 | |
Slow Execution Performance
comp.databases.ms-sqlserver comp.databases.ms-sqlserver
 |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Slow Execution Performance -
11-01-2007
, 06:45 AM
|
Ben (pillars4 (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net) writes: The main problem in this issue was the packet size. The packet size setting of SQL Server 2005 required it to be increased. So, after the update statistics and reindexing, the packet size just had to be increased and that solved the slowness problem. Interesting. I have not heard of anything related to packet size before. Thanks for the update! -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel (AT) sommarskog (DOT) 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 |
#12
| |||
| |||
|
|
What do you mean? |
that your issue was resolved and how it was resolved.
I also expressed my surprise at the resolution. It was not one that I
would think of myself. Which does not mean that resolution was incorrect
or anything. I am only happy to learn from other people's experiences.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel (AT) sommarskog (DOT) 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
#13
| |||
| |||
|
|
Ben (pillars4 (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net) writes: What do you mean? What I meant? I expressed my thanks that you took the time to report that your issue was resolved and how it was resolved. I also expressed my surprise at the resolution. It was not one that I would think of myself. Which does not mean that resolution was incorrect or anything. I am only happy to learn from other people's experiences. -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel (AT) sommarskog (DOT) 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 |
#14
| |||
| |||
|
|
I just had to ask cause I wanted to know your input on that. I am still in the observation state. Personally, I have always set the settings to default unless it is really, badly necessary to change it. As I did with SQL Server 2000. That is why I did not think of the packet size that it needs tweaking. In SQL Server 2000 the packet size was set to zero. I am assuming that this was the default value, which meant that the packet size will grow or shrink as needed by SQL Server 2000. I checked the setting in SQL Server 2005 and the default was 4 KB. Looks like they changed it indeed. |
4096, and as I recall this is also default. Also, according sp_configure,
the minumum packet size is 512, not 0. I have never heard of any dynamic
packet size. It is however for an application to require a different
packet size when it connects.
Maybe someone did a tweak to the packet size on your SQL 2000 a long time
ago, and no one no longer recalls that it ever happened.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel (AT) sommarskog (DOT) 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
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.