This is a discussion on SQL server thrashing? within the SQL Server forums, part of the Microsoft SQL Server category; --> I have a loading process that periodically inserts a lot of relatively large files (up to 400MB) into a ...
| |||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||
| I have a loading process that periodically inserts a lot of relatively large files (up to 400MB) into a few substantial tables (about 50GB). Sometimes, after inserting many files with no problem, the DB server memory usage will suddenly jump from about 4.5GB to about 5.5GB (the server has 4GB physical), the normally heavy disk activity will stop, and the normally low CPU utilization will spike to about 90%, and stay there, and the DB will become totally unresponsive to any connection attempt - sqlcmd dedicated admin connections included. Has anyone seen this before? Does anyone have any idea what it might be, or how I can avoid it? If I kill the sqlserver process and start it up again, which entails a lengthy recovery process, I incur an unacceptable service outage. Thanks, Seth |
| |||
| sql_server_user (kaioptera@gmail.com) writes: > I have a loading process that periodically inserts a lot of relatively > large files (up to 400MB) into a few substantial tables (about 50GB). > Sometimes, after inserting many files with no problem, the DB server > memory usage will suddenly jump from about 4.5GB to about 5.5GB (the > server has 4GB physical), the normally heavy disk activity will stop, > and the normally low CPU utilization will spike to about 90%, and stay > there, and the DB will become totally unresponsive to any connection > attempt - sqlcmd dedicated admin connections included. > > Has anyone seen this before? Does anyone have any idea what it might > be, or how I can avoid it? If I kill the sqlserver process and start it > up again, which entails a lengthy recovery process, I incur an > unacceptable service outage. That sounds bad. Not the least that the SQL Server process gets more virtual memory that the available physical memory. And it sounds even worse that the dedicated admin connection does not provide access. It's impossible to tell what might be going on, but it smells bug to me. I urge to open a case with Microsoft on this, not the least they need to know about it. -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx |