hi guys,
i need some advice.
we have here:
win2003r2sp2-32bit 4gb ram dual quad-core xeon (8 cpu=B4shown and
managable)
2 instances sql2000sp4, both with default settings, both equally
used ...
what would now be the recomended settings to provide the best
solution.
how should ram and procs be splitted to maximize performance?
ram for system: 1gb
ram for sql#1: 1.5gb
ram for sql#2: 1,5gb
proc 0+1 : system
proc 2-4: sql#1
proc 5-7: sql#2
or what do you guys think?
thanx in advance
juergen ladrickI would definately let SQL and the OS manage processor resources. There is
also a good case to leave both instances's memory dynamic. Either way, we do
not have enough info to say how it should be split.
--
Jason Massie
Web: http://statisticsio.com
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/statisticsio
"Juergen Ladrick" <juerji@.arcor.de> wrote in message
news:1ef6f2dd-60c8-4fde-9305-d665945d8eba@.s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
hi guys,
i need some advice.
we have here:
win2003r2sp2-32bit 4gb ram dual quad-core xeon (8 cpu´shown and
managable)
2 instances sql2000sp4, both with default settings, both equally
used ...
what would now be the recomended settings to provide the best
solution.
how should ram and procs be splitted to maximize performance?
ram for system: 1gb
ram for sql#1: 1.5gb
ram for sql#2: 1,5gb
proc 0+1 : system
proc 2-4: sql#1
proc 5-7: sql#2
or what do you guys think?
thanx in advance
juergen ladrick|||You need to provide more information regarding your performance requirements
and the characteristics of teh workloads for each instance. No specific
recommendations can be made based soly on the info you have provided.
Linchi
"Juergen Ladrick" wrote:
> hi guys,
> i need some advice.
> we have here:
> win2003r2sp2-32bit 4gb ram dual quad-core xeon (8 cpu´shown and
> managable)
> 2 instances sql2000sp4, both with default settings, both equally
> used ...
> what would now be the recomended settings to provide the best
> solution.
> how should ram and procs be splitted to maximize performance?
> ram for system: 1gb
> ram for sql#1: 1.5gb
> ram for sql#2: 1,5gb
> proc 0+1 : system
> proc 2-4: sql#1
> proc 5-7: sql#2
> or what do you guys think?
> thanx in advance
> juergen ladrick
>
Showing posts with label instances. Show all posts
Showing posts with label instances. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
processor and ram
hi guys,
i need some advice.
we have here:
win2003r2sp2-32bit 4gb ram dual quad-core xeon (8 cpushown and
managable)
2 instances sql2000sp4, both with default settings, both equally
used ...
what would now be the recomended settings to provide the best
solution.
how should ram and procs be splitted to maximize performance?
ram for system: 1gb
ram for sql#1: 1.5gb
ram for sql#2: 1,5gb
proc 0+1 : system
proc 2-4: sql#1
proc 5-7: sql#2
or what do you guys think?
thanx in advance
juergen ladrick
I would definately let SQL and the OS manage processor resources. There is
also a good case to leave both instances's memory dynamic. Either way, we do
not have enough info to say how it should be split.
Jason Massie
Web: http://statisticsio.com
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/statisticsio
"Juergen Ladrick" <juerji@.arcor.de> wrote in message
news:1ef6f2dd-60c8-4fde-9305-d665945d8eba@.s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
hi guys,
i need some advice.
we have here:
win2003r2sp2-32bit 4gb ram dual quad-core xeon (8 cpushown and
managable)
2 instances sql2000sp4, both with default settings, both equally
used ...
what would now be the recomended settings to provide the best
solution.
how should ram and procs be splitted to maximize performance?
ram for system: 1gb
ram for sql#1: 1.5gb
ram for sql#2: 1,5gb
proc 0+1 : system
proc 2-4: sql#1
proc 5-7: sql#2
or what do you guys think?
thanx in advance
juergen ladrick
|||You need to provide more information regarding your performance requirements
and the characteristics of teh workloads for each instance. No specific
recommendations can be made based soly on the info you have provided.
Linchi
"Juergen Ladrick" wrote:
> hi guys,
> i need some advice.
> we have here:
> win2003r2sp2-32bit 4gb ram dual quad-core xeon (8 cpu′shown and
> managable)
> 2 instances sql2000sp4, both with default settings, both equally
> used ...
> what would now be the recomended settings to provide the best
> solution.
> how should ram and procs be splitted to maximize performance?
