|
Good one.
We ended up fixing this by giving SQL Server at least 1024 MB of memory, always.
Having a bit less memory isn't a problem for any other application, they just get a little slow (not noticable though).
|
|
|
|
|
I was gonna say - a default install of SQL allows it to take up all the RAM it can get ahold of. If you limit it, the rest of the system should remain a lot more responsive.
|
|
|
|
|
Your browsers will often take the most memory; are constantly doing "call backs". Each tab is another instance; for the most part.
I uninstalled Chrome because it was ALWAYS busy; even when I wasn't explicitly "loading" it.
I use Edge and FireFox and watch everything in Task Manager. I stream movies while programming, etc. with 16GB. Just know what's going on.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
Gerry Schmitz wrote: I use Edge and FireFox and watch everything in Task Manager
Click 'Open Resource Monitor' at the bottom, and select the 'Memory' tab to get a more detailed view.
I run with 16 GB, and have never seen that as a limitation to my activities. Not even when running VS. I do not run any database system, though. Right now, Resource Monitor says that only 99 MB is 'Free'. But 9900 MB is 'Standby'. It claims that 6126 MB is 'In Use'.
So I start SysInternal RamMap to do a little cleanup: Empty Working Sets, Modified list and Standby list. In Use drops to 987 MB, Free goes up to 15215 MB.
This is of course just for a short time. Even though the working sets are small at the moment, it won't take long before the processes bring in some new pages. Also, when I cleared the Standby list, if some process actually requests some of those pages, they have to be fetched from disk, at a cost.
Yet, it takes a long time, with much activity, before the 'In Use' grows even close to 6 GB. I did a RamMap cleanup and went through all the 18 browser tabs, all the 7 Word documents paging them to the next page, changed to another directory in the Explorer windows and pulled up the menu in Network Connections, and inspected Resource monitor. That caused In Use to jump up to 2357 MB, and some Standby. 12.5 GB is still Free. I know from experience that it will take quite some time to build In Use back up to 6 GB with the applications I am running now.
That is with 7 (large!) MS-Word documents open, one single-tab web browser (Edge), another one (FireFox) with 17 open tabs. Two Explorer windows are open. One Network Connections window. One Resource Monitor, one RamMap. 14 windows in total.
I have tried to make a composition of application that I might be running at the same time - right now I am not doing sound editing, video editing or program development. I rarely do all of those at the same time, but even when I set it up I am not reaching 16 GB in use. (Part of the explanation may be that both my MSO, sound and video editor are several years old, made to run with a lot less resources available.)
I have another 16 GB of memory sticks sitting on my shelf (bought for another PC for a project that never materialized). I could plug them into my main PC, but as there has never been a need for more RAM, I never got around to doing it.
I believe that a lot of people claiming that they "must" have 32 (or 64 or 128) GB, and "only" 16 MB makes their PC slow as molasses, never really checked if RAM shortage really is the problem. It can be, but in lots of cases, it isn't.
|
|
|
|
|
In most cases, it's housekeeping. My "main user" thinks nothing of opening tab, after tab, after tab ...
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
I hope you realize that Edge now uses the same core chromium engine as Chrome?
|
|
|
|
|
You realize one is "wrapped" by Google and the other by MS?
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
Of course. And is one really all that much better than the other?
|
|
|
|
|
Not "better" ... greedier at collecting data and calling home. I said Chrome was always "busy"; including tasks like "GoogleUpdate"; or whatever.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
|
obermd wrote: SQL Server - limit memory usage via Server memory configuration options - SQL Server | Microsoft Learn
The problem wasn't the limit, the problem was that there simply wasn't any memory left.
We fixed the issue by saying SQL Server should grab a minimum (and maximum) amount of memory, 1024 MB.
Works like a charm now 
All the other apps can do with a little less memory 
|
|
|
|
|
Unless you explicitly tell SQL Server, any version, to not consume all memory it will consume everything it can up to the limits of that version.
|
|
|
|
|
How/where do you do that?
|
|
|
|
|
When you right-click on the server node in the object explorer you can go to properties and then the memory tab.
