| RE: [SQLDownUnder] 64bit users x86 |
- From: Greg Wood
- Subject: RE: [SQLDownUnder] 64bit users x86
- Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 17:03:25 +1000
- Follow-Ups:
- RE: [SQLDownUnder] 64bit users x86, mcasiou
- References:
- RE: [SQLDownUnder] 64bit users x86, Greg Wood
- Prev by Date: RE: [SQLDownUnder] 64bit users x86
- Next by Date: Re: [SQLDownUnder] 64bit users x86
- Previous by thread: RE: [SQLDownUnder] 64bit users x86
- Next by thread: RE: [SQLDownUnder] 64bit users x86
- Index(es):
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
More fuel to the fire in this article towards the bottom
http://www.devx.com/amd/Article/20342
By contrast, on a 64-bit system, the WOW64 infrastructure can allocate as much 4GB of RAM to a 32-bit Windows application?and that address space does not need to accommodate the operating system and drivers. That gives the full 4GB to the application, a significant increase for resource-hungry applications
i think this might be the answer, anymore comments?
Greg Wood gwood@xxxxxxxxxxx
From: "Greg Wood" <gwood@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: SQLDownUnder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: SQLDownUnder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [SQLDownUnder] 64bit users x86
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:52:44 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Originating-IP: [202.53.47.138]
X-Originating-Email: [gwood@xxxxxxxxxxx]
X-Sender: gwood@xxxxxxxxxxx
Received: from mail.mdnug.org ([203.89.209.190]) by mc4-f33.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Tue, 30 Aug 2005 23:53:14 -0700
Received: from hotmail.com ([65.54.175.44]) by mdnug.org with MailEnable ESMTP; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:55:56 +1000
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 30 Aug 2005 23:52:44 -0700
Received: from 65.54.175.201 by by104fd.bay104.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Wed, 31 Aug 2005 06:52:44 GMT
to unsubscribe to this list, please send a message back to the list with 'unsubscribe' as the subject. Powered by mailenable.com - List managed by http://www.readify.net
Rowan,
I see the 310 message in the SQL Server Agent Error Log - it is a informational message
Task Manger shows all the memory 16776108properties of SQL Server shows -see attached fiel
Greg Wood gwood@xxxxxxxxxxx
From: "Rowan Burke" <rburke@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: SQLDownUnder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: <SQLDownUnder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [SQLDownUnder] 64bit users x86
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:39:45 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from mail.mdnug.org ([203.89.209.190]) by mc9-f32.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Tue, 30 Aug 2005 23:34:55 -0700
Received: from fnsexc.fns.com.au ([203.56.230.14]) by mdnug.org with MailEnable ESMTP; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:37:43 +1000
Greg,Do you see all the memory in the System Properties or in task manager? It looks like the OS should be able to use up to 32GB, and 4.2.3 seems to confirm that to me....Where do you see the message:-[310] 8 processor(s) and 4096 MB RAM detectedRowan
From: SQLDownUnderList@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:SQLDownUnderList@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Greg Wood
Sent: Wednesday, 31 August 2005 3:40 PM
To: SQLDownUnder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: davele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [SQLDownUnder] 64bit users x86to unsubscribe to this list, please send a message back to the list with 'unsubscribe' as the subject. Powered by mailenable.com - List managed by http://www.readify.net to unsubscribe to this list, please send a message back to the list with 'unsubscribe' as the subject. Powered by mailenable.com - List managed by http://www.readify.netHi,
I need some advice/experience from some other users in the 64bit world.
We have just setup a new server
4 way Xeon 64bit
16 GB Memory
Windows 2003 Standard Server x64 Edition
SQL Server 2000 64bit with sp4 and AWE patch(http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=7C407047-3F1F-48B8-9E4C-DC32875E1961&displaylang=en)We cannot get sq server process to move over the 4gig memory mark(hangs around the 3.8), I can see in the start up the machine reports
[310] 8 processor(s) and 4096 MB RAM detectedI have had a read of IBM's document and point 4.2.3 tells me that i should go to the Enterprise edition http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redpapers/pdfs/redp3982.pdf
Will rebuilding the OS solve this problem or is it a waste of time - project due in 10 days. Any advice would be welcomed
gwood@xxxxxxxxxxx
Greg Wood
<< sqlPic.JPG >>
(Click here for more information on the sqldownunder mailling list)
