog slow.
>
Apart from figuring out why this is slow (or figuring out how on earth it
was ever _not_ slow), this seems like a case for replicating the static data
to the 32bit servers. You could use one of the built-in Replication types
or just schedule a job that runs
insert into CountryCode
select * from 64bitServer.MyDB.CountryCode
David

64bit to 32bit connectivity

Main Point: Views I have on my 64bit server will UNION ALL to my 32bit serve
r
to gather core data. The 32bit server view needs some staic data
(CountryCode) so it INNER JOINs back to the 64bit server to get the staic
data. This is extremely slow. On my 32bit => 32bit server it works fine, but
on this new 64bit => 32bit server it's dog slow.
Details:
My 32bit server has SP3a and the InstCat.sql from the 64bit
\SETUP\IA64\Install directory, I can now call my stored procedures that use
distributed views.
My previous server setup was:
Primary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 32bit; 32bit SQL Server Enterprise
Secondary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 32bit; 32bit SQL Server Enterpris
e
32bit Server (Primary;One Year of Data) + 32bit Server (Secondary; Seven
Years of Data)
My new server setup is:
Primary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 64bit; 64bit SQL Server Enterprise
Secondary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 32bit; 32bit SQL Server Enterpris
e
64bit Server (Primary;One Year of Data) + 32bit Server (Secondary; Seven
Years of Data)
The big problem: The views on the 64bit machine (64Views) UNION ALL to the
views on the 32bit machine (32Views) to allow me to retrieve data from both
machines. The concept of distributed views won't be discussed here for
brevity. These work fine.
But, as soon as I add to the 32Views, the SQL code that will INNER JOIN to
the CountryCodes static table on the 64bit machine it takes "forever"; 28
minutes to return a handful of records (162 to be exact). The reason for
doing this because I only want one location to store CountryCode details and
the 64bit machine is the primary machine to update these. I do have them on
the 32bit machine and I could change all my production machine databases to
look there, but I don't want to have to deal with this.
Tests:
On my previous setup of 32Views => 32Views => 32CountryCode, it works fine.
On a test of 64Views => 32Views, it works fine
Now, on the new setup of 64Views => 32Views => 64CountryCode, it is DOG SLOW
.
Anyone help me. If you need some code I can probably put together a small
sample (instead of my big view sets). I will plan on that, but thought I
would at least get the question out into the newsgroup.
dbArchitect
Greg L. Wright"dbArchitect" <dbArchitect@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:EE5AFA0D-BE0C-43F6-B4AE-37D52498A6B2@.microsoft.com...
> Main Point: Views I have on my 64bit server will UNION ALL to my 32bit
> server
> to gather core data. The 32bit server view needs some staic data
> (CountryCode) so it INNER JOINs back to the 64bit server to get the staic
> data. This is extremely slow. On my 32bit => 32bit server it works fine,
> but
> on this new 64bit => 32bit server it's dog slow.
>
Apart from figuring out why this is slow (or figuring out how on earth it
was ever _not_ slow), this seems like a case for replicating the static data
to the 32bit servers. You could use one of the built-in Replication types
or just schedule a job that runs
insert into CountryCode
select * from 64bitServer.MyDB.CountryCode
David

64-bit SQL2000 on 32-bit OS

Will my SQL server work like 32-bit or 64-bit if I installed 64bit SQL2000 E
E on 32-bit Windows 2003 Enterprise server?Please do not multi-post. You cannot install a 64-bit app on a 32-bit
server.
Tom
---
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql
"Dipesh" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B3C23FBD-BE47-4F5E-B464-905A1B94000A@.microsoft.com...
Will my SQL server work like 32-bit or 64-bit if I installed 64bit SQL2000
EE on 32-bit Windows 2003 Enterprise server?|||It will work like a rock. It will sit there and do nothing.
To run 64-bit, you need 64-bit hardware, 64-bit OS, and 64-bit applications.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Dipesh" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B3C23FBD-BE47-4F5E-B464-905A1B94000A@.microsoft.com...
> Will my SQL server work like 32-bit or 64-bit if I installed 64bit SQL2000
EE on 32-bit Windows 2003 Enterprise server?
>

64bit SQL

Hi,
Can anyone confirm that the 64bit edition on SQL 2000 will only run on
Itanium 64 bit machines & not Xeon 64 bit processors?
Is there an Microsoft article on this?
Regards
SteveConfirmed.
(Don't know about MS article, haven't searched KB..)
On EM64T and 64 bit OS, you can run 32 bit SQL Server with sp4 in WOW, which
is supported, but
probably not what you want.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
<stevanflores@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142414594.177552.235650@.z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> Can anyone confirm that the 64bit edition on SQL 2000 will only run on
> Itanium 64 bit machines & not Xeon 64 bit processors?
> Is there an Microsoft article on this?
> Regards
> Steve
>|||Hi
Yes , 64bit runs on Itanium , but I don't remember the specific article
about that
<stevanflores@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142414594.177552.235650@.z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> Can anyone confirm that the 64bit edition on SQL 2000 will only run on
> Itanium 64 bit machines & not Xeon 64 bit processors?
> Is there an Microsoft article on this?
> Regards
> Steve
>|||Thank you both.
We have a 32 bit application that is supposed be getting installed onto
64bit Server 2003, seeing as that we are still going to be using 32bit
SQL 2000, do you think it would be better for us to use the 32bit
version of Windows 2003?
Regards,
Steve|||IAE64 supports fully 64 bit and partially 32. Before this there was x64
allowing both architectures. As far as I know benefits (64) are visible when
you have more than 4 Gb RAM or 16 processors.
--
current location: alicante (es)
"Stevan" wrote:

> Thank you both.
> We have a 32 bit application that is supposed be getting installed onto
> 64bit Server 2003, seeing as that we are still going to be using 32bit
> SQL 2000, do you think it would be better for us to use the 32bit
> version of Windows 2003?
> Regards,
> Steve
>|||You should really look into using SQL2005 since you can run the 64 bit
edition of 2005 on Win2003 X64. But if you stay with 2000 then the 32 bit
is the only choice and it will run just fine on X64.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Stevan" <stevanflores@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142415651.698599.131360@.e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> Thank you both.
> We have a 32 bit application that is supposed be getting installed onto
> 64bit Server 2003, seeing as that we are still going to be using 32bit
> SQL 2000, do you think it would be better for us to use the 32bit
> version of Windows 2003?
> Regards,
> Steve
>|||You can certainly run SQL2000 SP4 on Windows 2003 x64. And there are some
benefits right away. For instance, SQL2000 gets to use 4GB by default.
Whether these benefits will bobble up to your app level is a different story
.
The only way to determine whether using Windows 2003 x64 will provide better
performance for your app is for you to conduct some tests. For the workloads
I have tested, I get better performance on Windows 2003 x64 for some
workloads and no change in performance for the others >with Windows 2003 x86
vs x64 being the only variable<.
Linchi
"Stevan" wrote:

> Thank you both.
> We have a 32 bit application that is supposed be getting installed onto
> 64bit Server 2003, seeing as that we are still going to be using 32bit
> SQL 2000, do you think it would be better for us to use the 32bit
> version of Windows 2003?
> Regards,
> Steve
>|||stevanflores@.gmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
> Can anyone confirm that the 64bit edition on SQL 2000 will only run on
> Itanium 64 bit machines & not Xeon 64 bit processors?
> Is there an Microsoft article on this?
> Regards
> Steve
64-bit IA64 Itanium is your only 64-bit option for SQL Server 2000 and
it must run on equivalent Itanium hardware.
SQL Server 2005 supports three platforms: x86, x64 (AMD64 and Intel
EM64T), and Itanium
You can run SQL Server 2000 SP4 x86 and SQL Server 2005 x86 on Windows
Server 2003 x64 Edition.
David Gugick - SQL Server MVP
Quest Software

64bit SQL

Hi,
Can anyone confirm that the 64bit edition on SQL 2000 will only run on
Itanium 64 bit machines & not Xeon 64 bit processors?
Is there an Microsoft article on this?
Regards
SteveConfirmed.
(Don't know about MS article, haven't searched KB..)
On EM64T and 64 bit OS, you can run 32 bit SQL Server with sp4 in WOW, which is supported, but
probably not what you want.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
<stevanflores@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142414594.177552.235650@.z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> Can anyone confirm that the 64bit edition on SQL 2000 will only run on
> Itanium 64 bit machines & not Xeon 64 bit processors?
> Is there an Microsoft article on this?
> Regards
> Steve
>|||Hi
Yes , 64bit runs on Itanium , but I don't remember the specific article
about that
<stevanflores@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142414594.177552.235650@.z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> Can anyone confirm that the 64bit edition on SQL 2000 will only run on
> Itanium 64 bit machines & not Xeon 64 bit processors?
> Is there an Microsoft article on this?
> Regards
> Steve
>|||Thank you both.
We have a 32 bit application that is supposed be getting installed onto
64bit Server 2003, seeing as that we are still going to be using 32bit
SQL 2000, do you think it would be better for us to use the 32bit
version of Windows 2003?
Regards,
Steve|||IAE64 supports fully 64 bit and partially 32. Before this there was x64
allowing both architectures. As far as I know benefits (64) are visible when
you have more than 4 Gb RAM or 16 processors.
--
current location: alicante (es)
"Stevan" wrote:
> Thank you both.
> We have a 32 bit application that is supposed be getting installed onto
> 64bit Server 2003, seeing as that we are still going to be using 32bit
> SQL 2000, do you think it would be better for us to use the 32bit
> version of Windows 2003?
> Regards,
> Steve
>|||You should really look into using SQL2005 since you can run the 64 bit
edition of 2005 on Win2003 X64. But if you stay with 2000 then the 32 bit
is the only choice and it will run just fine on X64.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Stevan" <stevanflores@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142415651.698599.131360@.e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> Thank you both.
> We have a 32 bit application that is supposed be getting installed onto
> 64bit Server 2003, seeing as that we are still going to be using 32bit
> SQL 2000, do you think it would be better for us to use the 32bit
> version of Windows 2003?
> Regards,
> Steve
>|||You can certainly run SQL2000 SP4 on Windows 2003 x64. And there are some
benefits right away. For instance, SQL2000 gets to use 4GB by default.
Whether these benefits will bobble up to your app level is a different story.
The only way to determine whether using Windows 2003 x64 will provide better
performance for your app is for you to conduct some tests. For the workloads
I have tested, I get better performance on Windows 2003 x64 for some
workloads and no change in performance for the others >with Windows 2003 x86
vs x64 being the only variable<.
Linchi
"Stevan" wrote:
> Thank you both.
> We have a 32 bit application that is supposed be getting installed onto
> 64bit Server 2003, seeing as that we are still going to be using 32bit
> SQL 2000, do you think it would be better for us to use the 32bit
> version of Windows 2003?
> Regards,
> Steve
>|||stevanflores@.gmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
> Can anyone confirm that the 64bit edition on SQL 2000 will only run on
> Itanium 64 bit machines & not Xeon 64 bit processors?
> Is there an Microsoft article on this?
> Regards
> Steve
64-bit IA64 Itanium is your only 64-bit option for SQL Server 2000 and
it must run on equivalent Itanium hardware.
SQL Server 2005 supports three platforms: x86, x64 (AMD64 and Intel
EM64T), and Itanium
You can run SQL Server 2000 SP4 x86 and SQL Server 2005 x86 on Windows
Server 2003 x64 Edition.
David Gugick - SQL Server MVP
Quest Software

64bit SQl

Hello,
how do I find out if my SQL iNstallation is a 64bit or 32bit installation.
The OS is windows server 2003 64bit.
--
taniHi
Open Error Log and at the top should be written Microsoft SQL Server 2005 -
9.00.3042.00 (X64) which means 64 bit
"tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:508C63C4-BE8A-487C-B130-FA9008A51F15@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> how do I find out if my SQL iNstallation is a 64bit or 32bit installation.
> The OS is windows server 2003 64bit.
> --
> tani|||sorry.. but where do I find the error log?
thanks
--
tani
"Uri Dimant" wrote:
> Hi
> Open Error Log and at the top should be written Microsoft SQL Server 2005 -
> 9.00.3042.00 (X64) which means 64 bit
> "tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:508C63C4-BE8A-487C-B130-FA9008A51F15@.microsoft.com...
> > Hello,
> >
> > how do I find out if my SQL iNstallation is a 64bit or 32bit installation.
> > The OS is windows server 2003 64bit.
> > --
> > tani
>
>|||tani
Do you know the path of SQL Server installation?
By default, the error log is located at Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL.n\MSSQL\LOG\ERRORLOG
"tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E4D8091E-2BE7-4DBF-BC4F-E4FA72A32698@.microsoft.com...
> sorry.. but where do I find the error log?
> thanks
> --
> tani
>
> "Uri Dimant" wrote:
>> Hi
>> Open Error Log and at the top should be written Microsoft SQL Server
>> 2005 -
>> 9.00.3042.00 (X64) which means 64 bit
>> "tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:508C63C4-BE8A-487C-B130-FA9008A51F15@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > how do I find out if my SQL iNstallation is a 64bit or 32bit
>> > installation.
>> > The OS is windows server 2003 64bit.
>> > --
>> > tani
>>|||Sorry.. I was looking on the completely wrong place..
I found it now.. thanks a lot!
--
tani
"Uri Dimant" wrote:
> tani
> Do you know the path of SQL Server installation?
> By default, the error log is located at Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\MSSQL.n\MSSQL\LOG\ERRORLOG
>
>
> "tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:E4D8091E-2BE7-4DBF-BC4F-E4FA72A32698@.microsoft.com...
> > sorry.. but where do I find the error log?
> > thanks
> > --
> > tani
> >
> >
> > "Uri Dimant" wrote:
> >
> >> Hi
> >> Open Error Log and at the top should be written Microsoft SQL Server
> >> 2005 -
> >> 9.00.3042.00 (X64) which means 64 bit
> >>
> >> "tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:508C63C4-BE8A-487C-B130-FA9008A51F15@.microsoft.com...
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > how do I find out if my SQL iNstallation is a 64bit or 32bit
> >> > installation.
> >> > The OS is windows server 2003 64bit.
> >> > --
> >> > tani
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>|||TO add to Uri's response, you can get the same info using SELECT @.@.VERSION.
On my 64-but test machine, this returns:
Microsoft SQL Server 2005 - 9.00.3054.00 (X64)
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:508C63C4-BE8A-487C-B130-FA9008A51F15@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> how do I find out if my SQL iNstallation is a 64bit or 32bit installation.
> The OS is windows server 2003 64bit.
> --
> tani|||Dan
I did not think about it, thanks :-)))
Uh, its time to go home..
"Dan Guzman" <guzmanda@.nospam-online.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:A1EA8611-5672-4555-8C8F-AA6DCB6EB3C6@.microsoft.com...
> TO add to Uri's response, you can get the same info using SELECT
> @.@.VERSION. On my 64-but test machine, this returns:
> Microsoft SQL Server 2005 - 9.00.3054.00 (X64)
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Dan Guzman
> SQL Server MVP
> "tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:508C63C4-BE8A-487C-B130-FA9008A51F15@.microsoft.com...
>> Hello,
>> how do I find out if my SQL iNstallation is a 64bit or 32bit
>> installation.
>> The OS is windows server 2003 64bit.
>> --
>> tani
>

64bit SQL

Hi,
Can anyone confirm that the 64bit edition on SQL 2000 will only run on
Itanium 64 bit machines & not Xeon 64 bit processors?
Is there an Microsoft article on this?
Regards
Steve
Confirmed.
(Don't know about MS article, haven't searched KB..)
On EM64T and 64 bit OS, you can run 32 bit SQL Server with sp4 in WOW, which is supported, but
probably not what you want.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
<stevanflores@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142414594.177552.235650@.z34g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi,
> Can anyone confirm that the 64bit edition on SQL 2000 will only run on
> Itanium 64 bit machines & not Xeon 64 bit processors?
> Is there an Microsoft article on this?
> Regards
> Steve
>
|||Hi
Yes , 64bit runs on Itanium , but I don't remember the specific article
about that
<stevanflores@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142414594.177552.235650@.z34g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi,
> Can anyone confirm that the 64bit edition on SQL 2000 will only run on
> Itanium 64 bit machines & not Xeon 64 bit processors?
> Is there an Microsoft article on this?
> Regards
> Steve
>
|||Thank you both.
We have a 32 bit application that is supposed be getting installed onto
64bit Server 2003, seeing as that we are still going to be using 32bit
SQL 2000, do you think it would be better for us to use the 32bit
version of Windows 2003?
Regards,
Steve
|||IAE64 supports fully 64 bit and partially 32. Before this there was x64
allowing both architectures. As far as I know benefits (64) are visible when
you have more than 4 Gb RAM or 16 processors.
current location: alicante (es)
"Stevan" wrote:

> Thank you both.
> We have a 32 bit application that is supposed be getting installed onto
> 64bit Server 2003, seeing as that we are still going to be using 32bit
> SQL 2000, do you think it would be better for us to use the 32bit
> version of Windows 2003?
> Regards,
> Steve
>
|||You should really look into using SQL2005 since you can run the 64 bit
edition of 2005 on Win2003 X64. But if you stay with 2000 then the 32 bit
is the only choice and it will run just fine on X64.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Stevan" <stevanflores@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142415651.698599.131360@.e56g2000cwe.googlegr oups.com...
> Thank you both.
> We have a 32 bit application that is supposed be getting installed onto
> 64bit Server 2003, seeing as that we are still going to be using 32bit
> SQL 2000, do you think it would be better for us to use the 32bit
> version of Windows 2003?
> Regards,
> Steve
>
|||You can certainly run SQL2000 SP4 on Windows 2003 x64. And there are some
benefits right away. For instance, SQL2000 gets to use 4GB by default.
Whether these benefits will bobble up to your app level is a different story.
The only way to determine whether using Windows 2003 x64 will provide better
performance for your app is for you to conduct some tests. For the workloads
I have tested, I get better performance on Windows 2003 x64 for some
workloads and no change in performance for the others >with Windows 2003 x86
vs x64 being the only variable<.
Linchi
"Stevan" wrote:

> Thank you both.
> We have a 32 bit application that is supposed be getting installed onto
> 64bit Server 2003, seeing as that we are still going to be using 32bit
> SQL 2000, do you think it would be better for us to use the 32bit
> version of Windows 2003?
> Regards,
> Steve
>
|||stevanflores@.gmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
> Can anyone confirm that the 64bit edition on SQL 2000 will only run on
> Itanium 64 bit machines & not Xeon 64 bit processors?
> Is there an Microsoft article on this?
> Regards
> Steve
64-bit IA64 Itanium is your only 64-bit option for SQL Server 2000 and
it must run on equivalent Itanium hardware.
SQL Server 2005 supports three platforms: x86, x64 (AMD64 and Intel
EM64T), and Itanium
You can run SQL Server 2000 SP4 x86 and SQL Server 2005 x86 on Windows
Server 2003 x64 Edition.
David Gugick - SQL Server MVP
Quest Software

64bit Server 32bit Client

I installed SQL 2005 on a 64bit server. Can I still use enterprise studio on a 32bit client machine?

The install CD's are 64bit and when I try to find the enterprise studio to install on my 32bit machine i get an error. Is there a place to download the 32bit enterprise studio? What are my options here?

Thanks in advance.

Mike

32 bit tools can happily talk to a 64 bit server.

64bit Proc Cache limit?

I understand that there is a 2Gb limit to SQL Server's procedure cache,
although I have found no official MS documentation that says so...
My question is whether the 64bit version suffers the same limit? Any input
and especially documentation would be much appreciated.
There are no such restrictions in 64bit. Virtually all of the available
memory for SQL Server is dynamic.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Don Peterson" <no1@.nunya.com> wrote in message
news:#Z6TidVKEHA.3580@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I understand that there is a 2Gb limit to SQL Server's procedure cache,
> although I have found no official MS documentation that says so...
> My question is whether the 64bit version suffers the same limit? Any
input
> and especially documentation would be much appreciated.
>

64bit Proc Cache limit?

I understand that there is a 2Gb limit to SQL Server's procedure cache,
although I have found no official MS documentation that says so...
My question is whether the 64bit version suffers the same limit? Any input
and especially documentation would be much appreciated.There are no such restrictions in 64bit. Virtually all of the available
memory for SQL Server is dynamic.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Don Peterson" <no1@.nunya.com> wrote in message
news:#Z6TidVKEHA.3580@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I understand that there is a 2Gb limit to SQL Server's procedure cache,
> although I have found no official MS documentation that says so...
> My question is whether the 64bit version suffers the same limit? Any
input
> and especially documentation would be much appreciated.
>

64bit Proc Cache limit?

I understand that there is a 2Gb limit to SQL Server's procedure cache,
although I have found no official MS documentation that says so...
My question is whether the 64bit version suffers the same limit? Any input
and especially documentation would be much appreciated.There are no such restrictions in 64bit. Virtually all of the available
memory for SQL Server is dynamic.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Don Peterson" <no1@.nunya.com> wrote in message
news:#Z6TidVKEHA.3580@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I understand that there is a 2Gb limit to SQL Server's procedure cache,
> although I have found no official MS documentation that says so...
> My question is whether the 64bit version suffers the same limit? Any
input
> and especially documentation would be much appreciated.
>

64bit problem?

I run SQL Server 2005 on a Windows 2003 64-bit server. I have created a package where I run an execute t-sql statement task. In the t-sql I have the following:

select * from
OpenDataSource('Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0','Data Source="c:\test.mdb";User ID=Admin;Password=').pubs.dbo.data

and I get the following error:

The OLE DB provider "Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0" has not been registered.

There is only 32-bit version of Jet provider.

You access it on 64-bit machine, if you run SSIS packages in 32-bit mode (using 32-bit dtexec from Program Files (x86) or setting appropriate option in project), and access Jet database directly (not through SQL server).|||I am a newbie with SSIS and I am not yet in the post-deployment stage. I am running the package from Visual Studio 2005.
How to choose to run it in 32 bit mode?
And how to run the Jet datbase directly and not through SQL server?

Thanks again!

|||To run package in 32-bit mode in Visual Studio, right click SSIS project and select properties. Set the property Debugging > Run64BitRuntime to false.
To access Jet database (e.g. as a source) without SQL Server:
1) create OLE DB Connection Manager, select "Native OLEDB\Microsoft Jet 4.0" provider in the top drop down box, configure path to database.
2) from Toolbox drop OLE DB Source to the data flow, configure it to use this connection manager.|||

execute the package with the dtsrun.exe found in

c:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools\Binn

regards

|||DtsRun is for DTS 2000, it would not be able to run SSIS package.
To run SSIS use DTEXEC from
c:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\90\Dts\Binn or
c:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft SQL Server\90\Dts\Binn|||

precondition >> I run SQL Server 2005 on a Windows 2003 64-bit server<<

further ssis dosnt run on 2000 but on 2005.

if you on 2005 run a ssis package it will use the 32bit jet driver and your import will work fine

regards

|||But opening an OLEDB source for MS Access will not allow me to use OpenDatasource from SQL, right?

Therefore there is no way to use OpenDataSource from SQL 2005 64 bit?

The idea is that I would like to run a complex stored procedure in the package, and that the stored procedure needs the data in Access as well.

64bit Primary with 32bit Secondary SQL 2005

Currently I have a standby server which is kept in synch from the primary via
log-shipping. Both are running SQL 2005 Standard sp1, on Windows 2003 Server
w/sp1. My primary is 64bit capable, but my secondary is not. Are there any
concerns running the primary as x64bit with log-shipping to a 32-bit machine
(other than performance and memory differences). Occasionaly I have to
switch production apps between the two servers. The log-shipping is a simple
tlog backup/restore, not Microsoft's log-shipping.That should not be a problem.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Brandon" <Brandon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CD1113A6-4937-49E4-8963-B2B8FC392456@.microsoft.com...
> Currently I have a standby server which is kept in synch from the primary
> via
> log-shipping. Both are running SQL 2005 Standard sp1, on Windows 2003
> Server
> w/sp1. My primary is 64bit capable, but my secondary is not. Are there
> any
> concerns running the primary as x64bit with log-shipping to a 32-bit
> machine
> (other than performance and memory differences). Occasionaly I have to
> switch production apps between the two servers. The log-shipping is a
> simple
> tlog backup/restore, not Microsoft's log-shipping.
>

64bit Primary with 32bit Secondary SQL 2005

Currently I have a standby server which is kept in synch from the primary vi
a
log-shipping. Both are running SQL 2005 Standard sp1, on Windows 2003 Serve
r
w/sp1. My primary is 64bit capable, but my secondary is not. Are there any
concerns running the primary as x64bit with log-shipping to a 32-bit machine
(other than performance and memory differences). Occasionaly I have to
switch production apps between the two servers. The log-shipping is a simpl
e
tlog backup/restore, not Microsoft's log-shipping.That should not be a problem.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Brandon" <Brandon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CD1113A6-4937-49E4-8963-B2B8FC392456@.microsoft.com...
> Currently I have a standby server which is kept in synch from the primary
> via
> log-shipping. Both are running SQL 2005 Standard sp1, on Windows 2003
> Server
> w/sp1. My primary is 64bit capable, but my secondary is not. Are there
> any
> concerns running the primary as x64bit with log-shipping to a 32-bit
> machine
> (other than performance and memory differences). Occasionaly I have to
> switch production apps between the two servers. The log-shipping is a
> simple
> tlog backup/restore, not Microsoft's log-shipping.
>

