November 23, 2017 at 6:55 am
DesNorton - Thursday, November 23, 2017 4:20 AMThat statement was made by Scott Pletcher.
Hi Des , Oh yeah it was Scott. But your reference of Aaron's article below also endorses the same view. So the same question to you too .. Is this the same way SQL works in current versions , I mean beyond 2008 R2 ? Thank you.
The following article by Aaron Bertrand illustrates the increased memory grants based on the defined data size, rather than the actual data size.
Performance Myths : Oversizing string columns
November 23, 2017 at 7:28 am
Arsh - Thursday, November 23, 2017 6:55 AMIs this the same way SQL works in current versions , I mean beyond 2008 R2 ? Thank you.
Aaron wrote the article this year, not back around the time of SQL 2008.
And, if you read the article, he even mentioned the SQL version.
What is the warning? It's an excessive memory grant warning, introduced in SQL Server 2016.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
November 23, 2017 at 8:16 am
GilaMonster - Thursday, November 23, 2017 7:28 AM
Aaron wrote the article this year, not back around the time of SQL 2008.
And, if you read the article, he even mentioned the SQL version.
What is the warning? It's an excessive memory grant warning, introduced in SQL Server 2016.
[/quote]
Thanks Gail... I read it at that and now had a very quick glance concentrating only on the grants area and the stats Aaron collected. Thanks for pointed that out.
Viewing 3 posts - 31 through 32 (of 32 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply