added memory - disk now full

We have a win 2000 server with SQL Server 2K.

Over the weekend, they added 4GB of RAM to the existing 4GB.

They did not enable AWE, nor /PAE /3GB. THat is planned for after an upgrade to 2003, this was in theory just to get the hardware stuff out of the way.

When I left on friday, there was 3.5GB on our data drive, which is typical although much too low. (we are also adding space to the SAN next weekend)

The problem is, when I came in this morning, there was only 9MB left on our data drive. I did request that they run update useage on the main database, but that would only help matters, wouldn't it?

Could the disk space problem be due to the memory addition?

Physical memory is paged in and out from and to the paging file. If you system is setup so the paging file size is system managed, the paging file size will be ~150-300% of physical ram. Adding 4 GB of RAM would have increased the paging file size by quite a bit, hence the change in free disk space.|||IMO, a system with 8GB of memory should disable paging. That is not a widely-shared point of view, however. I disable paging on my 2GB dev. system.

Added /3GB to boot.ini and OS will not start

Here is a new one for me. I added the /3GB switch to the boot.ini, restarted the server and now receive a number of messages when the OS tries to load.

Explorer.exe - Application Error

The application failed to initialize properly.

If I click OK the server sits on a blue screen with no information on the screen.

The other messages are the result of me trying to do anything within Task Manager, with the exception of rebooting the server. These messages make sense since Explorer.exe had a problem.

The server has the following configuration.

HP DL580

Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition - SP2

SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition - SP3a

14GB Memory

(4) dual core procs

PAE is enabled in the boot.ini

If I remove the /3GB the OS starts without a problem. Any suggestions?

Thanks, Dave

Hey Dave,

I don't recommend adding the 3GB switch for this server. You're running 14GB of memory, with PAE enabled.

This means Windows has got to use a lot more phsyical memory to house the PAE memory mappings, and when you set 3GB you're dropping the amount of memory Windows can use from 2GB down to 1GB, and from the sound of it it's just not enough for Windows.

Microsoft actually say not use 3GB with PAE in a server which has 16GB or greater RAM. But I've found anything more than 12 - 14GB and it's best not to use 3GB.

Hope that helps.

Cheers, Reece.

Add /3GB to Server 4GB

I have SQL Server 2000 cluster this is Active/Active.
The server has total 4GB of RAM with Windows 2000 Advanced Server.
Should the /3GB be applied to the both Active/Active nodes?
I would like the primary node to get 2.8 GB and the secondary node to get
1.2 GB of RAM.
Please help me with this problem.
Thank You,
The /3GB switch affects the VIRTUAL memory, not necessarily the physical RAM
and is for each process, each of which gets their own respective address
space. So, in short, yes, set it on each node of the cluster.
Next, you need to account for the OS and any additional processes that will
be running. Since you do not have sufficient memory to make good use of AWE
memory, do not enable that option.
There are two ways to control how much memory SQL Server uses: the MAX
SERVER MEMORY configuration option and the -g startup parameter. By
default, -g is set for 0.5 MB x number of worker threads (128 MB by default)
+ 256 MB = 384 MB. The -g parameter controls the amount of MEM TO LEAVE in
addition to the worker thread memory reservation and each SQL Server
instance has a separate one.
Since you will not be using AWE, as long as you do not set the WORKING SET
SIZE configuration option, memory allocation will be dynamic. I would keep
the MAX SERVER MEMORY set to Total Physical + 1/2 of the Page file. If both
instances were to failover to the same node, each SQL Server instance would
acquire and release memory as needed.
You could set the MIN SERVER MEMORY configuration option in an attempt to
specify the smallest each instance memory allocation would be in order to
keep either from totally controlling the entire physical allocation.
Something like 500 MB would be sufficient.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas

"Joe K." <JoeK@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F6DB31B3-053D-46E5-B2D6-7592C831952D@.microsoft.com...
> I have SQL Server 2000 cluster this is Active/Active.
> The server has total 4GB of RAM with Windows 2000 Advanced Server.
> Should the /3GB be applied to the both Active/Active nodes?
> I would like the primary node to get 2.8 GB and the secondary node to get
> 1.2 GB of RAM.
> Please help me with this problem.
> Thank You,
>
>