/pae /3gb switch

Hello,
I have a pair of clustered sql server with 12GB of memory in each. What do
you recommend in allocating memory space? I was told to add a /3gb and /pae
switch is boot.ini. please let me know if this is best practice.
thanks!
Calvin
doc@.ebay.com
sorry... forgot some details. both boxes are W2K3 enterprise with sql 2000
enterprise.
"Calvin Do" wrote:

> Hello,
> I have a pair of clustered sql server with 12GB of memory in each. What do
> you recommend in allocating memory space? I was told to add a /3gb and /pae
> switch is boot.ini. please let me know if this is best practice.
>
> thanks!
> --
> Calvin
> doc@.ebay.com
|||Calvin,
Enabling /PAE will enable Windows address more than 4gb... good way of making use of available RAM.
/3gb switch will make 3gb of virtual memory address space available to Sql server for Buffer cache.
Turn on AWE for data-caching on your available physical memory.
All these are ways of allocating more memory for sql server use.
http://support.microsoft.com/default...;en-us;q321363
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...ar_sa_6b3k.asp
Also refer to this earlier post below:
Definitely apply the hotfix mentioned for article 834628. Another DBA here
ran into something that he thinks may have been caused by this issue.
Don't use /3GB when you have more than 12 GB of RAM in your system. The OS
needs the extra mamory to handle mapping AWE memory back into the lower 4GB
address space. Finally, set the MAX SERVER MEMORY to about 2-4GB less than
your physical memory.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Larry Kippenhan" <lwkthrowaway1@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:e$pzBY9rEHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I have a couple of questions that I hope y'all will be able to give me
> some info on.
> I am installing SQL Server 2000 on a Win2K3 Enterprise server with 20GB
> of RAM (I know, odd number), anyway, as I was searching for information
> on enabling all of my memory, and the /PAE option, I came across a KB
> article, #834628
> (http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;834628), titled
> "Data is corrupted when PAE is enabled on a Windows Server 2003-based
> computer". I expect this machine to give the resources a pretty good
> workout, and I was concerned about running into this issue. Has any of
> you run into this issue? Or, how likely is it that I will experience
> this. Microsoft suggests not installing the hotfix unless you are
> severely affected by this bug. To me, ANY corruption counts as severe,
> and I really don't want to have to do all of the restores, and send 400
> people home, etc, etc, while I fix this thing. So, any info here is
> appreciated.
> Second question I had was: with the /PAE option, and awe enabled on the
> SQL Server, it consumed as much of the available memory as it could
> (about 19.7 GB). This in itself doesn't bother me, but what had me
> puzzled, was that it appeared to be using the memory that was below the
> 4GB line. I really expected that it wouldn't since I hadn't used the
> /3GB switch. Any thoughts on this? Is /3GB not needed anymore, or is
> my understanding not in line with reality?
> Thanks again for your insights.
> Larry
|||thanks, appreciate your response.
"TJ" wrote:

> Calvin,
> Enabling /PAE will enable Windows address more than 4gb... good way of making use of available RAM.
> /3gb switch will make 3gb of virtual memory address space available to Sql server for Buffer cache.
> Turn on AWE for data-caching on your available physical memory.
> All these are ways of allocating more memory for sql server use.
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...;en-us;q321363
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...ar_sa_6b3k.asp
>
> Also refer to this earlier post below:
>
> Definitely apply the hotfix mentioned for article 834628. Another DBA here
> ran into something that he thinks may have been caused by this issue.
> Don't use /3GB when you have more than 12 GB of RAM in your system. The OS
> needs the extra mamory to handle mapping AWE memory back into the lower 4GB
> address space. Finally, set the MAX SERVER MEMORY to about 2-4GB less than
> your physical memory.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Larry Kippenhan" <lwkthrowaway1@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:e$pzBY9rEHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
sql

/pae /3gb switch

Hello,
I have a pair of clustered sql server with 12GB of memory in each. What do
you recommend in allocating memory space? I was told to add a /3gb and /pae
switch is boot.ini. please let me know if this is best practice.
thanks!
--
Calvin
doc@.ebay.comsorry... forgot some details. both boxes are W2K3 enterprise with sql 2000
enterprise.
"Calvin Do" wrote:

> Hello,
> I have a pair of clustered sql server with 12GB of memory in each. What do
> you recommend in allocating memory space? I was told to add a /3gb and /pa
e
> switch is boot.ini. please let me know if this is best practice.
>
> thanks!
> --
> Calvin
> doc@.ebay.com|||Calvin,
Enabling /PAE will enable Windows address more than 4gb... good way of maki
ng use of available RAM.
/3gb switch will make 3gb of virtual memory address space available to Sql s
erver for Buffer cache.
Turn on AWE for data-caching on your available physical memory.
All these are ways of allocating more memory for sql server use.
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...b;en-us;q321363
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...br />
6b3k.asp
Also refer to this earlier post below:
Definitely apply the hotfix mentioned for article 834628. Another DBA here
ran into something that he thinks may have been caused by this issue.
Don't use /3GB when you have more than 12 GB of RAM in your system. The OS
needs the extra mamory to handle mapping AWE memory back into the lower 4GB
address space. Finally, set the MAX SERVER MEMORY to about 2-4GB less than
your physical memory.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Larry Kippenhan" <lwkthrowaway1@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:e$pzBY9rEHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I have a couple of questions that I hope y'all will be able to give me
> some info on.
> I am installing SQL Server 2000 on a Win2K3 Enterprise server with 20GB
> of RAM (I know, odd number), anyway, as I was searching for information
> on enabling all of my memory, and the /PAE option, I came across a KB
> article, #834628
> (http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;834628), titled
> "Data is corrupted when PAE is enabled on a Windows Server 2003-based
> computer". I expect this machine to give the resources a pretty good
> workout, and I was concerned about running into this issue. Has any of
> you run into this issue? Or, how likely is it that I will experience
> this. Microsoft suggests not installing the hotfix unless you are
> severely affected by this bug. To me, ANY corruption counts as severe,
> and I really don't want to have to do all of the restores, and send 400
> people home, etc, etc, while I fix this thing. So, any info here is
> appreciated.
> Second question I had was: with the /PAE option, and awe enabled on the
> SQL Server, it consumed as much of the available memory as it could
> (about 19.7 GB). This in itself doesn't bother me, but what had me
> puzzled, was that it appeared to be using the memory that was below the
> 4GB line. I really expected that it wouldn't since I hadn't used the
> /3GB switch. Any thoughts on this? Is /3GB not needed anymore, or is
> my understanding not in line with reality?
> Thanks again for your insights.
> Larry|||thanks, appreciate your response.
"TJ" wrote:

> Calvin,
> Enabling /PAE will enable Windows address more than 4gb... good way of ma
king use of available RAM.
> /3gb switch will make 3gb of virtual memory address space available to Sql
server for Buffer cache.
> Turn on AWE for data-caching on your available physical memory.
> All these are ways of allocating more memory for sql server use.
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...b;en-us;q321363
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d... />
a_6b3k.asp
>
> Also refer to this earlier post below:
>
> Definitely apply the hotfix mentioned for article 834628. Another DBA h
ere
> ran into something that he thinks may have been caused by this issue.
> Don't use /3GB when you have more than 12 GB of RAM in your system. The
OS
> needs the extra mamory to handle mapping AWE memory back into the lower
4GB
> address space. Finally, set the MAX SERVER MEMORY to about 2-4GB less t
han
> your physical memory.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Larry Kippenhan" <lwkthrowaway1@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:e$pzBY9rEHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>

/pae /3gb switch

Hello,
I have a pair of clustered sql server with 12GB of memory in each. What do
you recommend in allocating memory space? I was told to add a /3gb and /pae
switch is boot.ini. please let me know if this is best practice.
thanks!
--
Calvin
doc@.ebay.comsorry... forgot some details. both boxes are W2K3 enterprise with sql 2000
enterprise.
"Calvin Do" wrote:
> Hello,
> I have a pair of clustered sql server with 12GB of memory in each. What do
> you recommend in allocating memory space? I was told to add a /3gb and /pae
> switch is boot.ini. please let me know if this is best practice.
>
> thanks!
> --
> Calvin
> doc@.ebay.com|||This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--=_NextPart_000_00DA_01C4AFDA.4AD438D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Calvin,
Enabling /PAE will enable Windows address more than 4gb... good way of =making use of available RAM.
/3gb switch will make 3gb of virtual memory address space available to =Sql server for Buffer cache.
Turn on AWE for data-caching on your available physical memory.
All these are ways of allocating more memory for sql server use.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=3Dkb;en-us;q321363
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=3D/library/en-us/archit=
ec/8_ar_sa_6b3k.asp
Also refer to this earlier post below:
Definitely apply the hotfix mentioned for article 834628. Another DBA =here
ran into something that he thinks may have been caused by this issue.
Don't use /3GB when you have more than 12 GB of RAM in your system. =The OS
needs the extra mamory to handle mapping AWE memory back into the =lower 4GB
address space. Finally, set the MAX SERVER MEMORY to about 2-4GB less =than
your physical memory.
-- Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Larry Kippenhan" <lwkthrowaway1@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:e$pzBY9rEHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I have a couple of questions that I hope y'all will be able to give =me
> some info on.
>
> I am installing SQL Server 2000 on a Win2K3 Enterprise server with =20GB
> of RAM (I know, odd number), anyway, as I was searching for =information
> on enabling all of my memory, and the /PAE option, I came across a =KB
> article, #834628
> (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=3Dkb;en-us;834628), =titled
> "Data is corrupted when PAE is enabled on a Windows Server =2003-based
> computer". I expect this machine to give the resources a pretty =good
> workout, and I was concerned about running into this issue. Has any =of
> you run into this issue? Or, how likely is it that I will =experience
> this. Microsoft suggests not installing the hotfix unless you are
> severely affected by this bug. To me, ANY corruption counts as =severe,
> and I really don't want to have to do all of the restores, and send =400
> people home, etc, etc, while I fix this thing. So, any info here is
> appreciated.
>
> Second question I had was: with the /PAE option, and awe enabled on =the
> SQL Server, it consumed as much of the available memory as it could
> (about 19.7 GB). This in itself doesn't bother me, but what had me
> puzzled, was that it appeared to be using the memory that was below =the
> 4GB line. I really expected that it wouldn't since I hadn't used =the
> /3GB switch. Any thoughts on this? Is /3GB not needed anymore, or =is
> my understanding not in line with reality?
>
> Thanks again for your insights.
>
> Larry
--=_NextPart_000_00DA_01C4AFDA.4AD438D0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=EF=BB=BF<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
&

---

Calvin,
Enabling /PAE will enable Windows =address more than 4gb... good way of making use of available RAM.
/3gb switch will make 3gb of virtual =memory address space available to Sql server for Buffer cache.
Turn on AWE for data-caching on your =available physical memory.
All these are ways of allocating more =memory for sql server use.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.as=p?url=3D/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_sa_6b3k.asp
Also refer to this earlier post below:
Definitely apply the hotfix mentioned for article 834628. Another DBA =hereran into something that he thinks may have been caused by this =issue.Don't use /3GB when you have more than 12 GB of RAM in your system. =The OSneeds the extra mamory to handle mapping AWE memory back into =the lower 4GBaddress space. Finally, set the MAX SERVER MEMORY to =about 2-4GB less thanyour physical memory.-- Geoff N. =HitenMicrosoft SQL Server MVPSenior Database =AdministratorCareerbuilder.comI support the Professional Association for SQL Serverhttp://www.sqlpass.org">www.sqlpass.org"Larry =Kippenhan" I have a couple of questions that I hope y'all will be able to give =me> some info on.>> I am installing SQL Server 2000 on a =Win2K3 Enterprise server with 20GB> of RAM (I know, odd number), =anyway, as I was searching for information> on enabling all of my memory, =and the /PAE option, I came across a KB> article, #834628> (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=3Dkb;en-us;834628), titled> "Data is corrupted when PAE is enabled on a Windows =Server 2003-based> computer". I expect this machine to give the resources a pretty good> workout, and I was concerned about =running into this issue. Has any of> you run into this =issue? Or, how likely is it that I will experience> this. Microsoft =suggests not installing the hotfix unless you are> severely affected by =this bug. To me, ANY corruption counts as severe,> and I =really don't want to have to do all of the restores, and send 400> people =home, etc, etc, while I fix this thing. So, any info here is> appreciated.>> Second question I had was: with the /PAE =option, and awe enabled on the> SQL Server, it consumed as much of the available memory as it could> (about 19.7 GB). This in =itself doesn't bother me, but what had me> puzzled, was that it =appeared to be using the memory that was below the> 4GB line. I really =expected that it wouldn't since I hadn't used the> /3GB switch. =Any thoughts on this? Is /3GB not needed anymore, or is> my understanding not in line with reality?>> Thanks again =for your insights.>> Larry

---

--=_NextPart_000_00DA_01C4AFDA.4AD438D0--|||thanks, appreciate your response.
"TJ" wrote:
> Calvin,
> Enabling /PAE will enable Windows address more than 4gb... good way of making use of available RAM.
> /3gb switch will make 3gb of virtual memory address space available to Sql server for Buffer cache.
> Turn on AWE for data-caching on your available physical memory.
> All these are ways of allocating more memory for sql server use.
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;q321363
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_sa_6b3k.asp
>
> Also refer to this earlier post below:
>
> Definitely apply the hotfix mentioned for article 834628. Another DBA here
> ran into something that he thinks may have been caused by this issue.
> Don't use /3GB when you have more than 12 GB of RAM in your system. The OS
> needs the extra mamory to handle mapping AWE memory back into the lower 4GB
> address space. Finally, set the MAX SERVER MEMORY to about 2-4GB less than
> your physical memory.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Larry Kippenhan" <lwkthrowaway1@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:e$pzBY9rEHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I have a couple of questions that I hope y'all will be able to give me
> > some info on.
> >
> > I am installing SQL Server 2000 on a Win2K3 Enterprise server with 20GB
> > of RAM (I know, odd number), anyway, as I was searching for information
> > on enabling all of my memory, and the /PAE option, I came across a KB
> > article, #834628
> > (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;834628), titled
> > "Data is corrupted when PAE is enabled on a Windows Server 2003-based
> > computer". I expect this machine to give the resources a pretty good
> > workout, and I was concerned about running into this issue. Has any of
> > you run into this issue? Or, how likely is it that I will experience
> > this. Microsoft suggests not installing the hotfix unless you are
> > severely affected by this bug. To me, ANY corruption counts as severe,
> > and I really don't want to have to do all of the restores, and send 400
> > people home, etc, etc, while I fix this thing. So, any info here is
> > appreciated.
> >
> > Second question I had was: with the /PAE option, and awe enabled on the
> > SQL Server, it consumed as much of the available memory as it could
> > (about 19.7 GB). This in itself doesn't bother me, but what had me
> > puzzled, was that it appeared to be using the memory that was below the
> > 4GB line. I really expected that it wouldn't since I hadn't used the
> > /3GB switch. Any thoughts on this? Is /3GB not needed anymore, or is
> > my understanding not in line with reality?
> >
> > Thanks again for your insights.
> >
> > Larry
>

