Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
currently)
I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?Perhaps you are talking about this on BOL
"Although it is not required, we recommend locking pages in memory when
using 64-bit operating systems. For 32-bit operating systems, Lock pages in
memory permission must be granted before AWE is configured for SQL Server."
I do not see why there could be a conflict if both services are using the
same Windows account and this account has the Lock pages in memory permission
granted. It should be Ok.
(BOL note from
Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
ms-help://MS.SQLCC.v9/MS.SQLSVR.v9.en/udb9/html/34950321-2bfd-4679-8f1b-0a0a440eb443.htm
)
Hope this helps,
Ben Nevarez
"Neufusion" wrote:
> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
> currently)
> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?
>|||The main SQL Server service is specifically designed for managing large
amounts of memory and has an option to use AWE but the SQL Agent only works
like any other regular program as far as memory management's concerned
(Virtual Memory). Therefore there's no reason to think both services would
make large AWE allocations at startup.
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
http://blogs.sqlserver.org.au/blogs/greg_linwood
Benchmark your query performance
http://www.SQLBenchmarkPro.com
"Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
> currently)
> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?|||If I remember correctly, the "Lock pages in memory" setting only applies to
Enterprise, not Standard edition. not sure which you are running
--
Kevin3NF
SQL Server dude
You want fries with that?
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
"Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
> currently)
> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?|||This was true for SQL 2000 but not SQL 2005
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
http://blogs.sqlserver.org.au/blogs/greg_linwood
Benchmark your query performance
http://www.SQLBenchmarkPro.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:Oh8WQgnYIHA.3964@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> If I remember correctly, the "Lock pages in memory" setting only applies
> to Enterprise, not Standard edition. not sure which you are running
> --
> Kevin3NF
> SQL Server dude
> You want fries with that?
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
> I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
> Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
>
> "Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
>> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
>> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
>> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
>> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
>> currently)
>> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
>> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?
>|||http://support.microsoft.com/kb/918483/en-us
Note For 64-bit systems, SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition is the only
edition that is designed to use lock pages in memory.
Am I misreading? I have a 3 node, 2 instance cluster my customer is about
to upgrade for this very reason...
--
Kevin3NF
SQL Server dude
You want fries with that?
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
"Greg Linwood" <g_linwood@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:utExsLrYIHA.4196@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> This was true for SQL 2000 but not SQL 2005
> Regards,
> Greg Linwood
> SQL Server MVP
> http://blogs.sqlserver.org.au/blogs/greg_linwood
> Benchmark your query performance
> http://www.SQLBenchmarkPro.com
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:Oh8WQgnYIHA.3964@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> If I remember correctly, the "Lock pages in memory" setting only applies
>> to Enterprise, not Standard edition. not sure which you are running
>> --
>> Kevin3NF
>> SQL Server dude
>> You want fries with that?
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
>> I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
>> Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
>>
>> "Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
>> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
>> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
>> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
>> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
>> currently)
>> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
>> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?
>>
>
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment