3G ram for SQL server: proc

Showing posts with label proc. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

A curious error message, local temp vs. global temp tables?!?!?

Hi all,

Looking at BOL for temp tables help, I discover that a local temp table (I want to only have life within my stored proc) SHOULD be visible to all (child) stored procs called by the papa stored proc.

However, the following code works just peachy when I use a GLOBAL temp table (i.e., ##MyTempTbl) but fails when I use a local temp table (i.e., #MyTempTable). Through trial and error, and careful weeding efforts, I know that the error I get on the local version is coming from the xp_sendmail call. The error I get is: ODBC error 208 (42S02) Invalid object name '#MyTempTbl'.

Here is the code that works:SET NOCOUNT ON

CREATE TABLE ##MyTempTbl (SeqNo int identity, MyWords varchar(1000))
INSERT ##MyTempTbl values ('Put your long message here.')
INSERT ##MyTempTbl values ('Put your second long message here.')
INSERT ##MyTempTbl values ('put your really, really LONG message (yeah, every guy says his message is the longest...whatever!')
DECLARE @.cmd varchar(256)
DECLARE @.LargestEventSize int
DECLARE @.Width int, @.Msg varchar(128)
SELECT @.LargestEventSize = Max(Len(MyWords))
FROM ##MyTempTbl

SET @.cmd = 'SELECT Cast(MyWords AS varchar(' +
CONVERT(varchar(5), @.LargestEventSize) +
')) FROM ##MyTempTbl order by SeqNo'
SET @.Width = @.LargestEventSize + 1
SET @.Msg = 'Here is the junk you asked about' + CHAR(13) + '---------'
EXECUTE Master.dbo.xp_sendmail
'YoMama@.WhoKnows.com',
@.query = @.cmd,
@.no_header= 'TRUE',
@.width = @.Width,
@.dbuse = 'MyDB',
@.subject='none of your darn business',
@.message= @.Msg
DROP TABLE ##MyTempTbl

The only thing I change to make it fail is the table name, change it from ##MyTempTbl to #MyTempTbl, and it dashes the email hopes of the stored procedure upon the jagged rocks of electronic despair.

Any insight anyone? Or is BOL just full of...well..."stuff"?I would still like to hear if anyone knows anything different, but while looking into Des' sendmail problem, I found this lil' tidbit in BOL for xp_sendmail If query is specified, xp_sendmail logs in to SQL Server as a client and executes the specified query. SQL Mail makes a separate connection to SQL Server; it does not share the same connection as the original client connection issuing xp_sendmail. I suspect the "separate connection to SQL Server" is the issue here?!?!?! Hmmmm...perhaps the local temp table can be seen by child processes called by the proc that creates the table EXCEPT in xp_sendmail, etc.|||You hit the problem right on the head... xp_sendmail does execute the query in a different context, meaning that it can't see local variables, settings, or temp tables. You can think of it almost as though xp_sendmail were cranking up OSQL.EXE to execute your query (that isn't what actually happens, but it is logically pretty close).

-PatP

Sunday, March 25, 2012

A couple of quick questions about SQL Server 6.5

I have a couple of quick questions to do with SQL 6.5.
1. Is there a stored proc that I can use in conjunction with
sp_foreachtable to step though all the user tables and list the permissions
that the public role has.
2. When I use the generate SQL Script , to have it script up all the
logins,users and permissions. I then look at the resulting script and it seem
to set all the passwords to (Null). Is there a way to have the passwords
intact?Hi
1. I think you would need to look at writing your own that queries the
sysprotects/sysusers tables.
2. I believe this is by design. You may want to look at:
http://tinyurl.com/5yw77
John
"Russell" <Russell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:515AAE7C-B95F-4573-BD41-1BFB037F84D1@.microsoft.com...
> I have a couple of quick questions to do with SQL 6.5.
> 1. Is there a stored proc that I can use in conjunction with
> sp_foreachtable to step though all the user tables and list the
permissions
> that the public role has.
> 2. When I use the generate SQL Script , to have it script up all the
> logins,users and permissions. I then look at the resulting script and it
seem
> to set all the passwords to (Null). Is there a way to have the passwords
> intact?|||> 1. I think you would need to look at writing your own that queries the
> sysprotects/sysusers tables.
Or perhaps sp_helprotect?
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%230$dreinEHA.3152@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> 1. I think you would need to look at writing your own that queries the
> sysprotects/sysusers tables.
> 2. I believe this is by design. You may want to look at:
> http://tinyurl.com/5yw77
> John
> "Russell" <Russell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:515AAE7C-B95F-4573-BD41-1BFB037F84D1@.microsoft.com...
>> I have a couple of quick questions to do with SQL 6.5.
>> 1. Is there a stored proc that I can use in conjunction with
>> sp_foreachtable to step though all the user tables and list the
> permissions
>> that the public role has.
>> 2. When I use the generate SQL Script , to have it script up all the
>> logins,users and permissions. I then look at the resulting script and it
> seem
>> to set all the passwords to (Null). Is there a way to have the passwords
>> intact?
>|||Hi Tibor
I didn't think that was in 6.5?
John
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OwymtcknEHA.3464@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > 1. I think you would need to look at writing your own that queries the
> > sysprotects/sysusers tables.
>
> Or perhaps sp_helprotect?
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%230$dreinEHA.3152@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > Hi
> >
> > 1. I think you would need to look at writing your own that queries the
> > sysprotects/sysusers tables.
> >
> > 2. I believe this is by design. You may want to look at:
> > http://tinyurl.com/5yw77
> >
> > John
> >
> > "Russell" <Russell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:515AAE7C-B95F-4573-BD41-1BFB037F84D1@.microsoft.com...
> >> I have a couple of quick questions to do with SQL 6.5.
> >>
> >> 1. Is there a stored proc that I can use in conjunction with
> >> sp_foreachtable to step though all the user tables and list the
> > permissions
> >> that the public role has.
> >>
> >> 2. When I use the generate SQL Script , to have it script up all the
> >> logins,users and permissions. I then look at the resulting script and
it
> > seem
> >> to set all the passwords to (Null). Is there a way to have the
passwords
> >> intact?
> >
> >
>|||Hi John,
To be honest, I'm not 100% certain. But if I'd guess, I'd guess that the proc did exist in 6.5.
Due to a disk crash, I don't have my VM Ware images with 6.5 anymore, so I guess we'll wait until
someone with 6.5 or 6.5 BOL can tell us for certain. :-)
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ens2aOmnEHA.3392@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi Tibor
> I didn't think that was in 6.5?
> John
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
> message news:OwymtcknEHA.3464@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> > 1. I think you would need to look at writing your own that queries the
>> > sysprotects/sysusers tables.
>>
>> Or perhaps sp_helprotect?
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>>
>> "John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%230$dreinEHA.3152@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > 1. I think you would need to look at writing your own that queries the
>> > sysprotects/sysusers tables.
>> >
>> > 2. I believe this is by design. You may want to look at:
>> > http://tinyurl.com/5yw77
>> >
>> > John
>> >
>> > "Russell" <Russell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > news:515AAE7C-B95F-4573-BD41-1BFB037F84D1@.microsoft.com...
>> >> I have a couple of quick questions to do with SQL 6.5.
>> >>
>> >> 1. Is there a stored proc that I can use in conjunction with
>> >> sp_foreachtable to step though all the user tables and list the
>> > permissions
>> >> that the public role has.
>> >>
>> >> 2. When I use the generate SQL Script , to have it script up all the
>> >> logins,users and permissions. I then look at the resulting script and
> it
>> > seem
>> >> to set all the passwords to (Null). Is there a way to have the
> passwords
>> >> intact?
>> >
>> >
>>
>|||sp_helprotect has been around since since the beginning.
--
HTH
--
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:%234k4pTmnEHA.3988@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi John,
> To be honest, I'm not 100% certain. But if I'd guess, I'd guess that the
> proc did exist in 6.5.
> Due to a disk crash, I don't have my VM Ware images with 6.5 anymore, so I
> guess we'll wait until someone with 6.5 or 6.5 BOL can tell us for
> certain. :-)
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ens2aOmnEHA.3392@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Hi Tibor
>> I didn't think that was in 6.5?
>> John
>> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
>> in
>> message news:OwymtcknEHA.3464@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> > 1. I think you would need to look at writing your own that queries the
>> > sysprotects/sysusers tables.
>>
>> Or perhaps sp_helprotect?
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>>
>> "John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%230$dreinEHA.3152@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > 1. I think you would need to look at writing your own that queries the
>> > sysprotects/sysusers tables.
>> >
>> > 2. I believe this is by design. You may want to look at:
>> > http://tinyurl.com/5yw77
>> >
>> > John
>> >
>> > "Russell" <Russell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > news:515AAE7C-B95F-4573-BD41-1BFB037F84D1@.microsoft.com...
>> >> I have a couple of quick questions to do with SQL 6.5.
>> >>
>> >> 1. Is there a stored proc that I can use in conjunction with
>> >> sp_foreachtable to step though all the user tables and list the
>> > permissions
>> >> that the public role has.
>> >>
>> >> 2. When I use the generate SQL Script , to have it script up all the
>> >> logins,users and permissions. I then look at the resulting script and
>> it
>> > seem
>> >> to set all the passwords to (Null). Is there a way to have the
>> passwords
>> >> intact?
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>

Monday, March 19, 2012

99.99% without a cluster ?

Is it realistic expect 99.99% reliability and system uptime without using
any clustering solutions on a SQL 2000 db ?
My server hardware is dual proc, raid1=OS, raid5=db, dual nic teamed and
connected to individual switches for redudancy. My organization is 8 h/day
shop and I have plenty of time for maintenance during weekends or nights.
I am asking because some co-workers would like to cluster 4 SQL servers and
I have some questions if that is worthwhile and necessary in my environment.
Clustering is for hardware failures. If your motherboard or processor dies
you are down until you can replace it. If you can do that within a time
that is acceptable to your business then great, otherwise something like
clustereing or log shipping will get you going a lot faster.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Marlon Brown" <marlon_brownj@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OF4IjVMLEHA.2576@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Is it realistic expect 99.99% reliability and system uptime without using
> any clustering solutions on a SQL 2000 db ?
> My server hardware is dual proc, raid1=OS, raid5=db, dual nic teamed and
> connected to individual switches for redudancy. My organization is 8
h/day
> shop and I have plenty of time for maintenance during weekends or nights.
> I am asking because some co-workers would like to cluster 4 SQL servers
and
> I have some questions if that is worthwhile and necessary in my
environment.
>
|||It's "possible", but not "realistic" unless you're a zen master (:
You need to ask (at least) these questions:
(a) what is our REAL availability requirement
(b) what is our real cost of downtime
(c) what solutions are available to me (there is more than just clustering)
(d) what are the TOTAL costs associated with deploying each solutions?
(e) which solution (c) costs least (d) to limit downtime (b) whilst
achieving at least (a)
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
"Marlon Brown" <marlon_brownj@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OF4IjVMLEHA.2576@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Is it realistic expect 99.99% reliability and system uptime without using
> any clustering solutions on a SQL 2000 db ?
> My server hardware is dual proc, raid1=OS, raid5=db, dual nic teamed and
> connected to individual switches for redudancy. My organization is 8
h/day
> shop and I have plenty of time for maintenance during weekends or nights.
> I am asking because some co-workers would like to cluster 4 SQL servers
and
> I have some questions if that is worthwhile and necessary in my
environment.
>
|||What do you mean by 99.99%? Are you counting total uptime, or just
unplanned outages? We don't have 99.99% uptime measured as a total, even
with a cluster and I'm not worried at all. That's not to say that our
servers (Dell 6650's) aren't reliable, they are; we've only had one
unplanned outage in the past year and a half and that was only for about 2
minutes as the cluster failed over... However, between hardware
maintenance/upgrades, and patches--both OS and SQL Server, we have managed
about 99.93% total uptime. But we have managed 100% uptime for business
hours over the past 11 months.
What we have found to be the biggest benefit of clustering is the ability to
do rolling upgrades, thereby reducing the total outage window for any
particular upgrade.
"Marlon Brown" <marlon_brownj@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OF4IjVMLEHA.2576@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Is it realistic expect 99.99% reliability and system uptime without using
> any clustering solutions on a SQL 2000 db ?
> My server hardware is dual proc, raid1=OS, raid5=db, dual nic teamed and
> connected to individual switches for redudancy. My organization is 8
h/day
> shop and I have plenty of time for maintenance during weekends or nights.
> I am asking because some co-workers would like to cluster 4 SQL servers
and
> I have some questions if that is worthwhile and necessary in my
environment.
>

99.99% without a cluster ?

Is it realistic expect 99.99% reliability and system uptime without using
any clustering solutions on a SQL 2000 db ?
My server hardware is dual proc, raid1=OS, raid5=db, dual nic teamed and
connected to individual switches for redudancy. My organization is 8 h/day
shop and I have plenty of time for maintenance during weekends or nights.
I am asking because some co-workers would like to cluster 4 SQL servers and
I have some questions if that is worthwhile and necessary in my environment.Clustering is for hardware failures. If your motherboard or processor dies
you are down until you can replace it. If you can do that within a time
that is acceptable to your business then great, otherwise something like
clustereing or log shipping will get you going a lot faster.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Marlon Brown" <marlon_brownj@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OF4IjVMLEHA.2576@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Is it realistic expect 99.99% reliability and system uptime without using
> any clustering solutions on a SQL 2000 db ?
> My server hardware is dual proc, raid1=OS, raid5=db, dual nic teamed and
> connected to individual switches for redudancy. My organization is 8
h/day
> shop and I have plenty of time for maintenance during weekends or nights.
> I am asking because some co-workers would like to cluster 4 SQL servers
and
> I have some questions if that is worthwhile and necessary in my
environment.
>|||It's "possible", but not "realistic" unless you're a zen master (:
You need to ask (at least) these questions:
(a) what is our REAL availability requirement
(b) what is our real cost of downtime
(c) what solutions are available to me (there is more than just clustering)
(d) what are the TOTAL costs associated with deploying each solutions?
(e) which solution (c) costs least (d) to limit downtime (b) whilst
achieving at least (a)
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
"Marlon Brown" <marlon_brownj@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OF4IjVMLEHA.2576@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Is it realistic expect 99.99% reliability and system uptime without using
> any clustering solutions on a SQL 2000 db ?
> My server hardware is dual proc, raid1=OS, raid5=db, dual nic teamed and
> connected to individual switches for redudancy. My organization is 8
h/day
> shop and I have plenty of time for maintenance during weekends or nights.
> I am asking because some co-workers would like to cluster 4 SQL servers
and
> I have some questions if that is worthwhile and necessary in my
environment.
>|||What do you mean by 99.99%? Are you counting total uptime, or just
unplanned outages? We don't have 99.99% uptime measured as a total, even
with a cluster and I'm not worried at all. That's not to say that our
servers (Dell 6650's) aren't reliable, they are; we've only had one
unplanned outage in the past year and a half and that was only for about 2
minutes as the cluster failed over... However, between hardware
maintenance/upgrades, and patches--both OS and SQL Server, we have managed
about 99.93% total uptime. But we have managed 100% uptime for business
hours over the past 11 months.
What we have found to be the biggest benefit of clustering is the ability to
do rolling upgrades, thereby reducing the total outage window for any
particular upgrade.
"Marlon Brown" <marlon_brownj@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OF4IjVMLEHA.2576@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Is it realistic expect 99.99% reliability and system uptime without using
> any clustering solutions on a SQL 2000 db ?
> My server hardware is dual proc, raid1=OS, raid5=db, dual nic teamed and
> connected to individual switches for redudancy. My organization is 8
h/day
> shop and I have plenty of time for maintenance during weekends or nights.
> I am asking because some co-workers would like to cluster 4 SQL servers
and
> I have some questions if that is worthwhile and necessary in my
environment.
>

Thursday, March 8, 2012

64gb memory - recommendations, etc..

Multi proc server with 64gb memory.
Applications that use SQL Server 2000 & 2005 run on this system.
Can someone point me to a site / document / any material that has
information about best practices, recommendations, etc about configuring SQL
Server to use this much of memory ?
Cheers
sqlcatzHere are some items that you can use to shed light on the issues with large
memory.
Configuration -Memory, Large Memory Support Is Available in Windows 2000
(AWE)
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037
Configuration -Memory, SQL Server 7 & 2000 memory usage
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=321363
Configuration -Memory, SQL Server Memory
http://sqljunkies.com/Tutorial/0D4FF40A-695C-4327-A41B-F9F2FE2D58F6.scuk
Configuration -Memory, SQL Server to use more than 2 GB of physical memory
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750/
Configuration -Memory, Using AWE Memory
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"SQLCatz" <SQLCatz@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F7C8E4BB-39A2-4898-88B3-AC0BEA469E19@.microsoft.com...
> Multi proc server with 64gb memory.
> Applications that use SQL Server 2000 & 2005 run on this system.
> Can someone point me to a site / document / any material that has
> information about best practices, recommendations, etc about configuring
> SQL
> Server to use this much of memory ?
> Cheers
> sqlcatz
>

64gb memory - recommendations, etc..

Multi proc server with 64gb memory.
Applications that use SQL Server 2000 & 2005 run on this system.
Can someone point me to a site / document / any material that has
information about best practices, recommendations, etc about configuring SQL
Server to use this much of memory ?
Cheers
sqlcatz
Here are some items that you can use to shed light on the issues with large
memory.
Configuration -Memory, Large Memory Support Is Available in Windows 2000
(AWE)
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037
Configuration -Memory, SQL Server 7 & 2000 memory usage
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=321363
Configuration -Memory, SQL Server Memory
http://sqljunkies.com/Tutorial/0D4FF...2FE2D58F6.scuk
Configuration -Memory, SQL Server to use more than 2 GB of physical memory
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750/
Configuration -Memory, Using AWE Memory
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"SQLCatz" <SQLCatz@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F7C8E4BB-39A2-4898-88B3-AC0BEA469E19@.microsoft.com...
> Multi proc server with 64gb memory.
> Applications that use SQL Server 2000 & 2005 run on this system.
> Can someone point me to a site / document / any material that has
> information about best practices, recommendations, etc about configuring
> SQL
> Server to use this much of memory ?
> Cheers
> sqlcatz
>

64gb memory - recommendations, etc..

Multi proc server with 64gb memory.
Applications that use SQL Server 2000 & 2005 run on this system.
Can someone point me to a site / document / any material that has
information about best practices, recommendations, etc about configuring SQL
Server to use this much of memory ?
Cheers
sqlcatzHere are some items that you can use to shed light on the issues with large
memory.
Configuration -Memory, Large Memory Support Is Available in Windows 2000
(AWE)
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037
Configuration -Memory, SQL Server 7 & 2000 memory usage
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=321363
Configuration -Memory, SQL Server Memory
http://sqljunkies.com/Tutorial/0D4F...F2FE2D58F6.scuk
Configuration -Memory, SQL Server to use more than 2 GB of physical memory
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750/
Configuration -Memory, Using AWE Memory
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"SQLCatz" <SQLCatz@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F7C8E4BB-39A2-4898-88B3-AC0BEA469E19@.microsoft.com...
> Multi proc server with 64gb memory.
> Applications that use SQL Server 2000 & 2005 run on this system.
> Can someone point me to a site / document / any material that has
> information about best practices, recommendations, etc about configuring
> SQL
> Server to use this much of memory ?
> Cheers
> sqlcatz
>

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

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.
>

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

A curious error message, local temp vs. global temp tables?!?!?

Sunday, March 25, 2012

A couple of quick questions about SQL Server 6.5

A couple of quick questions about SQL Server 6.5

Monday, March 19, 2012

99.99% without a cluster ?

99.99% without a cluster ?

Thursday, March 8, 2012

64gb memory - recommendations, etc..

64gb memory - recommendations, etc..

64gb memory - recommendations, etc..

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

64bit Proc Cache limit?

64bit Proc Cache limit?

64bit Proc Cache limit?

3G ram for SQL server

Blog Archive

About Me