March 30, 2017 at 12:51 pm
Jeff Moden - Thursday, March 30, 2017 8:37 AMNorthernSoul - Thursday, March 30, 2017 2:34 AMI notice you've raised another topic regarding memory pressure. Is this happening on the same server?Heh.... yeah.... the one with 27GB allocated to SQL Server?
That's the one. I've just re-read the other thread and its been confirmed that both topics are related.
March 30, 2017 at 8:34 pm
NorthernSoul - Thursday, March 30, 2017 12:51 PMJeff Moden - Thursday, March 30, 2017 8:37 AMNorthernSoul - Thursday, March 30, 2017 2:34 AMI notice you've raised another topic regarding memory pressure. Is this happening on the same server?Heh.... yeah.... the one with 27GB allocated to SQL Server?
That's the one. I've just re-read the other thread and its been confirmed that both topics are related.
Interesting. According to this thread, they have a "huge database in TB size" and they haven't enough memory to deal with a likely size table. If the database truly is that size and the company won't even spring for some extra RAM, then I honestly feel sorry for the OP. If the OP is making any of this up, then I feel sorry for the company the OP works for. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
Viewing 2 posts - 16 through 16 (of 16 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply