@@CPU_BUSY

I'm looking at the various counter variables available in SQL Server 2000 &
2005 and trying to understand what they can be used for. The ones I'm
intrested in are:
@.@.cpu_busy
@.@.io_busy
@.@.idle
@.@.pack_received
@.@.pack_sent
@.@.connections
@.@.packet_errors
@.@.total_read
@.@.total_write
@.@.total_errors
Now I've read BOL on these and understand they get reset when restarting the
instance on SQL Server and I've also looked at sp_monitor and the
spt_monitor system table. However, I'm still fishing.
Were these intended to tell a DBA how busy the server has been?
Can they be used to determin when you have more capicity that you need?
How about that you don't have enough capicity to do the job you are trying
to?
Can I use them to determin jumps in activity after software has been
updated?
We have about 20 database servers in the farm and I would like to add some
kind of monitor to tell me which servers can be placed on a virtual server
without having to visit each one regurally as well as to have a historical
record.
Thanks,
Jay
Hi Jay
In general perfmon is probably a better tool to do what you require as the
instantanious values given by the listed functions don't really have a
context. You may find the values more useful for before/after sampling to get
an indication of what has been consumed, although there are also alternate
ways to do this, such as SQL Profiler.
John
"Jay" wrote:

> I'm looking at the various counter variables available in SQL Server 2000 &
> 2005 and trying to understand what they can be used for. The ones I'm
> intrested in are:
> @.@.cpu_busy
> @.@.io_busy
> @.@.idle
> @.@.pack_received
> @.@.pack_sent
> @.@.connections
> @.@.packet_errors
> @.@.total_read
> @.@.total_write
> @.@.total_errors
> Now I've read BOL on these and understand they get reset when restarting the
> instance on SQL Server and I've also looked at sp_monitor and the
> spt_monitor system table. However, I'm still fishing.
> Were these intended to tell a DBA how busy the server has been?
> Can they be used to determin when you have more capicity that you need?
> How about that you don't have enough capicity to do the job you are trying
> to?
> Can I use them to determin jumps in activity after software has been
> updated?
> We have about 20 database servers in the farm and I would like to add some
> kind of monitor to tell me which servers can be placed on a virtual server
> without having to visit each one regurally as well as to have a historical
> record.
> Thanks,
> Jay
>
>
|||The problem with both Perfmon and SQL Profiler is that they require
connecting to the server. With 20 servers and growing, I would prefer to use
a data feed and write a report that summarizes the information and tells me
which servers need some attention. Since I already have a summary system
setup, I was hoping to add server usage stats to it, but only if they
provide me with some value.
Also, if Perfmod and the Profiler are better, why do these values exist?
"John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:451AC64E-6A91-46F4-AF8F-FFCCD1A03F0C@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Jay
> In general perfmon is probably a better tool to do what you require as the
> instantanious values given by the listed functions don't really have a
> context. You may find the values more useful for before/after sampling to
> get
> an indication of what has been consumed, although there are also alternate
> ways to do this, such as SQL Profiler.
> John
>
> "Jay" wrote:
|||Hi Jay
Perfmon is probably the tool you wish to use the most, this can be run (and
it is preferrable) on a remote server. The can be scheduled to run at given
periods or continuously run at a pre-defined sampling solution. Alerts can
also be scheduled if the perfmon value exceeds a defined limit. Other system
management tools such as MOM, Tivoli or HP Openview etc can also be used to
monitor your systems and they also provide additional functionality for a
more comprehensive approach to system monitoring.
John
"Jay" wrote:

> The problem with both Perfmon and SQL Profiler is that they require
> connecting to the server. With 20 servers and growing, I would prefer to use
> a data feed and write a report that summarizes the information and tells me
> which servers need some attention. Since I already have a summary system
> setup, I was hoping to add server usage stats to it, but only if they
> provide me with some value.
> Also, if Perfmod and the Profiler are better, why do these values exist?
>
> "John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:451AC64E-6A91-46F4-AF8F-FFCCD1A03F0C@.microsoft.com...
>
>