Article: SQL Server memory configurations for procedure cache and buffer cache - SQL Server with Mr. Denny
Home > IT Blogs > SQL Server with Mr. Denny > Article: SQL Server memory configurations for procedure cache and buffer cache
>>VIEW ALL POSTS  

SQL Server with Mr. Denny

« SQL 2005 Internal Query Error 8623 still unfixed
SQL Server 2008 RC 0 Released »
Jun 10 2008   6:39PM GMT

Article: SQL Server memory configurations for procedure cache and buffer cache



Posted by: mrdenny
SQL Server 2000, Cache, SQL Server 2005, Article

I’ve just published another tip over on SearchSQLServer.com.  This one is titled SQL Server memory configurations for procedure cache and buffer cache.

To determine how much memory your SQL Server database uses for buffer cache and procedure cache, factor in the SQL version you’re using, whether it’s x86, x64 or Itanium and the amount of memory allocated to the SQL Server instance. I talk about how the system configures memory and how it allocates the amount of buffer and procedure cache that’s available.Denny

AddThis Social Bookmark Button     Comment     RSS Feed     Email a friend

Comment on this Post


You must be logged-in to post a comment. Log-in/Register

Avournas  |   Jun 28 2008   1:56PM GMT

In the article you state “Buffer cache cannot reside within the Address Windowing Extension (AWE)-controlled memory space”. I think you have that backwards. It is procedure cache that cannot reside in AWE. Buffer cache can.


 

Mrdenny  |   Jun 28 2008   6:05PM GMT

You are correct, I did manage to get those backwards. I’ll have the article corrected.

Thanks for pointing that out.


 

Ratio of Adhoc plans to Stored proc plans in Cache | keyongtech  |   Jan 18 2009   5:26PM GMT

[...] can be no higher than 1 Gig. This blog post and the article it points to explain the calculations.  <a href="http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarge...-buffer-cache/" title="http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarge...-buffer-cache/" target="_blank">http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarge…-…</a>) Denny On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 14:33:23 -0600, "Chris Wood" <anonymous> wrote: [...]