There you can set a minimum and a maximum amount of server memory.
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: We're getting timeouts like you wouldn't believe,
Just realized I had not looked at memory utilization in years. Right now with 16 gb I have nothing but three browser windows open and the memory util is at 5 gig.
Performance problems for me always come down to CPU. Usually when VS is starting up or when the virus checker is going crazy.
But you didn't mention the CPU at all?
When this happens the CPU is low?
Also which version of windows?
Sander Rossel wrote: 20GB and that fixes the problem
And what was it set to before?
Mine uses auto manage.
The windows suggestion appears to have that value as low. Suggestion seems to be "1.5 to 3 times" of physical memory. So 24 to 48 would be an appropriate range.
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: But you didn't mention the CPU at all?
When this happens the CPU is low?
Also which version of windows?
CPU isn't the issue, the guy has a good one.
Windows 11 Pro.
jschell wrote: And what was it set to before?
Mine uses auto manage.
Same.
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: CPU isn't the issue, the guy has a good one.
CPU load, not the hardware.
|
|
|
|
|
Here's a snapshot of memory usage[^] on my 16GB desktop running Ubuntu 22.04.2 LTS.
I'm currently running:
* GIMP,
* FireFox (with 30 tabs open) - one streaming music,
* two remote desktop connections via Remmina,
* 3 terminal sessions,
* MS Teams,
* VSCode,
* various other programs
Because I saw someone mention Docker, I went ahead and started my Docker container running MS SQL Server.
Here's the memory snapshot[^] with Docker running too.
I could never run all this on my 16GB Windows 10 laptop.
What do those Linux devs know? 😂😆🤓
There really are advantages to running Linux as dev.
I understand that I can't run full Visual Studio but learning command line and migrating to .NET Core makes it so I can do everything I need (yes, not WinForms) on Linux with VS Code. and I feel much less pain.
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: What do those Linux devs know?
CLI.
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: yes, not WinForms
Unfortunately, a necessity, as is .NET Framework 
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I understand the constraints of legacy software etc.
It makes sense. It's just amazing to me that Linux really does seem to keep memory cleaner.
I think it kind of indicates that Linux devs are a bit more disciplined in creating things really.
Whereas in the Windows world it feels more like a free-for-all "memory is there, go ahead and eat it".
I am also always astonished at the number of things running "to support" the Win OS or whatever all that stuff is. Windows itself just eats so much memory and feels ridiculous. I mean, as you seem to be learning, 32GB probably is the minimum now for Win10. Oy!
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: Yeah, I understand the constraints of legacy software etc.
virtual machines?
raddevus wrote: I think it kind of indicates that Linux devs are a bit more disciplined in creating things really.
I saw it already back to the late 2000s... burning a cd ín windows almost 40 min. In linux 3.
raddevus wrote: Whereas in the Windows world it feels more like a free-for-all "memory is there, go ahead and eat it".
sadly... yes
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Have you tried limiting how much memory SQL Server is allowed to use? It will take every bit of free memory on the machine as it needs it and tends to hold on to it long after that need is gone.
There are no solutions, only trade-offs. - Thomas Sowell
A day can really slip by when you're deliberately avoiding what you're supposed to do.
- Calvin (Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes)
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, but that wasn't the problem.
The problem was SQL Server could not get enough memory to run properly, so we gave it a minimum amount of memory (and also a maximum).
Works like a charm now 
|
|
|
|
|
I've had my current laptop a couple of years and usually just use it to RDP into my work desktop and run Teams locally. The laptop came with 8Gb while the work machine has 64Gb.
Recently I found that even with only 1 instance of RDP, MS Teams and a couple of Chrome windows under Win 11, the laptop was using 7.8 out of 8Gb, paging like mad and, according to Resource Monitor, "Memory Compression" was causing over 1200 Hard Faults per second! I've added another 8Gb and it seems OK... For now! 
I think it's got to the stage where a 16Gb machine is entry level for Windows and a dev machine should probably have 64Gb, possibly more.
(One day I'll think of a signature...)
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
