MDF

I have a system in Vb using SQL 2000.
happens that MDF has + - 400 mdf mb. And LDF increases reaching 2 Gb in 1
w a lot!
Does have as creating a routine for everyday to reduce the space of this
file?
Manually, I make the backup log <name table> with truncate only.. and later
I make the shrink database!
An option exists in Enterprise Manager of <Database Maintenance Plans> where
configures the maintenances (backup, shrink, etc)... I Made the tests and it
didn't reduce the size! IS THIS THE CORRECT OPTION FOR THIS?Hi
You can create a maintenance plan to do this, or alternatively craft your
own ot use sqlmaint without an existing plan.
If you log file is not shrinking then check out:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...r />
_1uzr.asp
John
"Frank Dulk" <fdulk@.bol.com.br> wrote in message
news:uinlXfLLFHA.3064@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>I have a system in Vb using SQL 2000.
> happens that MDF has + - 400 mdf mb. And LDF increases reaching 2 Gb in 1
> w a lot!
> Does have as creating a routine for everyday to reduce the space of this
> file?
> Manually, I make the backup log <name table> with truncate only.. and
> later
> I make the shrink database!
> An option exists in Enterprise Manager of <Database Maintenance Plans>
> where
> configures the maintenances (backup, shrink, etc)... I Made the tests and
> it
> didn't reduce the size! IS THIS THE CORRECT OPTION FOR THIS?
>

MDAC 2.8 Fatal Setup Error. This setup does not support installing on this operating system

I have XP Pro SP2 with MDAC 2.8.1022. It had a problem so I tried to reinstall MDAC and got a Fatal Setup Error. This setup does not support installing on this operating system. I downloaded MDAC 2.8 1177 and get the same error.

I thought of uninstalling/reinstalling SP2, but this is a 2 month old Dell Latitude 610 with factory installed XP. There is no Windows Service Pack 2 option listed in the Control Panel > Add/Remove Programs.

There's some other strange things, so I wonder if they are related.

1) I have Paul set up as an administrator account. Some folders like MSSQL show that account with no permissions. I grant all the permissions to Paul for that folder. I come back later and the permissions are gone.

2) I deleted 20 files in Explorer, but 7 of them did not go away. I deleted those 7 again and they instatnly reappeared. I deleted those 7 again and then they finally went away.

3) I get a slow reaction time for things like Windows Explorer and opening and closing programs. This is suprising since it has 2 gig of RAM and 2.3 Gig processor. Could it be a memory handling problem that's causing OS problems. Probably, the memory didn't handle the OS installation well and the whole system is compromised now.

I'm having the same problem on XP Sp2 trying to re-install MDAC.

Thought I'd try re-installing MDAC since my system errors out when I try to register DLL files.

|||

I've seen this error during MDAC installation on XP SP2 as well. I was able to get around it by changing the Compatibility Properties of the mdac installation file to Win NT. It then installs OK.

|||

Chnaces are the files did go away for an instant but they are on the system recovery list and XP replaced them.

|||

I have XP Pro SP2 . It had a problem so I tried to install ADO.Net (MDAC Version 2.8 SP1 ) many times and reload it from download.microsoft.com. I couldn't install on my computer. I get the Fatal Setup Error "This setup does not support installing on this operating system". How can I solve this problem ?

|||

I could not overcome the problem.. I finally did erased the drive and reinstalled windows.

Paul

|||Windows XP comes pre-installed with MDAC you should not install the standalone MDAC installer on Windows XP. If you have a problem with the MDAC install on XP then just run a repair install of XP this will reinstall the MDAC that XP ships with.|||

I had a similar experience. Two possible options can be used to allow XP to repair the entries or force the install without having to repair the XP installation.

1. To repair your MDAC installation. Found this solution on the web that works. Have your XP SP2 install disk handy. Go to and find c:\windows\inf\mdac.inf. Right click on the .inf file and pick Install. It will attempt to reinstall the files. Browse to source files on the XP CD. It should install smoothly. It may ask for the handler.reg (in c:\program files\common files\system\msadc\). Restart. Sign in (admin) and then after a few minutes windows update will want to apply the security patch again. You may want to follow up with the SJet update also.

2. To force the installation. Found this one also. XP SP2 will already have the SP1 update applied but has registry corruption (virus after affects). Right click on the MDAC 2.8 SP1 install exe file and select properties. Select the Compatability tab, check the compatability mode box and pick "windows NT" or possibly "Windows 2000". Click apply and run the file again. It should install all the proper files again.

This restored the complete connectivity to databases. In visual studio the data tables did not display properly with a flawed connection. If the access (mdb) tables display properly, then a connection to the SQL database (mdf) - missing tables -is a access/login rights problem. Grant login rights to the user for the database.

|||

John,

#2 works like a charms. Thanks a million.

sql

MDAC 2.8 Fatal Setup Error. This setup does not support installing on this operating system

I have XP Pro SP2 with MDAC 2.8.1022. It had a problem so I tried to reinstall MDAC and got a Fatal Setup Error. This setup does not support installing on this operating system. I downloaded MDAC 2.8 1177 and get the same error.

I thought of uninstalling/reinstalling SP2, but this is a 2 month old Dell Latitude 610 with factory installed XP. There is no Windows Service Pack 2 option listed in the Control Panel > Add/Remove Programs.

There's some other strange things, so I wonder if they are related.

1) I have Paul set up as an administrator account. Some folders like MSSQL show that account with no permissions. I grant all the permissions to Paul for that folder. I come back later and the permissions are gone.

2) I deleted 20 files in Explorer, but 7 of them did not go away. I deleted those 7 again and they instatnly reappeared. I deleted those 7 again and then they finally went away.

3) I get a slow reaction time for things like Windows Explorer and opening and closing programs. This is suprising since it has 2 gig of RAM and 2.3 Gig processor. Could it be a memory handling problem that's causing OS problems. Probably, the memory didn't handle the OS installation well and the whole system is compromised now.

I'm having the same problem on XP Sp2 trying to re-install MDAC.

Thought I'd try re-installing MDAC since my system errors out when I try to register DLL files.

|||

I've seen this error during MDAC installation on XP SP2 as well. I was able to get around it by changing the Compatibility Properties of the mdac installation file to Win NT. It then installs OK.

|||

Chnaces are the files did go away for an instant but they are on the system recovery list and XP replaced them.

|||

I have XP Pro SP2 . It had a problem so I tried to install ADO.Net (MDAC Version 2.8 SP1 ) many times and reload it from download.microsoft.com. I couldn't install on my computer. I get the Fatal Setup Error "This setup does not support installing on this operating system". How can I solve this problem ?

|||

I could not overcome the problem.. I finally did erased the drive and reinstalled windows.

Paul

|||Windows XP comes pre-installed with MDAC you should not install the standalone MDAC installer on Windows XP. If you have a problem with the MDAC install on XP then just run a repair install of XP this will reinstall the MDAC that XP ships with.|||

I had a similar experience. Two possible options can be used to allow XP to repair the entries or force the install without having to repair the XP installation.

1. To repair your MDAC installation. Found this solution on the web that works. Have your XP SP2 install disk handy. Go to and find c:\windows\inf\mdac.inf. Right click on the .inf file and pick Install. It will attempt to reinstall the files. Browse to source files on the XP CD. It should install smoothly. It may ask for the handler.reg (in c:\program files\common files\system\msadc\). Restart. Sign in (admin) and then after a few minutes windows update will want to apply the security patch again. You may want to follow up with the SJet update also.

2. To force the installation. Found this one also. XP SP2 will already have the SP1 update applied but has registry corruption (virus after affects). Right click on the MDAC 2.8 SP1 install exe file and select properties. Select the Compatability tab, check the compatability mode box and pick "windows NT" or possibly "Windows 2000". Click apply and run the file again. It should install all the proper files again.

This restored the complete connectivity to databases. In visual studio the data tables did not display properly with a flawed connection. If the access (mdb) tables display properly, then a connection to the SQL database (mdf) - missing tables -is a access/login rights problem. Grant login rights to the user for the database.

|||

John,

#2 works like a charms. Thanks a million.

MDAC 2.8 Fatal Setup Error. This setup does not support installing on this operating system

I have XP Pro SP2 with MDAC 2.8.1022. It had a problem so I tried to reinstall MDAC and got a Fatal Setup Error. This setup does not support installing on this operating system. I downloaded MDAC 2.8 1177 and get the same error.

I thought of uninstalling/reinstalling SP2, but this is a 2 month old Dell Latitude 610 with factory installed XP. There is no Windows Service Pack 2 option listed in the Control Panel > Add/Remove Programs.

There's some other strange things, so I wonder if they are related.

1) I have Paul set up as an administrator account. Some folders like MSSQL show that account with no permissions. I grant all the permissions to Paul for that folder. I come back later and the permissions are gone.

2) I deleted 20 files in Explorer, but 7 of them did not go away. I deleted those 7 again and they instatnly reappeared. I deleted those 7 again and then they finally went away.

3) I get a slow reaction time for things like Windows Explorer and opening and closing programs. This is suprising since it has 2 gig of RAM and 2.3 Gig processor. Could it be a memory handling problem that's causing OS problems. Probably, the memory didn't handle the OS installation well and the whole system is compromised now.

I'm having the same problem on XP Sp2 trying to re-install MDAC.

Thought I'd try re-installing MDAC since my system errors out when I try to register DLL files.

|||

I've seen this error during MDAC installation on XP SP2 as well. I was able to get around it by changing the Compatibility Properties of the mdac installation file to Win NT. It then installs OK.

|||

Chnaces are the files did go away for an instant but they are on the system recovery list and XP replaced them.

|||

I have XP Pro SP2 . It had a problem so I tried to install ADO.Net (MDAC Version 2.8 SP1 ) many times and reload it from download.microsoft.com. I couldn't install on my computer. I get the Fatal Setup Error "This setup does not support installing on this operating system". How can I solve this problem ?

|||

I could not overcome the problem.. I finally did erased the drive and reinstalled windows.

Paul

|||Windows XP comes pre-installed with MDAC you should not install the standalone MDAC installer on Windows XP. If you have a problem with the MDAC install on XP then just run a repair install of XP this will reinstall the MDAC that XP ships with.|||

I had a similar experience. Two possible options can be used to allow XP to repair the entries or force the install without having to repair the XP installation.

1. To repair your MDAC installation. Found this solution on the web that works. Have your XP SP2 install disk handy. Go to and find c:\windows\inf\mdac.inf. Right click on the .inf file and pick Install. It will attempt to reinstall the files. Browse to source files on the XP CD. It should install smoothly. It may ask for the handler.reg (in c:\program files\common files\system\msadc\). Restart. Sign in (admin) and then after a few minutes windows update will want to apply the security patch again. You may want to follow up with the SJet update also.

2. To force the installation. Found this one also. XP SP2 will already have the SP1 update applied but has registry corruption (virus after affects). Right click on the MDAC 2.8 SP1 install exe file and select properties. Select the Compatability tab, check the compatability mode box and pick "windows NT" or possibly "Windows 2000". Click apply and run the file again. It should install all the proper files again.

This restored the complete connectivity to databases. In visual studio the data tables did not display properly with a flawed connection. If the access (mdb) tables display properly, then a connection to the SQL database (mdf) - missing tables -is a access/login rights problem. Grant login rights to the user for the database.

|||

John,

#2 works like a charms. Thanks a million.

MDAC 2.8 Fatal Setup Error. This setup does not support installing on this operating system

I have XP Pro SP2 with MDAC 2.8.1022. It had a problem so I tried to reinstall MDAC and got a Fatal Setup Error. This setup does not support installing on this operating system. I downloaded MDAC 2.8 1177 and get the same error.

I thought of uninstalling/reinstalling SP2, but this is a 2 month old Dell Latitude 610 with factory installed XP. There is no Windows Service Pack 2 option listed in the Control Panel > Add/Remove Programs.

There's some other strange things, so I wonder if they are related.

1) I have Paul set up as an administrator account. Some folders like MSSQL show that account with no permissions. I grant all the permissions to Paul for that folder. I come back later and the permissions are gone.

2) I deleted 20 files in Explorer, but 7 of them did not go away. I deleted those 7 again and they instatnly reappeared. I deleted those 7 again and then they finally went away.

3) I get a slow reaction time for things like Windows Explorer and opening and closing programs. This is suprising since it has 2 gig of RAM and 2.3 Gig processor. Could it be a memory handling problem that's causing OS problems. Probably, the memory didn't handle the OS installation well and the whole system is compromised now.

I'm having the same problem on XP Sp2 trying to re-install MDAC.

Thought I'd try re-installing MDAC since my system errors out when I try to register DLL files.

|||

I've seen this error during MDAC installation on XP SP2 as well. I was able to get around it by changing the Compatibility Properties of the mdac installation file to Win NT. It then installs OK.

|||

Chnaces are the files did go away for an instant but they are on the system recovery list and XP replaced them.

|||

I have XP Pro SP2 . It had a problem so I tried to install ADO.Net (MDAC Version 2.8 SP1 ) many times and reload it from download.microsoft.com. I couldn't install on my computer. I get the Fatal Setup Error "This setup does not support installing on this operating system". How can I solve this problem ?

|||

I could not overcome the problem.. I finally did erased the drive and reinstalled windows.

Paul

|||Windows XP comes pre-installed with MDAC you should not install the standalone MDAC installer on Windows XP. If you have a problem with the MDAC install on XP then just run a repair install of XP this will reinstall the MDAC that XP ships with.|||

I had a similar experience. Two possible options can be used to allow XP to repair the entries or force the install without having to repair the XP installation.

1. To repair your MDAC installation. Found this solution on the web that works. Have your XP SP2 install disk handy. Go to and find c:\windows\inf\mdac.inf. Right click on the .inf file and pick Install. It will attempt to reinstall the files. Browse to source files on the XP CD. It should install smoothly. It may ask for the handler.reg (in c:\program files\common files\system\msadc\). Restart. Sign in (admin) and then after a few minutes windows update will want to apply the security patch again. You may want to follow up with the SJet update also.

2. To force the installation. Found this one also. XP SP2 will already have the SP1 update applied but has registry corruption (virus after affects). Right click on the MDAC 2.8 SP1 install exe file and select properties. Select the Compatability tab, check the compatability mode box and pick "windows NT" or possibly "Windows 2000". Click apply and run the file again. It should install all the proper files again.

This restored the complete connectivity to databases. In visual studio the data tables did not display properly with a flawed connection. If the access (mdb) tables display properly, then a connection to the SQL database (mdf) - missing tables -is a access/login rights problem. Grant login rights to the user for the database.

|||

John,

#2 works like a charms. Thanks a million.

MDAC 2.8 Fatal Setup Error. This setup does not support installing on this operating system

I have XP Pro SP2 with MDAC 2.8.1022. It had a problem so I tried to reinstall MDAC and got a Fatal Setup Error. This setup does not support installing on this operating system. I downloaded MDAC 2.8 1177 and get the same error.

I thought of uninstalling/reinstalling SP2, but this is a 2 month old Dell Latitude 610 with factory installed XP. There is no Windows Service Pack 2 option listed in the Control Panel > Add/Remove Programs.

There's some other strange things, so I wonder if they are related.

1) I have Paul set up as an administrator account. Some folders like MSSQL show that account with no permissions. I grant all the permissions to Paul for that folder. I come back later and the permissions are gone.

2) I deleted 20 files in Explorer, but 7 of them did not go away. I deleted those 7 again and they instatnly reappeared. I deleted those 7 again and then they finally went away.

3) I get a slow reaction time for things like Windows Explorer and opening and closing programs. This is suprising since it has 2 gig of RAM and 2.3 Gig processor. Could it be a memory handling problem that's causing OS problems. Probably, the memory didn't handle the OS installation well and the whole system is compromised now.

I'm having the same problem on XP Sp2 trying to re-install MDAC.

Thought I'd try re-installing MDAC since my system errors out when I try to register DLL files.

|||

I've seen this error during MDAC installation on XP SP2 as well. I was able to get around it by changing the Compatibility Properties of the mdac installation file to Win NT. It then installs OK.

|||

Chnaces are the files did go away for an instant but they are on the system recovery list and XP replaced them.

|||

I have XP Pro SP2 . It had a problem so I tried to install ADO.Net (MDAC Version 2.8 SP1 ) many times and reload it from download.microsoft.com. I couldn't install on my computer. I get the Fatal Setup Error "This setup does not support installing on this operating system". How can I solve this problem ?

|||

I could not overcome the problem.. I finally did erased the drive and reinstalled windows.

Paul

|||Windows XP comes pre-installed with MDAC you should not install the standalone MDAC installer on Windows XP. If you have a problem with the MDAC install on XP then just run a repair install of XP this will reinstall the MDAC that XP ships with.|||

I had a similar experience. Two possible options can be used to allow XP to repair the entries or force the install without having to repair the XP installation.

1. To repair your MDAC installation. Found this solution on the web that works. Have your XP SP2 install disk handy. Go to and find c:\windows\inf\mdac.inf. Right click on the .inf file and pick Install. It will attempt to reinstall the files. Browse to source files on the XP CD. It should install smoothly. It may ask for the handler.reg (in c:\program files\common files\system\msadc\). Restart. Sign in (admin) and then after a few minutes windows update will want to apply the security patch again. You may want to follow up with the SJet update also.

2. To force the installation. Found this one also. XP SP2 will already have the SP1 update applied but has registry corruption (virus after affects). Right click on the MDAC 2.8 SP1 install exe file and select properties. Select the Compatability tab, check the compatability mode box and pick "windows NT" or possibly "Windows 2000". Click apply and run the file again. It should install all the proper files again.

This restored the complete connectivity to databases. In visual studio the data tables did not display properly with a flawed connection. If the access (mdb) tables display properly, then a connection to the SQL database (mdf) - missing tables -is a access/login rights problem. Grant login rights to the user for the database.

|||

John,

#2 works like a charms. Thanks a million.

Maybe a silly question

Hi Experts
I am developing and order processing system in VB and opening a lot of
tables simultaneously and doing a lot of rs.addnew's and rs.updates with a
CN.BeginTrans.
My question is where does one find the need to use Stored Procedures? Is it
necessary to use Stored Procedures in an application like order processing.
Please Help! I have done lot of programming using COBOL once upon a time
thereafter i have never programmed. Now I am back and find that life has
changed drastically!!!@.#
Thanks in advance
(Rip Van Winkle) Manish
Three Cheers to technet for the Help!For a business process application like Order Processing I would expect
ALL data manipulation (inserting, updating deleting and retrieving
data) to be performed by parameterized SPs. SPs should be your
application's interface to the database and you shouldn't need to
execute SQL statements directly against the DB from VB. In general
that's good practice for many reasons: security, performance,
maintainability and portability, among them.
--
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--|||Thanks a lot David Portas probably i should take the lead from you and do
some soul searching and research on this. Thanks
"Manish Sawjiani" wrote:

> Hi Experts
> I am developing and order processing system in VB and opening a lot of
> tables simultaneously and doing a lot of rs.addnew's and rs.updates with a
> CN.BeginTrans.
> My question is where does one find the need to use Stored Procedures? Is i
t
> necessary to use Stored Procedures in an application like order processing
.
> Please Help! I have done lot of programming using COBOL once upon a time
> thereafter i have never programmed. Now I am back and find that life has
> changed drastically!!!@.#
> Thanks in advance
> (Rip Van Winkle) Manish
> --
> Three Cheers to technet for the Help!sql

May I install Reporting Designer on XP

I'd like to trial Reporting Service 2000. But it couldn't install on XP
system.
How can I develop the reports on XP platform within VS 2003?
If I cannot, I have to reinstall my laptop. How sad it is!
Thanks & Regards,
John WangYou can definitely do this. I assume what you want to do is to have RS
server (the report designer is definitely not an issue) on XP. You have to
have a version of SQL Server 2000 installed (RS uses that) also you need to
have IIS running. By default IIS is not installed with XP and you have to
add/remove programs, windows (I believe) and add in IIS.
What you want to do is definitely possible.
Also, if the reports are to be deployed elsewhere then the problem is that
you tried to install the server portion of RS instead of just the client
tools.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"John Wang" <John Wang@.community.nospam> wrote in message
news:%23TNR9FZ3GHA.5000@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> I'd like to trial Reporting Service 2000. But it couldn't install on XP
> system.
> How can I develop the reports on XP platform within VS 2003?
> If I cannot, I have to reinstall my laptop. How sad it is!
> Thanks & Regards,
> John Wang
>|||Thank you a lot for your help.
I found that I was too impatient in last install process. I canceled the
installation process without the "next" button appeared after the warning
prompt. :)
I have completed the installation now. Thank you very much.
John Wang
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" <bruce_lcNOSPAM@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e$VfhZZ3GHA.4364@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> You can definitely do this. I assume what you want to do is to have RS
> server (the report designer is definitely not an issue) on XP. You have to
> have a version of SQL Server 2000 installed (RS uses that) also you need
> to have IIS running. By default IIS is not installed with XP and you have
> to add/remove programs, windows (I believe) and add in IIS.
> What you want to do is definitely possible.
> Also, if the reports are to be deployed elsewhere then the problem is that
> you tried to install the server portion of RS instead of just the client
> tools.
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "John Wang" <John Wang@.community.nospam> wrote in message
> news:%23TNR9FZ3GHA.5000@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> I'd like to trial Reporting Service 2000. But it couldn't install on XP
>> system.
>> How can I develop the reports on XP platform within VS 2003?
>> If I cannot, I have to reinstall my laptop. How sad it is!
>> Thanks & Regards,
>> John Wang
>

Maximum memory that SQL 2005 standard can use....

Hi,
We intend to get a new Windows 2003 standard server with 8GB Ram. We will
also be installing SQL 2005 standard on the same system.
We are aware that Windows 2003 standard server supports up to 4GB Ram and
SQL 2005 standard support up to the maximum ram the server has.
Our question is will SQL 2005 standard maximise all the 8GB ram available on
the server even though it is installed on a Windows 2003 standard server
supports only up to 4GB Ram?
Thanks.
Hi
I'm sure it is relevant to SQL Server 2005 too.
http://support.microsoft.com/default...274750&sd=tech
"Mousehunt" <Mousehunt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D994E07B-2082-4E4A-A1AF-B18CB9C630F4@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> We intend to get a new Windows 2003 standard server with 8GB Ram. We will
> also be installing SQL 2005 standard on the same system.
> We are aware that Windows 2003 standard server supports up to 4GB Ram and
> SQL 2005 standard support up to the maximum ram the server has.
> Our question is will SQL 2005 standard maximise all the 8GB ram available
> on
> the server even though it is installed on a Windows 2003 standard server
> supports only up to 4GB Ram?
> Thanks.
|||On a 32bit Windows standard server you're limited to 3GB application address
space with the /3GB switch in boot.ini
On a 64bit Windows standard server system you're limited to 4GB RAM total
You'd need Windows 2003 Enterprise 32 or 64 bit to use all of your 8GB
There really isn't any point in putting more than 4GB in a standard server
as it'll never be used
Peter Lawton
"Mousehunt" <Mousehunt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D994E07B-2082-4E4A-A1AF-B18CB9C630F4@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> We intend to get a new Windows 2003 standard server with 8GB Ram. We will
> also be installing SQL 2005 standard on the same system.
> We are aware that Windows 2003 standard server supports up to 4GB Ram and
> SQL 2005 standard support up to the maximum ram the server has.
> Our question is will SQL 2005 standard maximise all the 8GB ram available
> on
> the server even though it is installed on a Windows 2003 standard server
> supports only up to 4GB Ram?
> Thanks.
|||The x64 version of Windows Server 2003 standard supports 32GB of RAM.
32-bit is 4gb only, so if you are using 32-bit, you will need to get Server
2003 Enterprise. Note that SQL 2005 Standard supports the maximum that the
OS supports, 32-bit or 64-bit.
"Mousehunt" <Mousehunt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D994E07B-2082-4E4A-A1AF-B18CB9C630F4@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> We intend to get a new Windows 2003 standard server with 8GB Ram. We will
> also be installing SQL 2005 standard on the same system.
> We are aware that Windows 2003 standard server supports up to 4GB Ram and
> SQL 2005 standard support up to the maximum ram the server has.
> Our question is will SQL 2005 standard maximise all the 8GB ram available
> on
> the server even though it is installed on a Windows 2003 standard server
> supports only up to 4GB Ram?
> Thanks.
|||This is not true for the x64 version of Windows Server 2003 Standard. Don't
know about Itanium.
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/888732
"Peter Lawton" <devnull@.fakedomain.com> wrote in message
news:uEV$ceTMGHA.2828@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> On a 32bit Windows standard server you're limited to 3GB application
> address space with the /3GB switch in boot.ini
> On a 64bit Windows standard server system you're limited to 4GB RAM total
> You'd need Windows 2003 Enterprise 32 or 64 bit to use all of your 8GB
> There really isn't any point in putting more than 4GB in a standard server
> as it'll never be used
> Peter Lawton
> "Mousehunt" <Mousehunt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D994E07B-2082-4E4A-A1AF-B18CB9C630F4@.microsoft.com...
>

Maximum memory that SQL 2005 standard can use....

Hi,
We intend to get a new Windows 2003 standard server with 8GB Ram. We will
also be installing SQL 2005 standard on the same system.
We are aware that Windows 2003 standard server supports up to 4GB Ram and
SQL 2005 standard support up to the maximum ram the server has.
Our question is will SQL 2005 standard maximise all the 8GB ram available on
the server even though it is installed on a Windows 2003 standard server
supports only up to 4GB Ram?
Thanks.Hi
I'm sure it is relevant to SQL Server 2005 too.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;274750&sd=tech
"Mousehunt" <Mousehunt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D994E07B-2082-4E4A-A1AF-B18CB9C630F4@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> We intend to get a new Windows 2003 standard server with 8GB Ram. We will
> also be installing SQL 2005 standard on the same system.
> We are aware that Windows 2003 standard server supports up to 4GB Ram and
> SQL 2005 standard support up to the maximum ram the server has.
> Our question is will SQL 2005 standard maximise all the 8GB ram available
> on
> the server even though it is installed on a Windows 2003 standard server
> supports only up to 4GB Ram?
> Thanks.|||On a 32bit Windows standard server you're limited to 3GB application address
space with the /3GB switch in boot.ini
On a 64bit Windows standard server system you're limited to 4GB RAM total
You'd need Windows 2003 Enterprise 32 or 64 bit to use all of your 8GB
There really isn't any point in putting more than 4GB in a standard server
as it'll never be used
Peter Lawton
"Mousehunt" <Mousehunt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D994E07B-2082-4E4A-A1AF-B18CB9C630F4@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> We intend to get a new Windows 2003 standard server with 8GB Ram. We will
> also be installing SQL 2005 standard on the same system.
> We are aware that Windows 2003 standard server supports up to 4GB Ram and
> SQL 2005 standard support up to the maximum ram the server has.
> Our question is will SQL 2005 standard maximise all the 8GB ram available
> on
> the server even though it is installed on a Windows 2003 standard server
> supports only up to 4GB Ram?
> Thanks.|||The x64 version of Windows Server 2003 standard supports 32GB of RAM.
32-bit is 4gb only, so if you are using 32-bit, you will need to get Server
2003 Enterprise. Note that SQL 2005 Standard supports the maximum that the
OS supports, 32-bit or 64-bit.
"Mousehunt" <Mousehunt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D994E07B-2082-4E4A-A1AF-B18CB9C630F4@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> We intend to get a new Windows 2003 standard server with 8GB Ram. We will
> also be installing SQL 2005 standard on the same system.
> We are aware that Windows 2003 standard server supports up to 4GB Ram and
> SQL 2005 standard support up to the maximum ram the server has.
> Our question is will SQL 2005 standard maximise all the 8GB ram available
> on
> the server even though it is installed on a Windows 2003 standard server
> supports only up to 4GB Ram?
> Thanks.|||This is not true for the x64 version of Windows Server 2003 Standard. Don't
know about Itanium.
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/888732
"Peter Lawton" <devnull@.fakedomain.com> wrote in message
news:uEV$ceTMGHA.2828@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> On a 32bit Windows standard server you're limited to 3GB application
> address space with the /3GB switch in boot.ini
> On a 64bit Windows standard server system you're limited to 4GB RAM total
> You'd need Windows 2003 Enterprise 32 or 64 bit to use all of your 8GB
> There really isn't any point in putting more than 4GB in a standard server
> as it'll never be used
> Peter Lawton
> "Mousehunt" <Mousehunt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D994E07B-2082-4E4A-A1AF-B18CB9C630F4@.microsoft.com...
>> Hi,
>> We intend to get a new Windows 2003 standard server with 8GB Ram. We will
>> also be installing SQL 2005 standard on the same system.
>> We are aware that Windows 2003 standard server supports up to 4GB Ram and
>> SQL 2005 standard support up to the maximum ram the server has.
>> Our question is will SQL 2005 standard maximise all the 8GB ram available
>> on
>> the server even though it is installed on a Windows 2003 standard server
>> supports only up to 4GB Ram?
>> Thanks.
>

Maximum memory that SQL 2005 standard can use....

Hi,
We intend to get a new Windows 2003 standard server with 8GB Ram. We will
also be installing SQL 2005 standard on the same system.
We are aware that Windows 2003 standard server supports up to 4GB Ram and
SQL 2005 standard support up to the maximum ram the server has.
Our question is will SQL 2005 standard maximise all the 8GB ram available on
the server even though it is installed on a Windows 2003 standard server
supports only up to 4GB Ram?
Thanks.Hi
I'm sure it is relevant to SQL Server 2005 too.
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...;274750&sd=tech
"Mousehunt" <Mousehunt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D994E07B-2082-4E4A-A1AF-B18CB9C630F4@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> We intend to get a new Windows 2003 standard server with 8GB Ram. We will
> also be installing SQL 2005 standard on the same system.
> We are aware that Windows 2003 standard server supports up to 4GB Ram and
> SQL 2005 standard support up to the maximum ram the server has.
> Our question is will SQL 2005 standard maximise all the 8GB ram available
> on
> the server even though it is installed on a Windows 2003 standard server
> supports only up to 4GB Ram?
> Thanks.|||On a 32bit Windows standard server you're limited to 3GB application address
space with the /3GB switch in boot.ini
On a 64bit Windows standard server system you're limited to 4GB RAM total
You'd need Windows 2003 Enterprise 32 or 64 bit to use all of your 8GB
There really isn't any point in putting more than 4GB in a standard server
as it'll never be used
Peter Lawton
"Mousehunt" <Mousehunt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D994E07B-2082-4E4A-A1AF-B18CB9C630F4@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> We intend to get a new Windows 2003 standard server with 8GB Ram. We will
> also be installing SQL 2005 standard on the same system.
> We are aware that Windows 2003 standard server supports up to 4GB Ram and
> SQL 2005 standard support up to the maximum ram the server has.
> Our question is will SQL 2005 standard maximise all the 8GB ram available
> on
> the server even though it is installed on a Windows 2003 standard server
> supports only up to 4GB Ram?
> Thanks.|||The x64 version of Windows Server 2003 standard supports 32GB of RAM.
32-bit is 4gb only, so if you are using 32-bit, you will need to get Server
2003 Enterprise. Note that SQL 2005 Standard supports the maximum that the
OS supports, 32-bit or 64-bit.
"Mousehunt" <Mousehunt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D994E07B-2082-4E4A-A1AF-B18CB9C630F4@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> We intend to get a new Windows 2003 standard server with 8GB Ram. We will
> also be installing SQL 2005 standard on the same system.
> We are aware that Windows 2003 standard server supports up to 4GB Ram and
> SQL 2005 standard support up to the maximum ram the server has.
> Our question is will SQL 2005 standard maximise all the 8GB ram available
> on
> the server even though it is installed on a Windows 2003 standard server
> supports only up to 4GB Ram?
> Thanks.|||This is not true for the x64 version of Windows Server 2003 Standard. Don't
know about Itanium.
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/888732
"Peter Lawton" <devnull@.fakedomain.com> wrote in message
news:uEV$ceTMGHA.2828@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> On a 32bit Windows standard server you're limited to 3GB application
> address space with the /3GB switch in boot.ini
> On a 64bit Windows standard server system you're limited to 4GB RAM total
> You'd need Windows 2003 Enterprise 32 or 64 bit to use all of your 8GB
> There really isn't any point in putting more than 4GB in a standard server
> as it'll never be used
> Peter Lawton
> "Mousehunt" <Mousehunt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D994E07B-2082-4E4A-A1AF-B18CB9C630F4@.microsoft.com...
>

Max Worker Threads setting in X64 system.

Hi All,

As we know, the default max worker thread in SQL 2005 is 0. The default value for Max worker threads, 0, allows SQL Server to automatically configure the number of worker threads AT STARTUP.

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187024.aspx

However, what's the actual max worker thread while the "max worker thread" option is configured as 0? Is it the one list in this table?

Number of CPUs

32-bit computer

64-bit computer

<= 4 processors

256

512

8 processors

288

576

16 processors

352

704

32 processors

480

960

This table is got form the above article. Please kindly help me confirm

This is the formula that SQL uses is it is at 0.

x86

<= 4 procs = 256

> 4 procs = 256+((# procs-4)*8)

x64

<= 4 procs = 512

> 4 procs = 512+((# procs-4)*16)

It is also wise to set this back to 0 if it is an upgrade from 2000.

|||Thanks a lot for your confirmation and formula!