/3GB

I've been doing some research on whether or not to use the /3GB switch, and
/PAE, in boot.ini but seem that I find contradicting information.
This article by Brian Moran seems to indicate I should use it, and I have
the utmost respect for Brian.
http://www.sqlmag.com/Article/Artic...
of_Memory.html
But I seem to see other articles by MS that either caution against it, or
say it should only be used with certain flavors or OS. And I can't even
find my OS in any of the articles.
I'm using Windows 2003 R2, SQL 2k sp4, on a Proliant 580 with 4GB of ram.
My box is a dedicated SQL Server. I am, temporarily, running IIS and
Reporting Services on the same box. Those will be offloaded to another
server shortly.
Can anyone tell me conclusively whether or not I should use the /3GB switch?
Thanks, AndreUse the /3GB, but don't use the /PAE. Reevaluate after you move IIS and SSRS
off of the box.
Since SQL 2000 can't access memory over 3GB without /PAE, and since /PEA
requires a large memory block (up to 1GB) just to manage memory, in your
scenario, you may actually be causing a reduction to the memory available to
SQL Server.
Configuration -Enabling AWE Memory for SQL Server
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673.aspx
Configuration -Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179301.aspx
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Andre" <no@.spam.com> wrote in message
news:%23DJkotWFHHA.1252@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> I've been doing some research on whether or not to use the /3GB switch,
> and /PAE, in boot.ini but seem that I find contradicting information.
> This article by Brian Moran seems to indicate I should use it, and I have
> the utmost respect for Brian.
> http://www.sqlmag.com/Article/Artic..._of_Memory.html
> But I seem to see other articles by MS that either caution against it, or
> say it should only be used with certain flavors or OS. And I can't even
> find my OS in any of the articles.
> I'm using Windows 2003 R2, SQL 2k sp4, on a Proliant 580 with 4GB of ram.
> My box is a dedicated SQL Server. I am, temporarily, running IIS and
> Reporting Services on the same box. Those will be offloaded to another
> server shortly.
> Can anyone tell me conclusively whether or not I should use the /3GB
> switch?
> Thanks, Andre
>

/3GB

I've been doing some research on whether or not to use the /3GB switch, and
/PAE, in boot.ini but seem that I find contradicting information.
This article by Brian Moran seems to indicate I should use it, and I have
the utmost respect for Brian.
http://www.sqlmag.com/Article/ArticleID/45156/Using_SQL_Server_with_Large_Amounts_of_Memory.html
But I seem to see other articles by MS that either caution against it, or
say it should only be used with certain flavors or OS. And I can't even
find my OS in any of the articles.
I'm using Windows 2003 R2, SQL 2k sp4, on a Proliant 580 with 4GB of ram.
My box is a dedicated SQL Server. I am, temporarily, running IIS and
Reporting Services on the same box. Those will be offloaded to another
server shortly.
Can anyone tell me conclusively whether or not I should use the /3GB switch?
Thanks, AndreUse the /3GB, but don't use the /PAE. Reevaluate after you move IIS and SSRS
off of the box.
Since SQL 2000 can't access memory over 3GB without /PAE, and since /PEA
requires a large memory block (up to 1GB) just to manage memory, in your
scenario, you may actually be causing a reduction to the memory available to
SQL Server.
Configuration -Enabling AWE Memory for SQL Server
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673.aspx
Configuration -Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179301.aspx
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Andre" <no@.spam.com> wrote in message
news:%23DJkotWFHHA.1252@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> I've been doing some research on whether or not to use the /3GB switch,
> and /PAE, in boot.ini but seem that I find contradicting information.
> This article by Brian Moran seems to indicate I should use it, and I have
> the utmost respect for Brian.
> http://www.sqlmag.com/Article/ArticleID/45156/Using_SQL_Server_with_Large_Amounts_of_Memory.html
> But I seem to see other articles by MS that either caution against it, or
> say it should only be used with certain flavors or OS. And I can't even
> find my OS in any of the articles.
> I'm using Windows 2003 R2, SQL 2k sp4, on a Proliant 580 with 4GB of ram.
> My box is a dedicated SQL Server. I am, temporarily, running IIS and
> Reporting Services on the same box. Those will be offloaded to another
> server shortly.
> Can anyone tell me conclusively whether or not I should use the /3GB
> switch?
> Thanks, Andre
>

/3GB

I've been doing some research on whether or not to use the /3GB switch, and
/PAE, in boot.ini but seem that I find contradicting information.
This article by Brian Moran seems to indicate I should use it, and I have
the utmost respect for Brian.
[url]http://www.sqlmag.com/Article/ArticleID/45156/Using_SQL_Server_with_Large_Amounts_of_Memory.html [/url]
But I seem to see other articles by MS that either caution against it, or
say it should only be used with certain flavors or OS. And I can't even
find my OS in any of the articles.
I'm using Windows 2003 R2, SQL 2k sp4, on a Proliant 580 with 4GB of ram.
My box is a dedicated SQL Server. I am, temporarily, running IIS and
Reporting Services on the same box. Those will be offloaded to another
server shortly.
Can anyone tell me conclusively whether or not I should use the /3GB switch?
Thanks, Andre
Use the /3GB, but don't use the /PAE. Reevaluate after you move IIS and SSRS
off of the box.
Since SQL 2000 can't access memory over 3GB without /PAE, and since /PEA
requires a large memory block (up to 1GB) just to manage memory, in your
scenario, you may actually be causing a reduction to the memory available to
SQL Server.
Configuration -Enabling AWE Memory for SQL Server
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673.aspx
Configuration -Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179301.aspx
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Andre" <no@.spam.com> wrote in message
news:%23DJkotWFHHA.1252@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> I've been doing some research on whether or not to use the /3GB switch,
> and /PAE, in boot.ini but seem that I find contradicting information.
> This article by Brian Moran seems to indicate I should use it, and I have
> the utmost respect for Brian.
> [url]http://www.sqlmag.com/Article/ArticleID/45156/Using_SQL_Server_with_Large_Amounts_of_Memory.html [/url]
> But I seem to see other articles by MS that either caution against it, or
> say it should only be used with certain flavors or OS. And I can't even
> find my OS in any of the articles.
> I'm using Windows 2003 R2, SQL 2k sp4, on a Proliant 580 with 4GB of ram.
> My box is a dedicated SQL Server. I am, temporarily, running IIS and
> Reporting Services on the same box. Those will be offloaded to another
> server shortly.
> Can anyone tell me conclusively whether or not I should use the /3GB
> switch?
> Thanks, Andre
>

/3G question

We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition. 8G
total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
server memory both show 7G.
My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am I
missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
Thanks very much.
Brian
AWE enables SQL Server (or any properly enabled app) to see up to 64GB of
memory with the proper OS and SQL Editions. The /3GB has nothing to do with
AWE (other than you should turn it off at 12GB or higher to ensure enough
PTEs). It only allows the app to see 3GB instead of 2GB of directly
addressable memory.
http://sqljunkies.com/Tutorial/0D4FF40A-695C-4327-A41B-F9F2FE2D58F6.scuk
Memory
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp Using AWE Memory
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=321363 SQL Server 7 & 2000 memory
usage
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=274750 Memory config
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037 Large Memory Support Is
Available in Windows 2000 (AWE)
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=811891 Can not use more than 2GB of
memory
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Brian Brian" <BrianBrian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2DB937E4-6853-4EFB-B1F3-C23012F70734@.microsoft.com...
> We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition.
> 8G
> total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
> enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
> memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
> server memory both show 7G.
> My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am
> I
> missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
> implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
> Thanks very much.
> --
> Brian
|||Hi Brian
I'm not sure where you get the 6GB figure from. Without AWE, SQL Server is
limited to either 2GB or 3GB. With AWE, SQL Server can use up to 64GB,
depending on the version and edition. The /3GB switch only controls how
much memory is directly addressable. All memory above 2GB or 3GB must be
accessed through AWE memory mapping.
Direct addressing is slightly faster than going through AWE, so with the 3GB
flag you will get to more memory slightly faster. In addition, only pages
from your data files can use the memory addressed through AWE. All other
memory uses (query plan, user connections, lock memory, etc) has to use
directly addressed memory, so having 3GB enabled will give you up to 50%
more space for those other memory uses. This can be a good thing.
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.InsideSQLServer.com
http://sqlblog.com
"Brian Brian" <BrianBrian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2DB937E4-6853-4EFB-B1F3-C23012F70734@.microsoft.com...
> We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition.
> 8G
> total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
> enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
> memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
> server memory both show 7G.
> My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am
> I
> missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
> implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
> Thanks very much.
> --
> Brian

/3G question

We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition. 8G
total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
server memory both show 7G.
My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am I
missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
Thanks very much.
--
BrianAWE enables SQL Server (or any properly enabled app) to see up to 64GB of
memory with the proper OS and SQL Editions. The /3GB has nothing to do with
AWE (other than you should turn it off at 12GB or higher to ensure enough
PTEs). It only allows the app to see 3GB instead of 2GB of directly
addressable memory.
http://sqljunkies.com/Tutorial/0D4FF40A-695C-4327-A41B-F9F2FE2D58F6.scuk
Memory
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp Using AWE Memory
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=321363 SQL Server 7 & 2000 memory
usage
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=274750 Memory config
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037 Large Memory Support Is
Available in Windows 2000 (AWE)
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=811891 Can not use more than 2GB of
memory
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Brian Brian" <BrianBrian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2DB937E4-6853-4EFB-B1F3-C23012F70734@.microsoft.com...
> We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition.
> 8G
> total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
> enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
> memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
> server memory both show 7G.
> My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am
> I
> missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
> implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
> Thanks very much.
> --
> Brian|||Hi Brian
I'm not sure where you get the 6GB figure from. Without AWE, SQL Server is
limited to either 2GB or 3GB. With AWE, SQL Server can use up to 64GB,
depending on the version and edition. The /3GB switch only controls how
much memory is directly addressable. All memory above 2GB or 3GB must be
accessed through AWE memory mapping.
Direct addressing is slightly faster than going through AWE, so with the 3GB
flag you will get to more memory slightly faster. In addition, only pages
from your data files can use the memory addressed through AWE. All other
memory uses (query plan, user connections, lock memory, etc) has to use
directly addressed memory, so having 3GB enabled will give you up to 50%
more space for those other memory uses. This can be a good thing.
--
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.InsideSQLServer.com
http://sqlblog.com
"Brian Brian" <BrianBrian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2DB937E4-6853-4EFB-B1F3-C23012F70734@.microsoft.com...
> We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition.
> 8G
> total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
> enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
> memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
> server memory both show 7G.
> My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am
> I
> missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
> implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
> Thanks very much.
> --
> Brian

/3G question

We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition. 8G
total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
server memory both show 7G.
My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am I
missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
Thanks very much.
--
BrianAWE enables SQL Server (or any properly enabled app) to see up to 64GB of
memory with the proper OS and SQL Editions. The /3GB has nothing to do with
AWE (other than you should turn it off at 12GB or higher to ensure enough
PTEs). It only allows the app to see 3GB instead of 2GB of directly
addressable memory.
http://sqljunkies.com/Tutorial/0D4F...F2FE2D58F6.scuk
Memory
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp Using AWE Memory
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=321363 SQL Server 7 & 2000 memory
usage
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=274750 Memory config
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037 Large Memory Support Is
Available in Windows 2000 (AWE)
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=811891 Can not use more than 2GB of
memory
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Brian Brian" <BrianBrian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2DB937E4-6853-4EFB-B1F3-C23012F70734@.microsoft.com...
> We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition.
> 8G
> total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
> enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
> memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
> server memory both show 7G.
> My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am
> I
> missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
> implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
> Thanks very much.
> --
> Brian|||Hi Brian
I'm not sure where you get the 6GB figure from. Without AWE, SQL Server is
limited to either 2GB or 3GB. With AWE, SQL Server can use up to 64GB,
depending on the version and edition. The /3GB switch only controls how
much memory is directly addressable. All memory above 2GB or 3GB must be
accessed through AWE memory mapping.
Direct addressing is slightly faster than going through AWE, so with the 3GB
flag you will get to more memory slightly faster. In addition, only pages
from your data files can use the memory addressed through AWE. All other
memory uses (query plan, user connections, lock memory, etc) has to use
directly addressed memory, so having 3GB enabled will give you up to 50%
more space for those other memory uses. This can be a good thing.
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.InsideSQLServer.com
http://sqlblog.com
"Brian Brian" <BrianBrian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2DB937E4-6853-4EFB-B1F3-C23012F70734@.microsoft.com...
> We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition.
> 8G
> total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
> enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
> memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
> server memory both show 7G.
> My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am
> I
> missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
> implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
> Thanks very much.
> --
> Brian