> ram for system: 1gb
> ram for sql#1: 1.5gb
> ram for sql#2: 1,5gb
> proc 0+1 : system
> proc 2-4: sql#1
> proc 5-7: sql#2
> or what do you guys think?
> thanx in advance
> juergen ladrick
>
i need some advice.
we have here:
win2003r2sp2-32bit 4gb ram dual quad-core xeon (8 cpushown and
managable)
2 instances sql2000sp4, both with default settings, both equally
used ...
what would now be the recomended settings to provide the best
solution.
how should ram and procs be splitted to maximize performance?
ram for system: 1gb
ram for sql#1: 1.5gb
ram for sql#2: 1,5gb
proc 0+1 : system
proc 2-4: sql#1
proc 5-7: sql#2
or what do you guys think?
thanx in advance
juergen ladrick
I would definately let SQL and the OS manage processor resources. There is
also a good case to leave both instances's memory dynamic. Either way, we do
not have enough info to say how it should be split.
Jason Massie
Web: http://statisticsio.com
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/statisticsio
"Juergen Ladrick" <juerji@.arcor.de> wrote in message
news:1ef6f2dd-60c8-4fde-9305-d665945d8eba@.s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
hi guys,
i need some advice.
we have here:
win2003r2sp2-32bit 4gb ram dual quad-core xeon (8 cpushown and
managable)
2 instances sql2000sp4, both with default settings, both equally
used ...
what would now be the recomended settings to provide the best
solution.
how should ram and procs be splitted to maximize performance?
ram for system: 1gb
ram for sql#1: 1.5gb
ram for sql#2: 1,5gb
proc 0+1 : system
proc 2-4: sql#1
proc 5-7: sql#2
or what do you guys think?
thanx in advance
juergen ladrick
|||You need to provide more information regarding your performance requirements
and the characteristics of teh workloads for each instance. No specific
recommendations can be made based soly on the info you have provided.
Linchi
"Juergen Ladrick" wrote:
> hi guys,
> i need some advice.
> we have here:
> win2003r2sp2-32bit 4gb ram dual quad-core xeon (8 cpu′shown and
> managable)
> 2 instances sql2000sp4, both with default settings, both equally
> used ...
> what would now be the recomended settings to provide the best
> solution.
> how should ram and procs be splitted to maximize performance?
> ram for system: 1gb
> ram for sql#1: 1.5gb
> ram for sql#2: 1,5gb
> proc 0+1 : system
> proc 2-4: sql#1
> proc 5-7: sql#2
> or what do you guys think?
> thanx in advance
> juergen ladrick
>
Friday, March 9, 2012
Process: %processor time
Hi,
I am monitoring the above counter on a 4 processor box
and have 2 questions:
(1) the value for 2 instances (there are 5 all together)
is ~200, so how is this a %? Is this to be read as 200/4
so 50%?
(2) the instances are listed as sqlservr #1, sqlservr #2
etc - how can I resolve this to the instance name?
TIA,
Mary
Mary,
1: Yes, divide the total percent by the number of instances. Double check
with Task Manager.
2. What operating system are you using? On Windows XP, Perfmon separates the
counters by instance name.
Hope this helps,
Ron
Ron Talmage
SQL Server MVP
"Mary" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:112801c4f721$51e21910$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I am monitoring the above counter on a 4 processor box
> and have 2 questions:
> (1) the value for 2 instances (there are 5 all together)
> is ~200, so how is this a %? Is this to be read as 200/4
> so 50%?
> (2) the instances are listed as sqlservr #1, sqlservr #2
> etc - how can I resolve this to the instance name?
> TIA,
> Mary
|||Thanks Ron,
I'm using Win 2000 Server. The counters are separated by
instance name for most things, but for Process they are
not - they appear as a numbered list in the bottom right-
hand corner.
Thanks,
Mary
I am monitoring the above counter on a 4 processor box
and have 2 questions:
(1) the value for 2 instances (there are 5 all together)
is ~200, so how is this a %? Is this to be read as 200/4
so 50%?
(2) the instances are listed as sqlservr #1, sqlservr #2
etc - how can I resolve this to the instance name?
TIA,
Mary
Mary,
1: Yes, divide the total percent by the number of instances. Double check
with Task Manager.
2. What operating system are you using? On Windows XP, Perfmon separates the
counters by instance name.
Hope this helps,
Ron
Ron Talmage
SQL Server MVP
"Mary" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:112801c4f721$51e21910$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I am monitoring the above counter on a 4 processor box
> and have 2 questions:
> (1) the value for 2 instances (there are 5 all together)
> is ~200, so how is this a %? Is this to be read as 200/4
> so 50%?
> (2) the instances are listed as sqlservr #1, sqlservr #2
> etc - how can I resolve this to the instance name?
> TIA,
> Mary
|||Thanks Ron,
I'm using Win 2000 Server. The counters are separated by
instance name for most things, but for Process they are
not - they appear as a numbered list in the bottom right-
hand corner.
Thanks,
Mary
Process: %processor time
Hi,
I am monitoring the above counter on a 4 processor box
and have 2 questions:
(1) the value for 2 instances (there are 5 all together)
is ~200, so how is this a %? Is this to be read as 200/4
so 50%?
(2) the instances are listed as sqlservr #1, sqlservr #2
etc - how can I resolve this to the instance name?
TIA,
MaryMary,
1: Yes, divide the total percent by the number of instances. Double check
with Task Manager.
2. What operating system are you using? On Windows XP, Perfmon separates the
counters by instance name.
Hope this helps,
Ron
--
Ron Talmage
SQL Server MVP
"Mary" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:112801c4f721$51e21910$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I am monitoring the above counter on a 4 processor box
> and have 2 questions:
> (1) the value for 2 instances (there are 5 all together)
> is ~200, so how is this a %? Is this to be read as 200/4
> so 50%?
> (2) the instances are listed as sqlservr #1, sqlservr #2
> etc - how can I resolve this to the instance name?
> TIA,
> Mary|||Thanks Ron,
I'm using Win 2000 Server. The counters are separated by
instance name for most things, but for Process they are
not - they appear as a numbered list in the bottom right-
hand corner.
Thanks,
Mary
I am monitoring the above counter on a 4 processor box
and have 2 questions:
(1) the value for 2 instances (there are 5 all together)
is ~200, so how is this a %? Is this to be read as 200/4
so 50%?
(2) the instances are listed as sqlservr #1, sqlservr #2
etc - how can I resolve this to the instance name?
TIA,
MaryMary,
1: Yes, divide the total percent by the number of instances. Double check
with Task Manager.
2. What operating system are you using? On Windows XP, Perfmon separates the
counters by instance name.
Hope this helps,
Ron
--
Ron Talmage
SQL Server MVP
"Mary" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:112801c4f721$51e21910$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I am monitoring the above counter on a 4 processor box
> and have 2 questions:
> (1) the value for 2 instances (there are 5 all together)
> is ~200, so how is this a %? Is this to be read as 200/4
> so 50%?
> (2) the instances are listed as sqlservr #1, sqlservr #2
> etc - how can I resolve this to the instance name?
> TIA,
> Mary|||Thanks Ron,
I'm using Win 2000 Server. The counters are separated by
instance name for most things, but for Process they are
not - they appear as a numbered list in the bottom right-
hand corner.
Thanks,
Mary
Process: %processor time
Hi,
I am monitoring the above counter on a 4 processor box
and have 2 questions:
(1) the value for 2 instances (there are 5 all together)
is ~200, so how is this a %? Is this to be read as 200/4
so 50%?
(2) the instances are listed as sqlservr #1, sqlservr #2
etc - how can I resolve this to the instance name?
TIA,
MaryMary,
1: Yes, divide the total percent by the number of instances. Double check
with Task Manager.
2. What operating system are you using? On Windows XP, Perfmon separates the
counters by instance name.
Hope this helps,
Ron
--
Ron Talmage
SQL Server MVP
"Mary" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:112801c4f721$51e21910$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I am monitoring the above counter on a 4 processor box
> and have 2 questions:
> (1) the value for 2 instances (there are 5 all together)
> is ~200, so how is this a %? Is this to be read as 200/4
> so 50%?
> (2) the instances are listed as sqlservr #1, sqlservr #2
> etc - how can I resolve this to the instance name?
> TIA,
> Mary|||Thanks Ron,
I'm using Win 2000 Server. The counters are separated by
instance name for most things, but for Process they are
not - they appear as a numbered list in the bottom right-
hand corner.
Thanks,
Mary
I am monitoring the above counter on a 4 processor box
and have 2 questions:
(1) the value for 2 instances (there are 5 all together)
is ~200, so how is this a %? Is this to be read as 200/4
so 50%?
(2) the instances are listed as sqlservr #1, sqlservr #2
etc - how can I resolve this to the instance name?
TIA,
MaryMary,
1: Yes, divide the total percent by the number of instances. Double check
with Task Manager.
2. What operating system are you using? On Windows XP, Perfmon separates the
counters by instance name.
Hope this helps,
Ron
--
Ron Talmage
SQL Server MVP
"Mary" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:112801c4f721$51e21910$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I am monitoring the above counter on a 4 processor box
> and have 2 questions:
> (1) the value for 2 instances (there are 5 all together)
> is ~200, so how is this a %? Is this to be read as 200/4
> so 50%?
> (2) the instances are listed as sqlservr #1, sqlservr #2
> etc - how can I resolve this to the instance name?
> TIA,
> Mary|||Thanks Ron,
I'm using Win 2000 Server. The counters are separated by
instance name for most things, but for Process they are
not - they appear as a numbered list in the bottom right-
hand corner.
Thanks,
Mary
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Process Info
I have an application that accesses the database using a generic account. I
am seeing a lot of instances of my generic account appearing on the Current
activity >>Process info tab . The status says "sleeping" on all of them.
There any way i could determine which one i the application is still using or
is it safe to kill these processes. In other words i am looking for a good
housekeeping procedure.
Thanks........
mmc,
Unless the performance of your server is suffering (especially memory
starvation), I would leave them alone. If it becomes a problem you
should consult the developers of the application to free their
connections when they are not needed.
Killing connections is not recommended as part of a housekeeping
routine. It smells of bad application design, however I do kill
connections when I need to do a database restore.
Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
http://www.markallison.co.uk
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602m.html
mmc wrote:
> I have an application that accesses the database using a generic account. I
> am seeing a lot of instances of my generic account appearing on the Current
> activity >>Process info tab . The status says "sleeping" on all of them.
> There any way i could determine which one i the application is still using or
> is it safe to kill these processes. In other words i am looking for a good
> housekeeping procedure.
> Thanks........
am seeing a lot of instances of my generic account appearing on the Current
activity >>Process info tab . The status says "sleeping" on all of them.
There any way i could determine which one i the application is still using or
is it safe to kill these processes. In other words i am looking for a good
housekeeping procedure.
Thanks........
mmc,
Unless the performance of your server is suffering (especially memory
starvation), I would leave them alone. If it becomes a problem you
should consult the developers of the application to free their
connections when they are not needed.
Killing connections is not recommended as part of a housekeeping
routine. It smells of bad application design, however I do kill
connections when I need to do a database restore.
Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
http://www.markallison.co.uk
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602m.html
mmc wrote:
> I have an application that accesses the database using a generic account. I
> am seeing a lot of instances of my generic account appearing on the Current
> activity >>Process info tab . The status says "sleeping" on all of them.
> There any way i could determine which one i the application is still using or
> is it safe to kill these processes. In other words i am looking for a good
> housekeeping procedure.
> Thanks........
Process Info
I have an application that accesses the database using a generic account. I
am seeing a lot of instances of my generic account appearing on the Current
activity >>Process info tab . The status says "sleeping" on all of them.
There any way i could determine which one i the application is still using or
is it safe to kill these processes. In other words i am looking for a good
housekeeping procedure.
Thanks........mmc,
Unless the performance of your server is suffering (especially memory
starvation), I would leave them alone. If it becomes a problem you
should consult the developers of the application to free their
connections when they are not needed.
Killing connections is not recommended as part of a housekeeping
routine. It smells of bad application design, however I do kill
connections when I need to do a database restore.
--
Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
http://www.markallison.co.uk
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602m.html
mmc wrote:
> I have an application that accesses the database using a generic account. I
> am seeing a lot of instances of my generic account appearing on the Current
> activity >>Process info tab . The status says "sleeping" on all of them.
> There any way i could determine which one i the application is still using or
> is it safe to kill these processes. In other words i am looking for a good
> housekeeping procedure.
> Thanks........
am seeing a lot of instances of my generic account appearing on the Current
activity >>Process info tab . The status says "sleeping" on all of them.
There any way i could determine which one i the application is still using or
is it safe to kill these processes. In other words i am looking for a good
housekeeping procedure.
Thanks........mmc,
Unless the performance of your server is suffering (especially memory
starvation), I would leave them alone. If it becomes a problem you
should consult the developers of the application to free their
connections when they are not needed.
Killing connections is not recommended as part of a housekeeping
routine. It smells of bad application design, however I do kill
connections when I need to do a database restore.
--
Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
http://www.markallison.co.uk
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602m.html
mmc wrote:
> I have an application that accesses the database using a generic account. I
> am seeing a lot of instances of my generic account appearing on the Current
> activity >>Process info tab . The status says "sleeping" on all of them.
> There any way i could determine which one i the application is still using or
> is it safe to kill these processes. In other words i am looking for a good
> housekeeping procedure.
> Thanks........
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)