Showing posts with label windows. Show all posts

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Analysis Server on Windows 2003

Hi all,
I am having trouble getting Analysis server to run on my Windows 2003, are
there any KNOWN compatibility issues?
Thanks...MWhat kind of problems are you running into?
--
Dave Wickert [MSFT]
dwickert@.online.microsoft.com
Program Manager
BI SystemsTeam
SQL BI Product Unit (Analysis Services)
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Michelle" <smiley2211@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eq8VC22SFHA.2916@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi all,
> I am having trouble getting Analysis server to run on my Windows 2003, are
> there any KNOWN compatibility issues?
> Thanks...M
>|||Hi,
Check the article below
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;815486
HTH
Andreas
"Dave Wickert [MSFT]" wrote:

> What kind of problems are you running into?
> --
> Dave Wickert [MSFT]
> dwickert@.online.microsoft.com
> Program Manager
> BI SystemsTeam
> SQL BI Product Unit (Analysis Services)
> --
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights
.
> "Michelle" <smiley2211@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:eq8VC22SFHA.2916@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
>|||Morning Dave,
We get the following error when trying to register AS...
"errors connecting to MYSERVER - incompatible repository"
Thanks...M
"Andreas Mavrogenis" <AndreasMavrogenis@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:E52B35EA-89EF-4FBF-AC5F-10E72A515300@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> Check the article below
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;815486
> HTH
> Andreas
> "Dave Wickert [MSFT]" wrote:
>|||Sorry. I've never heard of that one.
I'd post it on microsoft.public.sqlserver.olap and possible one of the PSS
engineers will pick it up.
The only other posting that I've seen is the kb article:
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;288890
--
Dave Wickert [MSFT]
dwickert@.online.microsoft.com
Program Manager
BI SystemsTeam
SQL BI Product Unit (Analysis Services)
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Michelle" <smiley2211@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%23UHMPB$SFHA.3392@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Morning Dave,
> We get the following error when trying to register AS...
> "errors connecting to MYSERVER - incompatible repository"
> Thanks...M
> "Andreas Mavrogenis" <AndreasMavrogenis@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
in
> message news:E52B35EA-89EF-4FBF-AC5F-10E72A515300@.microsoft.com...
2003,[vbcol=seagreen]
>|||Hi All,
Thanks for your help...it was Andreas recommendation that solved my
problem...I needed SP3 for Analysis server installed.
---
Check the article below
---
Thanks...M
"Dave Wickert [MSFT]" <dwickert@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23MTJd$ETFHA.3212@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Sorry. I've never heard of that one.
> I'd post it on microsoft.public.sqlserver.olap and possible one of the PSS
> engineers will pick it up.
> The only other posting that I've seen is the kb article:
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;288890
> --
> Dave Wickert [MSFT]
> dwickert@.online.microsoft.com
> Program Manager
> BI SystemsTeam
> SQL BI Product Unit (Analysis Services)
> --
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
> "Michelle" <smiley2211@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:%23UHMPB$SFHA.3392@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> in
> 2003,
>

Analysis Server on Windows 2003

Hi all,
I am having trouble getting Analysis server to run on my Windows 2003, are
there any KNOWN compatibility issues?
Thanks...M
What kind of problems are you running into?
Dave Wickert [MSFT]
dwickert@.online.microsoft.com
Program Manager
BI SystemsTeam
SQL BI Product Unit (Analysis Services)
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Michelle" <smiley2211@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eq8VC22SFHA.2916@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi all,
> I am having trouble getting Analysis server to run on my Windows 2003, are
> there any KNOWN compatibility issues?
> Thanks...M
>
|||Hi,
Check the article below
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;815486
HTH
Andreas
"Dave Wickert [MSFT]" wrote:

> What kind of problems are you running into?
> --
> Dave Wickert [MSFT]
> dwickert@.online.microsoft.com
> Program Manager
> BI SystemsTeam
> SQL BI Product Unit (Analysis Services)
> --
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> "Michelle" <smiley2211@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:eq8VC22SFHA.2916@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
>
|||Morning Dave,
We get the following error when trying to register AS...
"errors connecting to MYSERVER - incompatible repository"
Thanks...M
"Andreas Mavrogenis" <AndreasMavrogenis@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:E52B35EA-89EF-4FBF-AC5F-10E72A515300@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> Check the article below
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;815486
> HTH
> Andreas
> "Dave Wickert [MSFT]" wrote:
|||Sorry. I've never heard of that one.
I'd post it on microsoft.public.sqlserver.olap and possible one of the PSS
engineers will pick it up.
The only other posting that I've seen is the kb article:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;288890
Dave Wickert [MSFT]
dwickert@.online.microsoft.com
Program Manager
BI SystemsTeam
SQL BI Product Unit (Analysis Services)
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Michelle" <smiley2211@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%23UHMPB$SFHA.3392@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Morning Dave,
> We get the following error when trying to register AS...
> "errors connecting to MYSERVER - incompatible repository"
> Thanks...M
> "Andreas Mavrogenis" <AndreasMavrogenis@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
in[vbcol=seagreen]
> message news:E52B35EA-89EF-4FBF-AC5F-10E72A515300@.microsoft.com...
2003,
>
|||Hi All,
Thanks for your help...it was Andreas recommendation that solved my
problem...I needed SP3 for Analysis server installed.
Check the article below[vbcol=seagreen]
Thanks...M
"Dave Wickert [MSFT]" <dwickert@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23MTJd$ETFHA.3212@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Sorry. I've never heard of that one.
> I'd post it on microsoft.public.sqlserver.olap and possible one of the PSS
> engineers will pick it up.
> The only other posting that I've seen is the kb article:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;288890
> --
> Dave Wickert [MSFT]
> dwickert@.online.microsoft.com
> Program Manager
> BI SystemsTeam
> SQL BI Product Unit (Analysis Services)
> --
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
> "Michelle" <smiley2211@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:%23UHMPB$SFHA.3392@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> in
> 2003,
>

Thursday, March 22, 2012

Analysis Server 2000 memory vs. SQL Server 2000 memory

Here is the situation:
Server is installed with both Analysis Services(OLAP
Cubes) and SQL Server 2000. O/S is Windows Advanced
Server 2000. Server currently has 6 GB of RAM. AWE
extension is used with 5 GB of RAM allocated to SQL
Server.
Does this mean only 1 GB of RAM is left for Analysis
Services and O/S? What is the max RAM can be allocated to
Analysis Services in a Windows 2000 Advanced Server?
Need to understand why at times (once a month) we
encounter "running low on virtual memory" on this server
causing DTS packages to stall occasionally. Realize that
best practice is to separate OLAP server from SQL Server,
but budget is a limitation at this time.Steven,
Analysis Services 32-bit edition uses up to 2GB memory. It can be exapanded
up to 3GB (check the article at
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;295443 how to do
it). So in your case, AS and SQL are competing for the same memory. Maybe
you could limit SQL Server on 4GB, so you have 2GB for AS.
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Associate Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
More than just Training
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"Steven Wong" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:02e501c48af8$b4cc31e0$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> Here is the situation:
> Server is installed with both Analysis Services(OLAP
> Cubes) and SQL Server 2000. O/S is Windows Advanced
> Server 2000. Server currently has 6 GB of RAM. AWE
> extension is used with 5 GB of RAM allocated to SQL
> Server.
> Does this mean only 1 GB of RAM is left for Analysis
> Services and O/S? What is the max RAM can be allocated to
> Analysis Services in a Windows 2000 Advanced Server?
> Need to understand why at times (once a month) we
> encounter "running low on virtual memory" on this server
> causing DTS packages to stall occasionally. Realize that
> best practice is to separate OLAP server from SQL Server,
> but budget is a limitation at this time.
>|||Hi Dejan:
Thanks for your response. Just want to clarify....
Is AS and SQL competing for the memory OR AS only has up
to 1 GB of RAM to use since AWE is enabled with 5 GB
allocated to SQL in this case?
How about the option to add 2 GB of RAM to server, and
allocate 6 GB to SQL and leave 2 GB to AS? What do you
think?
Thanks in advance.
>--Original Message--
>Steven,
>Analysis Services 32-bit edition uses up to 2GB memory.
It can be exapanded
>up to 3GB (check the article at
>http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-
us;295443 how to do
>it). So in your case, AS and SQL are competing for the
same memory. Maybe
>you could limit SQL Server on 4GB, so you have 2GB for AS.
>--
>Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
>Associate Mentor
>Solid Quality Learning
>More than just Training
>www.SolidQualityLearning.com
>"Steven Wong" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
in message
>news:02e501c48af8$b4cc31e0$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
to[vbcol=seagreen]
that[vbcol=seagreen]
Server,[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>.
>|||> Is AS and SQL competing for the memory OR AS only has up
> to 1 GB of RAM to use since AWE is enabled with 5 GB
> allocated to SQL in this case?
I think they are competing for the first 4 GB.

> How about the option to add 2 GB of RAM to server, and
> allocate 6 GB to SQL and leave 2 GB to AS? What do you
> think?
This would be even better than limiting SQL Server :-)
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Associate Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
More than just Training
www.SolidQualityLearning.comsql

Analysis Server 2000 memory vs. SQL Server 2000 memory

Here is the situation:
Server is installed with both Analysis Services(OLAP
Cubes) and SQL Server 2000. O/S is Windows Advanced
Server 2000. Server currently has 6 GB of RAM. AWE
extension is used with 5 GB of RAM allocated to SQL
Server.
Does this mean only 1 GB of RAM is left for Analysis
Services and O/S? What is the max RAM can be allocated to
Analysis Services in a Windows 2000 Advanced Server?
Need to understand why at times (once a month) we
encounter "running low on virtual memory" on this server
causing DTS packages to stall occasionally. Realize that
best practice is to separate OLAP server from SQL Server,
but budget is a limitation at this time.
Steven,
Analysis Services 32-bit edition uses up to 2GB memory. It can be exapanded
up to 3GB (check the article at
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;295443 how to do
it). So in your case, AS and SQL are competing for the same memory. Maybe
you could limit SQL Server on 4GB, so you have 2GB for AS.
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Associate Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
More than just Training
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"Steven Wong" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:02e501c48af8$b4cc31e0$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> Here is the situation:
> Server is installed with both Analysis Services(OLAP
> Cubes) and SQL Server 2000. O/S is Windows Advanced
> Server 2000. Server currently has 6 GB of RAM. AWE
> extension is used with 5 GB of RAM allocated to SQL
> Server.
> Does this mean only 1 GB of RAM is left for Analysis
> Services and O/S? What is the max RAM can be allocated to
> Analysis Services in a Windows 2000 Advanced Server?
> Need to understand why at times (once a month) we
> encounter "running low on virtual memory" on this server
> causing DTS packages to stall occasionally. Realize that
> best practice is to separate OLAP server from SQL Server,
> but budget is a limitation at this time.
>
|||Hi Dejan:
Thanks for your response. Just want to clarify....
Is AS and SQL competing for the memory OR AS only has up
to 1 GB of RAM to use since AWE is enabled with 5 GB
allocated to SQL in this case?
How about the option to add 2 GB of RAM to server, and
allocate 6 GB to SQL and leave 2 GB to AS? What do you
think?
Thanks in advance.
>--Original Message--
>Steven,
>Analysis Services 32-bit edition uses up to 2GB memory.
It can be exapanded
>up to 3GB (check the article at
>http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-
us;295443 how to do
>it). So in your case, AS and SQL are competing for the
same memory. Maybe
>you could limit SQL Server on 4GB, so you have 2GB for AS.
>--
>Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
>Associate Mentor
>Solid Quality Learning
>More than just Training
>www.SolidQualityLearning.com
>"Steven Wong" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
in message[vbcol=seagreen]
>news:02e501c48af8$b4cc31e0$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
to[vbcol=seagreen]
that[vbcol=seagreen]
Server,
>
>.
>
|||> Is AS and SQL competing for the memory OR AS only has up
> to 1 GB of RAM to use since AWE is enabled with 5 GB
> allocated to SQL in this case?
I think they are competing for the first 4 GB.

> How about the option to add 2 GB of RAM to server, and
> allocate 6 GB to SQL and leave 2 GB to AS? What do you
> think?
This would be even better than limiting SQL Server :-)
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Associate Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
More than just Training
www.SolidQualityLearning.com

Analysis Server 2000 memory vs. SQL Server 2000 memory

Here is the situation:
Server is installed with both Analysis Services(OLAP
Cubes) and SQL Server 2000. O/S is Windows Advanced
Server 2000. Server currently has 6 GB of RAM. AWE
extension is used with 5 GB of RAM allocated to SQL
Server.
Does this mean only 1 GB of RAM is left for Analysis
Services and O/S? What is the max RAM can be allocated to
Analysis Services in a Windows 2000 Advanced Server?
Need to understand why at times (once a month) we
encounter "running low on virtual memory" on this server
causing DTS packages to stall occasionally. Realize that
best practice is to separate OLAP server from SQL Server,
but budget is a limitation at this time.Steven,
Analysis Services 32-bit edition uses up to 2GB memory. It can be exapanded
up to 3GB (check the article at
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;295443 how to do
it). So in your case, AS and SQL are competing for the same memory. Maybe
you could limit SQL Server on 4GB, so you have 2GB for AS.
--
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Associate Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
More than just Training
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"Steven Wong" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:02e501c48af8$b4cc31e0$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> Here is the situation:
> Server is installed with both Analysis Services(OLAP
> Cubes) and SQL Server 2000. O/S is Windows Advanced
> Server 2000. Server currently has 6 GB of RAM. AWE
> extension is used with 5 GB of RAM allocated to SQL
> Server.
> Does this mean only 1 GB of RAM is left for Analysis
> Services and O/S? What is the max RAM can be allocated to
> Analysis Services in a Windows 2000 Advanced Server?
> Need to understand why at times (once a month) we
> encounter "running low on virtual memory" on this server
> causing DTS packages to stall occasionally. Realize that
> best practice is to separate OLAP server from SQL Server,
> but budget is a limitation at this time.
>|||Hi Dejan:
Thanks for your response. Just want to clarify....
Is AS and SQL competing for the memory OR AS only has up
to 1 GB of RAM to use since AWE is enabled with 5 GB
allocated to SQL in this case?
How about the option to add 2 GB of RAM to server, and
allocate 6 GB to SQL and leave 2 GB to AS? What do you
think?
Thanks in advance.
>--Original Message--
>Steven,
>Analysis Services 32-bit edition uses up to 2GB memory.
It can be exapanded
>up to 3GB (check the article at
>http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-
us;295443 how to do
>it). So in your case, AS and SQL are competing for the
same memory. Maybe
>you could limit SQL Server on 4GB, so you have 2GB for AS.
>--
>Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
>Associate Mentor
>Solid Quality Learning
>More than just Training
>www.SolidQualityLearning.com
>"Steven Wong" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
in message
>news:02e501c48af8$b4cc31e0$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Here is the situation:
>> Server is installed with both Analysis Services(OLAP
>> Cubes) and SQL Server 2000. O/S is Windows Advanced
>> Server 2000. Server currently has 6 GB of RAM. AWE
>> extension is used with 5 GB of RAM allocated to SQL
>> Server.
>> Does this mean only 1 GB of RAM is left for Analysis
>> Services and O/S? What is the max RAM can be allocated
to
>> Analysis Services in a Windows 2000 Advanced Server?
>> Need to understand why at times (once a month) we
>> encounter "running low on virtual memory" on this server
>> causing DTS packages to stall occasionally. Realize
that
>> best practice is to separate OLAP server from SQL
Server,
>> but budget is a limitation at this time.
>
>.
>|||> Is AS and SQL competing for the memory OR AS only has up
> to 1 GB of RAM to use since AWE is enabled with 5 GB
> allocated to SQL in this case?
I think they are competing for the first 4 GB.
> How about the option to add 2 GB of RAM to server, and
> allocate 6 GB to SQL and leave 2 GB to AS? What do you
> think?
This would be even better than limiting SQL Server :-)
--
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Associate Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
More than just Training
www.SolidQualityLearning.com

Analysis Server

We are running Analysis Server on Windows 2000 and it's running under local system account,but most of the time we are getting the following error 'Error = -2147221455 (80040031) Error string: Unable to connect to the registry on the server ,or you are not a member of the OLAP Administrators group on this server.'This happens when we try to refresh the cube and the only thing that makes it work again is to go to the Services under the control panel and stop and restart the OLAP services.I wonder why??By refresh, do you mean re-process the cube?

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

An unknown error occurred in the WMI provider. Error Code 8000000A

Hi,

I just installed SQL Server 2005 on Windows Vista.
I am getting an error "An unknown error occurred in the WMI
provider. Error Code 8000000A" when connecting to a web server. The
reporting services is running. Is there any other installation that is
missing. Please help.

Reporting Services is not supported on Windows Vista until SP2 of SQL Server 2005 is available. It is due out early next year. If you are an SP2 preview customer, you can try it before then. You can find out about this program at: http://www.microsoft.com/sql/ctp.mspx

|||Hi,
I have just received the same error message when opening then Reporting Services configuration tool. The server is running MS Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition with Service Pack 1 and SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition with Service Pack 1. I don't have local administrator rights, but I am an administrator for SQL Server and I am in the system administrator group for Reporting Services.
I have already made done some web research, but all I have found was related to Windows Vista only.
Thanx for any help and best regards,
Gerald|||I am having the same problem as described for Server 2003. Do we just need to try SP2?

An unknown error occurred in the WMI provider. Error Code 8000000A

Hi,

|||I am having the same problem as described for Server 2003. Do we just need to try SP2?

Monday, March 19, 2012

An internal error occurred on the report server. See the error log for more details. (rsInternal

Hello everybody,

I am trying to use the reporting services on Windows 2003 with SQLServer 2005. Everything works fine in the report manager and I can access and render the reports without any problem. But when I try to access the reports directly with the URL from the ReportServer, I get the following error :

Reporting Services Error

An internal error occurred on the report server. See the error log for more details. (rsInternalError) Get Online Help

The type Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.WebControlConnection, ReportingServicesWebUserInterface, Version=9.0.242.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89845dcd8080cc91 does not implement IReportServerConnection or could not be found

SQL Server Reporting Services

So I went to see the error log, and here is what it says :

<Header>
<Product>Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services Version 9.00.1399.00</Product>
<Locale>en-US</Locale>
<TimeZone>GMT Standard Time</TimeZone>
<Path>C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL.3\Reporting Services\LogFiles\ReportServer__11_10_2006_13_43_22.log</Path>
<SystemName>VODAFONE</SystemName>
<OSName>Microsoft Windows NT 5.2.3790 Service Pack 1</OSName>
<OSVersion>5.2.3790.65536</OSVersion>
</Header>
w3wp!webserver!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Reporting Web Server started
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing ConnectionType to '0' as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing IsSchedulingService to 'True' as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing IsNotificationService to 'True' as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing IsEventService to 'True' as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing PollingInterval to '10' second(s) as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing WindowsServiceUseFileShareStorage to 'False' as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing MemoryLimit to '60' percent as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing RecycleTime to '720' minute(s) as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing MaximumMemoryLimit to '80' percent as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing MaxAppDomainUnloadTime to '30' minute(s) as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing MaxQueueThreads to '0' thread(s) as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing IsWebServiceEnabled to 'True' as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing MaxActiveReqForOneUser to '20' requests(s) as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing MaxScheduleWait to '5' second(s) as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing DatabaseQueryTimeout to '120' second(s) as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing ProcessRecycleOptions to '0' as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing RunningRequestsScavengerCycle to '60' second(s) as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing RunningRequestsDbCycle to '60' second(s) as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing RunningRequestsAge to '30' second(s) as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing CleanupCycleMinutes to '10' minute(s) as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing DailyCleanupMinuteOfDay to default value of '120' minutes since midnight because it was not specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing WatsonFlags to '1064' as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing WatsonDumpOnExceptions to 'Microsoft.ReportingServices.Diagnostics.Utilities.InternalCatalogException,Microsoft.ReportingServices.Modeling.InternalModelingException' as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing WatsonDumpExcludeIfContainsExceptions to 'System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException,System.Threading.ThreadAbortException' as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing SecureConnectionLevel to '0' as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing DisplayErrorLink to 'True' as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!library!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Initializing WebServiceUseFileShareStorage to 'False' as specified in Configuration file.
w3wp!resourceutilities!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Reporting Services starting SKU: Enterprise
w3wp!resourceutilities!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Evaluation copy: 0 days left
w3wp!runningjobs!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Database Cleanup (Web Service) timer enabled: Next Event: 600 seconds. Cycle: 600 seconds
w3wp!runningjobs!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Running Requests Scavenger timer enabled: Next Event: 60 seconds. Cycle: 60 seconds
w3wp!runningjobs!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Running Requests DB timer enabled: Next Event: 60 seconds. Cycle: 60 seconds
w3wp!runningjobs!5!11/10/2006-13:43:23:: i INFO: Memory stats update timer enabled: Next Event: 60 seconds. Cycle: 60 seconds
w3wp!library!5!10/11/2006-13:43:23:: Unhandled exception was caught: Microsoft.Reporting.WebForms.InvalidConfigFileTypeException: The type Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.WebControlConnection, ReportingServicesWebUserInterface, Version=9.0.242.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89845dcd8080cc91 does not implement IReportServerConnection or could not be found
at Microsoft.Reporting.WebForms.ConfigFilePropertyInterface`1.EnsurePropertyLoaded()
at Microsoft.Reporting.WebForms.ConfigFilePropertyInterface`1.GetInstance()
at Microsoft.Reporting.WebForms.ReportViewer.CreateServerReport()
at Microsoft.Reporting.WebForms.ReportViewer..ctor()
at Microsoft.ReportingServices.WebServer.ReportViewerHost..ctor()
at ASP.pages_reportviewer_aspx.__BuildControlReportViewerForm()
at ASP.pages_reportviewer_aspx.__BuildControlTree(pages_reportviewer_aspx __ctrl)
at ASP.pages_reportviewer_aspx.FrameworkInitialize()
at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest(Boolean includeStagesBeforeAsyncPoint, Boolean includeStagesAfterAsyncPoint)
at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest()
at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestWithNoAssert(HttpContext context)
at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest(HttpContext context)
at ASP.pages_reportviewer_aspx.ProcessRequest(HttpContext context)
at System.Web.HttpApplication.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute()
at System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously)
w3wp!library!5!10/11/2006-13:43:23:: e ERROR: Throwing Microsoft.ReportingServices.Diagnostics.Utilities.InternalCatalogException: An internal error occurred on the report server. See the error log for more details., ;
Info: Microsoft.ReportingServices.Diagnostics.Utilities.InternalCatalogException: An internal error occurred on the report server. See the error log for more details. > Microsoft.Reporting.WebForms.InvalidConfigFileTypeException: The type Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.WebControlConnection, ReportingServicesWebUserInterface, Version=9.0.242.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89845dcd8080cc91 does not implement IReportServerConnection or could not be found
at Microsoft.Reporting.WebForms.ConfigFilePropertyInterface`1.EnsurePropertyLoaded()
at Microsoft.Reporting.WebForms.ConfigFilePropertyInterface`1.GetInstance()
at Microsoft.Reporting.WebForms.ReportViewer.CreateServerReport()
at Microsoft.Reporting.WebForms.ReportViewer..ctor()
at Microsoft.ReportingServices.WebServer.ReportViewerHost..ctor()
at ASP.pages_reportviewer_aspx.__BuildControlReportViewerForm()
at ASP.pages_reportviewer_aspx.__BuildControlTree(pages_reportviewer_aspx __ctrl)
at ASP.pages_reportviewer_aspx.FrameworkInitialize()
at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest(Boolean includeStagesBeforeAsyncPoint, Boolean includeStagesAfterAsyncPoint)
at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest()
at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestWithNoAssert(HttpContext context)
at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest(HttpContext context)
at ASP.pages_reportviewer_aspx.ProcessRequest(HttpContext context)
at System.Web.HttpApplication.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute()
at System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously)
End of inner exception stack trace
w3wp!library!5!10/11/2006-13:43:25:: i INFO: Exception dumped to: C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL.3\Reporting Services\LogFiles flags= ReferencedMemory, AllThreads, SendToWatson
w3wp!library!5!10/11/2006-13:43:26:: i INFO: Catalog SQL Server Edition = Enterprise
w3wp!webserver!5!11/10/2006-13:43:34:: i INFO: Reporting Web Server stopped

Does anyone have any idea about what happends ? Any suggestions maybe about anything I should try ?

Thanks very much in advance.

[edit] I just installed a few minutes ago the service pack 1 for SQL Server 2005 and Reporting services, but obviously it doesn't change anything to my problem. [/edit]

Have you added / defined a ReportViewerServerConnection key in the <appSettings> for ReportServer's web.config file?

If yes, can you remove it and try agan?

thanx,
Prash

|||

Hi,

First, thank you for answering.

Actually I haven't any <appsetings> in the ReportServer's web.config file. I have that in the ReportManager, which works fine, but not in the ReportServer.

Here is my web.config file for the Report Server :

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>

</configSections>

<system.diagnostics>

</switches>

</system.diagnostics>

</RStrace>

<system.web>

</assemblies>

</compilation>

</httpHandlers>

</securityPolicy>

</system.web>

<assemblyIdentity name="Microsoft.ReportingServices.Interfaces"

publicKeyToken="89845dcd8080cc91"

culture="neutral" />

<bindingRedirect oldVersion="8.0.242.0"

newVersion="9.0.242.0"/>

9.00.1399.00

</dependentAssembly>

</assemblyBinding>

</runtime>

</configuration>

If any of you has any suggestion, I already spent a few hours on that problem...

|||

Found a solution here

http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.sqlserver.reportingsvcs/browse_thread/thread/a22799e1a354ea79/9aca125282998795

This fix works assuming that the IIS virtual server that reporting services is installed on uses the same home directory as the Report Manager (in which case the ReportServer web.config inherits the settings from its parent).

An internal error occurred on the report server. See the error log for more details. (rsInternal

Hello everybody,

Reporting Services Error

An internal error occurred on the report server. See the error log for more details. (rsInternalError) Get Online Help The type Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.WebControlConnection, ReportingServicesWebUserInterface, Version=9.0.242.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89845dcd8080cc91 does not implement IReportServerConnection or could not be found

SQL Server Reporting Services

So I went to see the error log, and here is what it says :

Does anyone have any idea about what happends ? Any suggestions maybe about anything I should try ?

Thanks very much in advance.

[edit] I just installed a few minutes ago the service pack 1 for SQL Server 2005 and Reporting services, but obviously it doesn't change anything to my problem. [/edit]

Have you added / defined a ReportViewerServerConnection key in the <appSettings> for ReportServer's web.config file?

If yes, can you remove it and try agan?

thanx,
Prash

|||

Hi,

First, thank you for answering.

Actually I haven't any <appsetings> in the ReportServer's web.config file. I have that in the ReportManager, which works fine, but not in the ReportServer.

Here is my web.config file for the Report Server :

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>

</configSections>

<system.diagnostics>

</switches>

</system.diagnostics>

</RStrace>

<system.web>

</assemblies>

</compilation>

</httpHandlers>

</securityPolicy>

</system.web>

<assemblyIdentity name="Microsoft.ReportingServices.Interfaces"

publicKeyToken="89845dcd8080cc91"

culture="neutral" />

<bindingRedirect oldVersion="8.0.242.0"

newVersion="9.0.242.0"/>

9.00.1399.00

</dependentAssembly>

</assemblyBinding>

</runtime>

</configuration>

If any of you has any suggestion, I already spent a few hours on that problem...

|||

Found a solution here

http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.sqlserver.reportingsvcs/browse_thread/thread/a22799e1a354ea79/9aca125282998795

An internal error occurred on the report server. See the error log for more details. (rsInte

Hello everybody,

Reporting Services Error

An internal error occurred on the report server. See the error log for more details. (rsInternalError) Get Online Help

SQL Server Reporting Services

So I went to see the error log, and here is what it says :

Does anyone have any idea about what happends ? Any suggestions maybe about anything I should try ?

Thanks very much in advance.

[edit] I just installed a few minutes ago the service pack 1 for SQL Server 2005 and Reporting services, but obviously it doesn't change anything to my problem. [/edit]

Have you added / defined a ReportViewerServerConnection key in the <appSettings> for ReportServer's web.config file?

If yes, can you remove it and try agan?

thanx,
Prash

|||

Hi,

First, thank you for answering.

Actually I haven't any <appsetings> in the ReportServer's web.config file. I have that in the ReportManager, which works fine, but not in the ReportServer.

Here is my web.config file for the Report Server :

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>

</configSections>

<system.diagnostics>

</switches>

</system.diagnostics>

</RStrace>

<system.web>

</assemblies>

</compilation>

</httpHandlers>

</securityPolicy>

</system.web>

<assemblyIdentity name="Microsoft.ReportingServices.Interfaces"

publicKeyToken="89845dcd8080cc91"

culture="neutral" />

<bindingRedirect oldVersion="8.0.242.0"

newVersion="9.0.242.0"/>

9.00.1399.00

</dependentAssembly>

</assemblyBinding>

</runtime>

</configuration>

If any of you has any suggestion, I already spent a few hours on that problem...

|||

Found a solution here

http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.sqlserver.reportingsvcs/browse_thread/thread/a22799e1a354ea79/9aca125282998795

An instance of the SQL Server Reconciler error object cannot be created

I've got the following server configuration.

Database Server

- Windows 2003 Standard

- MSSQL 2000 sp4

Web Server

- Windows 2003 Standard

- SQL 2000 sp4 replication components

- SQL Mobile 2005 Server tools

The database server published out the snapshot to a share on the web server. This bit is working file, I can see the snapshot contents etc. When I connect from my own pc using SQL Management Studio and attempt to set up a subscription to a Mobile database, I get the following error.

TITLE: Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio

An instance of the SQL Server Reconciler error object cannot be created. Try reinstalling the replication components.
HRESULT 0x8007007E (28010)

BUTTONS:

I've also accessed the Url using diagnostics and get the following output:


 SQL Server Mobile Server Agent Diagnostics


 2006/01/13 10:09:10

*General Information*Item Value
Server Name bundy
URL /services/taskmobileserversync/sqlcesa30.dll
Authentication Type Anonymous
Server Port 80
HTTPS off
Server Software Microsoft-IIS/6.0
Replication Allowed
RDA Allowed
Logging Level 1


*Impersonation and Access Tests* Action Status ErrorCode
Impersonate User SUCCESS 0x0
ReadWriteDeleteMessageFile SUCCESS 0x0


*SQL Server Mobile Modules Test*Module Status ErrorCode Version
SQLCERP30.DLL SUCCESS 0x0 3.0.5206.0
SQLCESA30.DLL SUCCESS 0x0 3.0.5206.0


*Reconciler Test* Reconciler Status ErrorCode
9.0 Database Reconciler FAILURE 0x80040154
8.0 Database Reconciler FAILURE 0x8007007E


*SQL Server Module Versions* Module Version
sqloledb.dll 2000.85.1022.0
8.0 replrec.dll 2000.80.2038.0
8.0 replprov.dll 2000.80.2038.0
8.0 msgprox.dll 2000.80.2038.0

Any suggestions? I've reinstalled the various components on the Web Server quite a few times by now...

thanks

// charlie

Search for REPLERRX.DLL and register using regsvr32. And then try. If the registration fails for this DLL, just check whether you have all the dependant DLLs. There are tools to find out the dependant DLLs of a particular binary. Most probably you may need to have MSVCR71.DLL and MSVCP71.DLL. However these two DLLs are already packaged in the 'SQL Server 2000 SP4 Replication Components' setup package. There is some problem in the installation I believe. If you could register REPLERRX.DLL, then you should be able to sync.

Thanks,

Laxmi NRO, MSFT, SQL Mobile, Microsoft Corporation

|||To fix this, I installed the SQL Server 2000 client tools. This resolved the problem.|||

Thanks for letting us know the information.

Thanks,

Laxmi Narsimha Rao ORUGANTI, MSFT, SQL Mobile, Microsoft Corporation

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Amount of RAM required ?

We are going to replace the old SQL Server 2000 to a new
Hardware running Windows 2003 Server.
We are planning how much memory should be used. At the
present monent, we are using 2GB RAM and the performance
is OK. We find that the Average RAM and Peak RAM used is
around 2000 MB. According to Network Administrator, it is
because SQL uses all memory available for caching /
performance optimisation.
Is it necessary for us to purchase more RAM for the new
server ? Is it possible for SQL Server 2000 Standard to
access more than 2 GB RAM ?
Thanks
SQL Server standard edition can only access 2GB of ram. However, I would
make sure the operating system and other programs have enough Ram. So
depending on other software buy three or four GB of ram and set SQL Servers
min and max memory to 2GB so it takes it up front.
"Jason" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0a2601c59bb6$38a863c0$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> We are going to replace the old SQL Server 2000 to a new
> Hardware running Windows 2003 Server.
> We are planning how much memory should be used. At the
> present monent, we are using 2GB RAM and the performance
> is OK. We find that the Average RAM and Peak RAM used is
> around 2000 MB. According to Network Administrator, it is
> because SQL uses all memory available for caching /
> performance optimisation.
> Is it necessary for us to purchase more RAM for the new
> server ? Is it possible for SQL Server 2000 Standard to
> access more than 2 GB RAM ?
> Thanks
|||did you hear "Danny" <someone@.nowhere.com> say in
news:wtyJe.1283$1S.438@.trnddc04:

> SQL Server standard edition can only access 2GB of ram. However, I
> would make sure the operating system and other programs have enough
> Ram. So depending on other software buy three or four GB of ram and
> set SQL Servers min and max memory to 2GB so it takes it up front.
ditto. I use Standard in the office exclusively (about 18 instances) and
I only put more than 4Gb in the box if I am installing a second instance
of SQL on the same box. If you have extra money to spend, you may want to
consider additional processors. SQL makes very good use of the additional
processors.
Neil MacMurchy
http://spaces.msn.com/members/neilmacmurchy
http://spaces.msn.com/members/mctblogs
|||It's impossible to say whether you need more memory or not without a few
metrics. A couple perfmon counters you should look at are the buffer
cache hit ratio (SQLServer:Buffer Manager | Buffer cache hit ratio) and
the page life expectancy (SQLServer:Buffer Manager | Page life expectancy).
SQL Server will cache data pages that are accessed, so the SQL Server
address space fills up with stuff and will remain filled with stuff
until it needs to free up the memory for another app, the OS or more
recently accessed data pages.
The cache hit ratio will tell you what percentage of your data requests
are satisfied from RAM (should be pretty high, like 99+ percent).
The page life expectancy is how long SQL Server expects a data page to
remain in RAM before needing to be swapped out to disk to free up the
memory for other apps or data. It's measured in seconds and I like to
make sure my servers have pages staying in RAM for at least 5 minutes on
average, preferable an hour or more.
Those two counters, while they won't give you a complete picture of the
memory pressure on a SQL server, will give you a fairly good idea of
whether or not you need to think about increasing physical RAM in a box.
And, yes, SQL Server is capable of managing a good deal more memory than
2G. With different editions, SQL Server 2000 can handle up to 64G
(http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...KChooseEd.mspx).
*mike hodgson*
blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Jason wrote:

>We are going to replace the old SQL Server 2000 to a new
>Hardware running Windows 2003 Server.
>We are planning how much memory should be used. At the
>present monent, we are using 2GB RAM and the performance
>is OK. We find that the Average RAM and Peak RAM used is
>around 2000 MB. According to Network Administrator, it is
>because SQL uses all memory available for caching /
>performance optimisation.
>Is it necessary for us to purchase more RAM for the new
>server ? Is it possible for SQL Server 2000 Standard to
>access more than 2 GB RAM ?
>Thanks
>
|||Dear Mike,
Thank you for your advice.
I would like to ask 3 questions:
1) Does it mean that each instance can access 2GB. In other words, if there are 3 instances installed, each of them can access 2GB or 6GB in total.
2) RAM Required - We have asked a consultant for Server Virtualization / Consolidation. Their suggestion for RAM usage is 8GB just 2GB + 2GB + 2GB (As we have 3 SQL Servers). However, we know that two of the SQL Servers are under utilized BUT their report tells us that they are using 2GB.
3) CPU Required - They say that we only need a dual CPU server. In the past, one of the SQL Server uses 4 processors while the other 2 are 2 processor servers.
Any suggestion is highly appreciated.
"Mike Hodgson" <mike.hodgson@.mallesons.nospam.com> wrote in message news:uRBjwE8mFHA.1968@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
It's impossible to say whether you need more memory or not without a few metrics. A couple perfmon counters you should look at are the buffer cache hit ratio (SQLServer:Buffer Manager | Buffer cache hit ratio) and the page life expectancy (SQLServer:Buffer Manager | Page life expectancy).
SQL Server will cache data pages that are accessed, so the SQL Server address space fills up with stuff and will remain filled with stuff until it needs to free up the memory for another app, the OS or more recently accessed data pages.
The cache hit ratio will tell you what percentage of your data requests are satisfied from RAM (should be pretty high, like 99+ percent).
The page life expectancy is how long SQL Server expects a data page to remain in RAM before needing to be swapped out to disk to free up the memory for other apps or data. It's measured in seconds and I like to make sure my servers have pages staying in RAM for at least 5 minutes on average, preferable an hour or more.
Those two counters, while they won't give you a complete picture of the memory pressure on a SQL server, will give you a fairly good idea of whether or not you need to think about increasing physical RAM in a box.
And, yes, SQL Server is capable of managing a good deal more memory than 2G. With different editions, SQL Server 2000 can handle up to 64G (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...KChooseEd.mspx).
mike hodgson
blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Jason wrote:
We are going to replace the old SQL Server 2000 to a new
Hardware running Windows 2003 Server.
We are planning how much memory should be used. At the
present monent, we are using 2GB RAM and the performance
is OK. We find that the Average RAM and Peak RAM used is
around 2000 MB. According to Network Administrator, it is
because SQL uses all memory available for caching /
performance optimisation.
Is it necessary for us to purchase more RAM for the new
server ? Is it possible for SQL Server 2000 Standard to
access more than 2 GB RAM ?
Thanks
|||Jason,
1) Does it mean that each instance can access 2GB. In other words, if there are 3 instances installed, each of them can access 2GB or 6GB in total.
SQL Server Standard edition can utilize 2 GB memory for each instance maximum. So 2 GB only will be utilized for each instance. Incase
1 instance is down then 2 GB allocated for that instance will be free.
2) RAM Required - We have asked a consultant for Server Virtualization / Consolidation. Their suggestion for RAM usage is 8GB just 2GB + 2GB + 2GB (As we have 3 SQL Servers). However, we know that two of the SQL Servers are under utilized BUT their report tells us that they are using 2GB.
Looks like you have kept the memory paramter static (Fixed). In this case 2 GB will be reserved to sql server and will not be shared across for other applications.
USE the Perfmon -- Memory -- availableMBytes counter to get the exact value during peak time.
3) CPU Required - They say that we only need a dual CPU server. In the past, one of the SQL Server uses 4 processors while the other 2 are 2 processor servers.
If your application is less processor intensive then you could go for 2 CPU servers. Again run the Perfmon and identify the CPU usage. If the CPU usage is <50% with
2 CPU duing peak then you do not have any CPU issue.
Measure cpu using the counter -- PROCESSOR -- % PROCESSOR TIME.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Jason" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:%23Qip5aAnFHA.3648@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
Dear Mike,
Thank you for your advice.
I would like to ask 3 questions:
1) Does it mean that each instance can access 2GB. In other words, if there are 3 instances installed, each of them can access 2GB or 6GB in total.
2) RAM Required - We have asked a consultant for Server Virtualization / Consolidation. Their suggestion for RAM usage is 8GB just 2GB + 2GB + 2GB (As we have 3 SQL Servers). However, we know that two of the SQL Servers are under utilized BUT their report tells us that they are using 2GB.
3) CPU Required - They say that we only need a dual CPU server. In the past, one of the SQL Server uses 4 processors while the other 2 are 2 processor servers.
Any suggestion is highly appreciated.
"Mike Hodgson" <mike.hodgson@.mallesons.nospam.com> wrote in message news:uRBjwE8mFHA.1968@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
It's impossible to say whether you need more memory or not without a few metrics. A couple perfmon counters you should look at are the buffer cache hit ratio (SQLServer:Buffer Manager | Buffer cache hit ratio) and the page life expectancy (SQLServer:Buffer Manager | Page life expectancy).
SQL Server will cache data pages that are accessed, so the SQL Server address space fills up with stuff and will remain filled with stuff until it needs to free up the memory for another app, the OS or more recently accessed data pages.
The cache hit ratio will tell you what percentage of your data requests are satisfied from RAM (should be pretty high, like 99+ percent).
The page life expectancy is how long SQL Server expects a data page to remain in RAM before needing to be swapped out to disk to free up the memory for other apps or data. It's measured in seconds and I like to make sure my servers have pages staying in RAM for at least 5 minutes on average, preferable an hour or more.
Those two counters, while they won't give you a complete picture of the memory pressure on a SQL server, will give you a fairly good idea of whether or not you need to think about increasing physical RAM in a box.
And, yes, SQL Server is capable of managing a good deal more memory than 2G. With different editions, SQL Server 2000 can handle up to 64G (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...KChooseEd.mspx).
mike hodgson
blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Jason wrote:
We are going to replace the old SQL Server 2000 to a new
Hardware running Windows 2003 Server.
We are planning how much memory should be used. At the
present monent, we are using 2GB RAM and the performance
is OK. We find that the Average RAM and Peak RAM used is
around 2000 MB. According to Network Administrator, it is
because SQL uses all memory available for caching /
performance optimisation.
Is it necessary for us to purchase more RAM for the new
server ? Is it possible for SQL Server 2000 Standard to
access more than 2 GB RAM ?
Thanks
|||Dear Hari,
Thank you for your advice.
1) I haven't installed more than 1 instance on a SQL Server. It is just for my interest only. I want to confirm I have followed what you mean = Each instance can be allocated 2 GB and if that instance is down, that 2GB will be of no use to other instances ?
2) NO. All of the SQL Servers RAM is dynamically allocated. I am wondering when we get the new Server, maybe we will assign 2.5GB for each Virtual Server. And I can assign 2GB to each SQL Server static. I would like to know if we statically allocate RAM, should I choose Minimum = 2GB and Maximum = 2GB ?
3) My boss just wonders why in the past for each SQL Server, at least 2 CPU are required, now for 3 Virtual Servers, only 2 processors are required. Anyhow, we have to look into the Virtual Server requirement and it is recommended by them. On the other hand, we are now using 20 CALs for each SQL Server, if we reduce the number of CPU of 1 SQL Server from 4 to 2, can we get any saving in licensing ?
Thanks
Jason
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:OyF9IpAnFHA.2852@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
Jason,
1) Does it mean that each instance can access 2GB. In other words, if there are 3 instances installed, each of them can access 2GB or 6GB in total.
SQL Server Standard edition can utilize 2 GB memory for each instance maximum. So 2 GB only will be utilized for each instance. Incase
1 instance is down then 2 GB allocated for that instance will be free.
2) RAM Required - We have asked a consultant for Server Virtualization / Consolidation. Their suggestion for RAM usage is 8GB just 2GB + 2GB + 2GB (As we have 3 SQL Servers). However, we know that two of the SQL Servers are under utilized BUT their report tells us that they are using 2GB.
Looks like you have kept the memory paramter static (Fixed). In this case 2 GB will be reserved to sql server and will not be shared across for other applications.
USE the Perfmon -- Memory -- availableMBytes counter to get the exact value during peak time.
3) CPU Required - They say that we only need a dual CPU server. In the past, one of the SQL Server uses 4 processors while the other 2 are 2 processor servers.
If your application is less processor intensive then you could go for 2 CPU servers. Again run the Perfmon and identify the CPU usage. If the CPU usage is <50% with
2 CPU duing peak then you do not have any CPU issue.
Measure cpu using the counter -- PROCESSOR -- % PROCESSOR TIME.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Jason" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:%23Qip5aAnFHA.3648@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
Dear Mike,
Thank you for your advice.
I would like to ask 3 questions:
1) Does it mean that each instance can access 2GB. In other words, if there are 3 instances installed, each of them can access 2GB or 6GB in total.
2) RAM Required - We have asked a consultant for Server Virtualization / Consolidation. Their suggestion for RAM usage is 8GB just 2GB + 2GB + 2GB (As we have 3 SQL Servers). However, we know that two of the SQL Servers are under utilized BUT their report tells us that they are using 2GB.
3) CPU Required - They say that we only need a dual CPU server. In the past, one of the SQL Server uses 4 processors while the other 2 are 2 processor servers.
Any suggestion is highly appreciated.
"Mike Hodgson" <mike.hodgson@.mallesons.nospam.com> wrote in message news:uRBjwE8mFHA.1968@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
It's impossible to say whether you need more memory or not without a few metrics. A couple perfmon counters you should look at are the buffer cache hit ratio (SQLServer:Buffer Manager | Buffer cache hit ratio) and the page life expectancy (SQLServer:Buffer Manager | Page life expectancy).
SQL Server will cache data pages that are accessed, so the SQL Server address space fills up with stuff and will remain filled with stuff until it needs to free up the memory for another app, the OS or more recently accessed data pages.
The cache hit ratio will tell you what percentage of your data requests are satisfied from RAM (should be pretty high, like 99+ percent).
The page life expectancy is how long SQL Server expects a data page to remain in RAM before needing to be swapped out to disk to free up the memory for other apps or data. It's measured in seconds and I like to make sure my servers have pages staying in RAM for at least 5 minutes on average, preferable an hour or more.
Those two counters, while they won't give you a complete picture of the memory pressure on a SQL server, will give you a fairly good idea of whether or not you need to think about increasing physical RAM in a box.
And, yes, SQL Server is capable of managing a good deal more memory than 2G. With different editions, SQL Server 2000 can handle up to 64G (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...KChooseEd.mspx).
mike hodgson
blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Jason wrote:
We are going to replace the old SQL Server 2000 to a new
Hardware running Windows 2003 Server.
We are planning how much memory should be used. At the
present monent, we are using 2GB RAM and the performance
is OK. We find that the Average RAM and Peak RAM used is
around 2000 MB. According to Network Administrator, it is
because SQL uses all memory available for caching /
performance optimisation.
Is it necessary for us to purchase more RAM for the new
server ? Is it possible for SQL Server 2000 Standard to
access more than 2 GB RAM ?
Thanks
|||Jason wrote:

> Dear Hari,
> Thank you for your advice.
> 1) I haven't installed more than 1 instance on a SQL Server. It is
> just for my interest only. I want to confirm I have followed what you
> mean = Each instance can be allocated 2 GB and if that instance is
> down, that 2GB will be of no use to other instances ?
No. If that 2GB is freed up it can be used by any application
(including other SQL instances). Configuring a SQL instance to only use
a maximum of 2GB of RAM doesn't reserve that physical memory for the exe
(unless it is running and you've turned off the standard dynamic memory
management). I think what Hari is trying to point out here is that if
the SQL instance is only using a max of 2GB then that is how much memory
will be available to other apps if that SQL instance shuts down.

> 2) NO. All of the SQL Servers RAM is dynamically allocated. I am
> wondering when we get the new Server, maybe we will assign 2.5GB for
> each Virtual Server. And I can assign 2GB to each SQL Server static.
> I would like to know if we statically allocate RAM, should I choose
> Minimum = 2GB and Maximum = 2GB ?
Personally, if you're talking about < 4GB of RAM then I would leave all
the instances set to allocate memory dynamically. Unless, one SQL
instance is particularly important and is having to fight for its memory
(eg. a production instance fighting with UAT & development instances for
the memory it needs), in which case I would still let it allocate memory
dynamically but would set a minimum server memory for that important
server of, say, 2GB. If you enable the /3GB switch in boot.ini then
each instance can grab up to 3GB of RAM if needed, but with the dynamic
memory management they will release RAM, if necessary, when other apps
make requests for it and there's not enough free.

> 3) My boss just wonders why in the past for each SQL Server, at least
> 2 CPU are required, now for 3 Virtual Servers, only 2 processors are
> required. Anyhow, we have to look into the Virtual Server requirement
> and it is recommended by them. On the other hand, we are now using 20
> CALs for each SQL Server, if we reduce the number of CPU of 1 SQL
> Server from 4 to 2, can we get any saving in licensing ?
There is a difference between a virtual server and a named SQL
instance. Virtual servers relate to SQL Server running on a Windows
cluster using Microsoft Clustering Services (MSCS). I think you meant
to say "SQL instance" rather than "virtual server".
It's possible that the CPUs you buy today are faster than the CPUs that
were in your previous boxes, in which case you may be able to get away
with fewer physical CPUs in your new box. Also, hyper-threading (which
may not have been an attribute of your old CPUs) may make a difference
to the maximum SQL load your new CPUs can handle. (All of this is
purely conjecture because I don't know all your details.) You should
keep an eye on the Processor perfmon counters on your new box as you
start to add load to make sure the fewer CPUs are up to the job. As a
general rule of thumb though, SQL Server is typically a CPU bound
application so you shouldn't skimp on the processors if you can afford it.
In terms of licensing, you should talk to you friendly Microsoft
licensing person because it's a rather convoluted area that not many
people are on top of (myself included). But my understand of the client
CALs is that 1 client CAL will allow 1 client computer to connect to an
number of purchased SQL server instances on your network (or should that
be MS Domain?). If you're licensed by client CALs then the number of
CPUs in each server doesn't make any difference - that only comes into
play when you're license by "per processor". I think that's right but
you should check that with Microsoft.
Hope that helps.
*mike hodgson*
blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks
> Jason
>
> "Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com
> <mailto:hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com>> wrote in message
> news:OyF9IpAnFHA.2852@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Jason,
> 1) Does it mean that each instance can access 2GB. In other
> words, if there are 3 instances installed, each of them can access
> 2GB or 6GB in total.
> SQL Server Standard edition can utilize 2 GB memory for each
> instance maximum. So 2 GB only will be utilized for each instance.
> Incase
> 1 instance is down then 2 GB allocated for that instance will be
> free.
> 2) RAM Required - We have asked a consultant for Server
> Virtualization / Consolidation. Their suggestion for RAM usage is
> 8GB just 2GB + 2GB + 2GB (As we have 3 SQL Servers). However, we
> know that two of the SQL Servers are under utilized BUT their
> report tells us that they are using 2GB.
> Looks like you have kept the memory paramter static (Fixed). In
> this case 2 GB will be reserved to sql server and will not be
> shared across for other applications.
> USE the Perfmon -- Memory -- availableMBytes counter to get the
> exact value during peak time.
> 3) CPU Required - They say that we only need a dual CPU server.
> In the past, one of the SQL Server uses 4 processors while the
> other 2 are 2 processor servers.
> If your application is less processor intensive then you could go
> for 2 CPU servers. Again run the Perfmon and identify the CPU
> usage. If the CPU usage is <50% with
> 2 CPU duing peak then you do not have any CPU issue.
> Measure cpu using the counter -- PROCESSOR -- % PROCESSOR TIME.
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Jason" <anonymous@.discussions..microsoft.com
> <mailto:anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>> wrote in message
> news:%23Qip5aAnFHA.3648@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Dear Mike,
> Thank you for your advice.
> I would like to ask 3 questions:
> 1) Does it mean that each instance can access 2GB. In other
> words, if there are 3 instances installed, each of them can
> access 2GB or 6GB in total.
> 2) RAM Required - We have asked a consultant for Server
> Virtualization / Consolidation. Their suggestion for RAM
> usage is 8GB just 2GB + 2GB + 2GB (As we have 3 SQL Servers).
> However, we know that two of the SQL Servers are under
> utilized BUT their report tells us that they are using 2GB.
> 3) CPU Required - They say that we only need a dual CPU
> server. In the past, one of the SQL Server uses 4 processors
> while the other 2 are 2 processor servers.
> Any suggestion is highly appreciated.
>
> "Mike Hodgson" <mike.hodgson@.mallesons.nospam.com
> <mailto:mike.hodgson@.mallesons.nospam.com>> wrote in
> message news:uRBjwE8mFHA.1968@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> It's impossible to say whether you need more memory or not
> without a few metrics. A couple perfmon counters you
> should look at are the buffer cache hit ratio
> (SQLServer:Buffer Manager | Buffer cache hit ratio) and
> the page life expectancy (SQLServer:Buffer Manager | Page
> life expectancy).
> SQL Server will cache data pages that are accessed, so the
> SQL Server address space fills up with stuff and will
> remain filled with stuff until it needs to free up the
> memory for another app, the OS or more recently accessed
> data pages.
> The cache hit ratio will tell you what percentage of your
> data requests are satisfied from RAM (should be pretty
> high, like 99+ percent).
> The page life expectancy is how long SQL Server expects a
> data page to remain in RAM before needing to be swapped
> out to disk to free up the memory for other apps or data.
> It's measured in seconds and I like to make sure my
> servers have pages staying in RAM for at least 5 minutes
> on average, preferable an hour or more.
> Those two counters, while they won't give you a complete
> picture of the memory pressure on a SQL server, will give
> you a fairly good idea of whether or not you need to think
> about increasing physical RAM in a box.
> And, yes, SQL Server is capable of managing a good deal
> more memory than 2G. With different editions, SQL Server
> 2000 can handle up to 64G
> (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...KChooseEd.mspx).
> --
> *mike hodgson*
> blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
>
> Jason wrote:
|||Hi,
from a licensing point of view...
if you have processors licenses for SQL Server and you want to use it in Virtual Server you have to pay ONLY for physical processors on the server.
So if you have 2 processors in the server, you pay 2 proc. licenses for SQL Server and you can use it in all your guest os.
You only have to pay for the OS used in the guest, not for SQL.
if you have CALs, its client access licenses, so the licenses are by user, and again there is no impact in your guests systems. 1 CAL give access to the user to all your SQL Servers installations.
And now, with dual core processors, you can setup a Dual Opteron Dual Core server (so windows see 4 processors) and you pay your SQL Server for only the 2 physical processors.
"Mike Hodgson" <mike.hodgson@.mallesons.nospam.com> wrote in message news:%23FlBIsXnFHA.3572@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
Jason wrote:
Dear Hari,
Thank you for your advice.
1) I haven't installed more than 1 instance on a SQL Server. It is just for my interest only. I want to confirm I have followed what you mean = Each instance can be allocated 2 GB and if that instance is down, that 2GB will be of no use to other instances ?
No. If that 2GB is freed up it can be used by any application (including other SQL instances). Configuring a SQL instance to only use a maximum of 2GB of RAM doesn't reserve that physical memory for the exe (unless it is running and you've turned off the standard dynamic memory management). I think what Hari is trying to point out here is that if the SQL instance is only using a max of 2GB then that is how much memory will be available to other apps if that SQL instance shuts down.
2) NO. All of the SQL Servers RAM is dynamically allocated. I am wondering when we get the new Server, maybe we will assign 2.5GB for each Virtual Server. And I can assign 2GB to each SQL Server static. I would like to know if we statically allocate RAM, should I choose Minimum = 2GB and Maximum = 2GB ?
Personally, if you're talking about < 4GB of RAM then I would leave all the instances set to allocate memory dynamically. Unless, one SQL instance is particularly important and is having to fight for its memory (eg. a production instance fighting with UAT & development instances for the memory it needs), in which case I would still let it allocate memory dynamically but would set a minimum server memory for that important server of, say, 2GB. If you enable the /3GB switch in boot.ini then each instance can grab up to 3GB of RAM if needed, but with the dynamic memory management they will release RAM, if necessary, when other apps make requests for it and there's not enough free.
3) My boss just wonders why in the past for each SQL Server, at least 2 CPU are required, now for 3 Virtual Servers, only 2 processors are required. Anyhow, we have to look into the Virtual Server requirement and it is recommended by them. On the other hand, we are now using 20 CALs for each SQL Server, if we reduce the number of CPU of 1 SQL Server from 4 to 2, can we get any saving in licensing ?
There is a difference between a virtual server and a named SQL instance. Virtual servers relate to SQL Server running on a Windows cluster using Microsoft Clustering Services (MSCS). I think you meant to say "SQL instance" rather than "virtual server".
It's possible that the CPUs you buy today are faster than the CPUs that were in your previous boxes, in which case you may be able to get away with fewer physical CPUs in your new box. Also, hyper-threading (which may not have been an attribute of your old CPUs) may make a difference to the maximum SQL load your new CPUs can handle. (All of this is purely conjecture because I don't know all your details.) You should keep an eye on the Processor perfmon counters on your new box as you start to add load to make sure the fewer CPUs are up to the job. As a general rule of thumb though, SQL Server is typically a CPU bound application so you shouldn't skimp on the processors if you can afford it.
In terms of licensing, you should talk to you friendly Microsoft licensing person because it's a rather convoluted area that not many people are on top of (myself included). But my understand of the client CALs is that 1 client CAL will allow 1 client computer to connect to an number of purchased SQL server instances on your network (or should that be MS Domain?). If you're licensed by client CALs then the number of CPUs in each server doesn't make any difference - that only comes into play when you're license by "per processor". I think that's right but you should check that with Microsoft.
Hope that helps.
mike hodgson
blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Thanks
Jason
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:OyF9IpAnFHA.2852@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
Jason,
1) Does it mean that each instance can access 2GB. In other words, if there are 3 instances installed, each of them can access 2GB or 6GB in total.
SQL Server Standard edition can utilize 2 GB memory for each instance maximum. So 2 GB only will be utilized for each instance. Incase
1 instance is down then 2 GB allocated for that instance will be free.
2) RAM Required - We have asked a consultant for Server Virtualization / Consolidation. Their suggestion for RAM usage is 8GB just 2GB + 2GB + 2GB (As we have 3 SQL Servers). However, we know that two of the SQL Servers are under utilized BUT their report tells us that they are using 2GB.
Looks like you have kept the memory paramter static (Fixed). In this case 2 GB will be reserved to sql server and will not be shared across for other applications.
USE the Perfmon -- Memory -- availableMBytes counter to get the exact value during peak time.
3) CPU Required - They say that we only need a dual CPU server. In the past, one of the SQL Server uses 4 processors while the other 2 are 2 processor servers.
If your application is less processor intensive then you could go for 2 CPU servers. Again run the Perfmon and identify the CPU usage. If the CPU usage is <50% with
2 CPU duing peak then you do not have any CPU issue.
Measure cpu using the counter -- PROCESSOR -- % PROCESSOR TIME.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Jason" <anonymous@.discussions..microsoft.com> wrote in message news:%23Qip5aAnFHA.3648@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
Dear Mike,
Thank you for your advice.
I would like to ask 3 questions:
1) Does it mean that each instance can access 2GB. In other words, if there are 3 instances installed, each of them can access 2GB or 6GB in total.
2) RAM Required - We have asked a consultant for Server Virtualization / Consolidation. Their suggestion for RAM usage is 8GB just 2GB + 2GB + 2GB (As we have 3 SQL Servers). However, we know that two of the SQL Servers are under utilized BUT their report tells us that they are using 2GB.
3) CPU Required - They say that we only need a dual CPU server. In the past, one of the SQL Server uses 4 processors while the other 2 are 2 processor servers.
Any suggestion is highly appreciated.
"Mike Hodgson" <mike.hodgson@.mallesons.nospam.com> wrote in message news:uRBjwE8mFHA.1968@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
It's impossible to say whether you need more memory or not without a few metrics. A couple perfmon counters you should look at are the buffer cache hit ratio (SQLServer:Buffer Manager | Buffer cache hit ratio) and the page life expectancy (SQLServer:Buffer Manager | Page life expectancy).
SQL Server will cache data pages that are accessed, so the SQL Server address space fills up with stuff and will remain filled with stuff until it needs to free up the memory for another app, the OS or more recently accessed data pages.
The cache hit ratio will tell you what percentage of your data requests are satisfied from RAM (should be pretty high, like 99+ percent).
The page life expectancy is how long SQL Server expects a data page to remain in RAM before needing to be swapped out to disk to free up the memory for other apps or data. It's measured in seconds and I like to make sure my servers have pages staying in RAM for at least 5 minutes on average, preferable an hour or more.
Those two counters, while they won't give you a complete picture of the memory pressure on a SQL server, will give you a fairly good idea of whether or not you need to think about increasing physical RAM in a box.
And, yes, SQL Server is capable of managing a good deal more memory than 2G. With different editions, SQL Server 2000 can handle up to 64G (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...KChooseEd.mspx).
mike hodgson
blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Jason wrote:
We are going to replace the old SQL Server 2000 to a new
Hardware running Windows 2003 Server.
We are planning how much memory should be used. At the
present monent, we are using 2GB RAM and the performance
is OK. We find that the Average RAM and Peak RAM used is
around 2000 MB. According to Network Administrator, it is
because SQL uses all memory available for caching /
performance optimisation.
Is it necessary for us to purchase more RAM for the new
server ? Is it possible for SQL Server 2000 Standard to
access more than 2 GB RAM ?
Thanks

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Analysis Server on Windows 2003

Analysis Server on Windows 2003

Thursday, March 22, 2012

Analysis Server 2000 memory vs. SQL Server 2000 memory

Analysis Server 2000 memory vs. SQL Server 2000 memory

Analysis Server 2000 memory vs. SQL Server 2000 memory

Analysis Server

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

An unknown error occurred in the WMI provider. Error Code 8000000A

An unknown error occurred in the WMI provider. Error Code 8000000A

Monday, March 19, 2012

An internal error occurred on the report server. See the error log for more details. (rsInternal

Reporting Services Error

An internal error occurred on the report server. See the error log for more details. (rsInternal

Reporting Services Error

An internal error occurred on the report server. See the error log for more details. (rsInte

Reporting Services Error

An instance of the SQL Server Reconciler error object cannot be created

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Amount of RAM required ?

SQL Alternative to cursor

Blog Archive

About Me