64bit patch question

I know 64bit SQL Server has sp3a rolled into the install and I know that
there is a 64bit MS03-031 patch.
Do the rest of the patches (pss and otherwise) work for 64bit or is MS03-031
the last and only one beyond the install?
Thanks in advance
frankmHi
There are quite a few fixes for 64-bit after MS03-31
If you search Microsoft.com for "kbfix kbbug sql 64-bit", you will get quite
a few hits.
Unless you are encountering one of the problems, it is best to wait for SP4
which is currently in beta (and if you have a test environment, you can beta
test it (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/betanominations.asp).
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"frankm" <frankm@.nospam.postalias> wrote in message
news:OZ6G7TeFFHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> I know 64bit SQL Server has sp3a rolled into the install and I know that
> there is a 64bit MS03-031 patch.
> Do the rest of the patches (pss and otherwise) work for 64bit or is
MS03-031
> the last and only one beyond the install?
> Thanks in advance
> frankm
>|||How do identify a 64bit hotfix from a 32bit hotfix?
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:OyDcFPgFFHA.3732@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> There are quite a few fixes for 64-bit after MS03-31
> If you search Microsoft.com for "kbfix kbbug sql 64-bit", you will get
quite
> a few hits.
> Unless you are encountering one of the problems, it is best to wait for
SP4
> which is currently in beta (and if you have a test environment, you can
beta
> test it (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/betanominations.asp).
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "frankm" <frankm@.nospam.postalias> wrote in message
> news:OZ6G7TeFFHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > I know 64bit SQL Server has sp3a rolled into the install and I know that
> > there is a 64bit MS03-031 patch.
> > Do the rest of the patches (pss and otherwise) work for 64bit or is
> MS03-031
> > the last and only one beyond the install?
> >
> > Thanks in advance
> > frankm
> >
> >
>|||Hi
In KB, it gives the 32 bit and/or 64 bit binary versions that are included
in the hotfix. If 64 bit is not specified, it does not apply to it.
In the SP4 beta documentation, there is a list of fixes that are rolling
with SP4. On that list you can also see what are 64bit Fixes.
Most of the time. the downloadable file from MS does not specify 32 or 64
bit, except when you look up the KB article that is in the file name.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"frankm" <frankm@.nospam.postalias> wrote in message
news:OJwITUvFFHA.3608@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> How do identify a 64bit hotfix from a 32bit hotfix?
>
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
> news:OyDcFPgFFHA.3732@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > Hi
> >
> > There are quite a few fixes for 64-bit after MS03-31
> > If you search Microsoft.com for "kbfix kbbug sql 64-bit", you will get
> quite
> > a few hits.
> >
> > Unless you are encountering one of the problems, it is best to wait for
> SP4
> > which is currently in beta (and if you have a test environment, you can
> beta
> > test it (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/betanominations.asp).
> >
> > Regards
> > --
> > Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> > Zurich, Switzerland
> >
> > IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> >
> > MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> >
> > Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> >
> > "frankm" <frankm@.nospam.postalias> wrote in message
> > news:OZ6G7TeFFHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > > I know 64bit SQL Server has sp3a rolled into the install and I know
that
> > > there is a 64bit MS03-031 patch.
> > > Do the rest of the patches (pss and otherwise) work for 64bit or is
> > MS03-031
> > > the last and only one beyond the install?
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance
> > > frankm
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

Thursday, March 8, 2012

64bit windows and 32bit SQL

64bit windows and 32bit SQL

64bit vs 32bit

64bit vs 32bit

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

64bit to 32bit connectivity

64bit to 32bit connectivity

64-bit SQL2000 on 32-bit OS

64bit SQL

64bit SQL

64bit SQl

64bit SQL

64bit Server 32bit Client

64bit Proc Cache limit?

64bit Proc Cache limit?

64bit Proc Cache limit?

64bit problem?

64bit Primary with 32bit Secondary SQL 2005

64bit Primary with 32bit Secondary SQL 2005

64bit patch question

64bit patch question

3G ram for SQL server

Blog Archive

About Me