Enabling AWE SQL Server 2005 64-bit

Hi All,
I'm trying to enable AWE to access more physical memory for SQL Server 2005
64-bit. I am not seeing the "Address Windowing Extensions enabled" message i
n
the SQL server logs when I restart services. I am following SQL documentatio
n
to do this but am having no luck. I have done this with SQL 2000 32-bit no
worries. Are things different for 64-bit SQL 2005?
Please provide advice.
Thanks in advanced,
Cheers,
PhilHi Phil
AWE is not needed with 64-bit. AWE is only needed because a 32-bit address
field cannot access any memory address higher than 4GB. With 64 bits for
addressing, you can directly address all the memory on your machine.
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.InsideSQLServer.com
http://sqlblog.com
"philt" <philt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C97C67C8-C6EE-455E-BF13-EE139812B7E5@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> I'm trying to enable AWE to access more physical memory for SQL Server
> 2005
> 64-bit. I am not seeing the "Address Windowing Extensions enabled" message
> in
> the SQL server logs when I restart services. I am following SQL
> documentation
> to do this but am having no luck. I have done this with SQL 2000 32-bit no
> worries. Are things different for 64-bit SQL 2005?
> Please provide advice.
> Thanks in advanced,
> Cheers,
> Phil|||Thanks Kalen, that's great.
So are you saying I do nothing? eg don't enable AWE in SQL?, don't add PAE
to boot.ini don't configure min and max server memory in SQL config?
Just let SQL 2005 64bit do it's own thing?
I'm using "Windows Server 2003 standard 64bit" and "SQL Server 2005 Standard
edition 64bit".
8GB of ram on server, was wanting to reserver 6 GB for SQL.
Thanks again.
Cheers,
Phil
"Kalen Delaney" wrote:

> Hi Phil
> AWE is not needed with 64-bit. AWE is only needed because a 32-bit address
> field cannot access any memory address higher than 4GB. With 64 bits for
> addressing, you can directly address all the memory on your machine.
> --
> HTH
> Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
> www.InsideSQLServer.com
> http://sqlblog.com
>
> "philt" <philt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:C97C67C8-C6EE-455E-BF13-EE139812B7E5@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||configuring min / max is good. I'm using it on all my servers.
AWE will not offer any performance advantage.
PAE mean nothing for an x64 server.
"philt" <philt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0DA946FF-AF53-4D7A-910A-99C088997C49@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks Kalen, that's great.
> So are you saying I do nothing? eg don't enable AWE in SQL?, don't add PAE
> to boot.ini don't configure min and max server memory in SQL config?
> Just let SQL 2005 64bit do it's own thing?
> I'm using "Windows Server 2003 standard 64bit" and "SQL Server 2005
> Standard
> edition 64bit".
> 8GB of ram on server, was wanting to reserver 6 GB for SQL.
> Thanks again.
> Cheers,
> Phil
> "Kalen Delaney" wrote:
>|||Its a good idea to set lock pages in memory for the service account too. It
would be bad to page out that much memory.
Jason Massie
www: http://statisticsio.com
rss: http://statisticsio.com/Home/tabid/.../1/Default.aspx
"philt" <philt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0DA946FF-AF53-4D7A-910A-99C088997C49@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks Kalen, that's great.
> So are you saying I do nothing? eg don't enable AWE in SQL?, don't add PAE
> to boot.ini don't configure min and max server memory in SQL config?
> Just let SQL 2005 64bit do it's own thing?
> I'm using "Windows Server 2003 standard 64bit" and "SQL Server 2005
> Standard
> edition 64bit".
> 8GB of ram on server, was wanting to reserver 6 GB for SQL.
> Thanks again.
> Cheers,
> Phil
> "Kalen Delaney" wrote:
>|||I saw a question like this: "If we do not need AWE in x64 then why it is
still exists?"
And I saw the answer for this question which was about AWE is not just for
address extention in x86 systems and it has other purposes too however that
was too technical and I didn't understand indeed. I hope I'll manage to find
a simplified answer for this one day =)
So what would your answer be to this question Kalen?
Ekrem nsoy
"Kalen Delaney" <replies@.public_newsgroups.com> wrote in message
news:elNSnmuMIHA.4740@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi Phil
> AWE is not needed with 64-bit. AWE is only needed because a 32-bit address
> field cannot access any memory address higher than 4GB. With 64 bits for
> addressing, you can directly address all the memory on your machine.
> --
> HTH
> Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
> www.InsideSQLServer.com
> http://sqlblog.com
>
> "philt" <philt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:C97C67C8-C6EE-455E-BF13-EE139812B7E5@.microsoft.com...
>|||No go on this one. Lock Pages in Memory on has effect for SQL Server
Enterprise Edition, IIRC.
Kevin G. Boles
TheSQLGuru
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"jason" <jason-r3move@.statisticsio.com> wrote in message
news:8003100B-724F-466B-8ABD-DD3CCEBCFAB9@.microsoft.com...
> Its a good idea to set lock pages in memory for the service account too.
> It would be bad to page out that much memory.
>
> --
> Jason Massie
> www: http://statisticsio.com
> rss: http://statisticsio.com/Home/tabid/.../1/Default.aspx
>
> "philt" <philt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:0DA946FF-AF53-4D7A-910A-99C088997C49@.microsoft.com...
>|||Correct - you need to do nothing but set max/min memory. I think it is best
practice to set at least some spread between max and min. Assuming there
isn't anything else running on the box, 2GB left for the OS should be
sufficient.
Kevin G. Boles
TheSQLGuru
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"philt" <philt@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0DA946FF-AF53-4D7A-910A-99C088997C49@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks Kalen, that's great.
> So are you saying I do nothing? eg don't enable AWE in SQL?, don't add PAE
> to boot.ini don't configure min and max server memory in SQL config?
> Just let SQL 2005 64bit do it's own thing?
> I'm using "Windows Server 2003 standard 64bit" and "SQL Server 2005
> Standard
> edition 64bit".
> 8GB of ram on server, was wanting to reserver 6 GB for SQL.
> Thanks again.
> Cheers,
> Phil
> "Kalen Delaney" wrote:
>|||Ekrem
My answer to the question "Why does AWE exist in x64" would be that MS just
didn't remove it from the metadata and the GUI because it is still needed
for 32-bit. Are there other config options or GUI properties that are
different between 32 and 64 bit? I do not have a 64-bit system to test this
out on.
The only issue with AWE that might apply here, that I am aware of, is that
with AWE enabled SQL Server will commit your max (or target) memory
immediately on startup and not wait until the system needs to use that much.
Again, I do not have a 64 bit machine, so anything I say would just be based
on things I have read.
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.InsideSQLServer.com
http://sqlblog.com
"Ekrem nsoy" <ekrem@.btegitim.com> wrote in message
news:B2358AFA-38B1-48E3-B8FC-64FF72EA9834@.microsoft.com...
>I saw a question like this: "If we do not need AWE in x64 then why it is
>still exists?"
> And I saw the answer for this question which was about AWE is not just for
> address extention in x86 systems and it has other purposes too however
> that was too technical and I didn't understand indeed. I hope I'll manage
> to find a simplified answer for this one day =)
> So what would your answer be to this question Kalen?
> --
> Ekrem nsoy
>
> "Kalen Delaney" <replies@.public_newsgroups.com> wrote in message
> news:elNSnmuMIHA.4740@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>|||Hi Kalen,
Thanks for sharing your thought with us.
Well, the question "Why does AWE exist in x64" goes to the x64 version of
SQL Server. As x64 version and x86 versions are different, this option could
be removed from the x64 version' s SSMS. By the way I don't know if there is
any difference between the x86 and x64' s SSMS' ? Or you might be right,
SSMS is the same SSMS in all systems. If this is the situation, then the
question is going to be kinda answered. However, if SSMSs are different in
different architectures then I'd love to learn why AWE option is still
there, in x64's SSMS.
Unfortunately I don't have a x64 system either.
Ekrem nsoy
"Kalen Delaney" <replies@.public_newsgroups.com> wrote in message
news:ugAL923MIHA.1204@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Ekrem
> My answer to the question "Why does AWE exist in x64" would be that MS
> just didn't remove it from the metadata and the GUI because it is still
> needed for 32-bit. Are there other config options or GUI properties that
> are different between 32 and 64 bit? I do not have a 64-bit system to
> test this out on.
> The only issue with AWE that might apply here, that I am aware of, is that
> with AWE enabled SQL Server will commit your max (or target) memory
> immediately on startup and not wait until the system needs to use that
> much. Again, I do not have a 64 bit machine, so anything I say would just
> be based on things I have read.
> --
> HTH
> Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
> www.InsideSQLServer.com
> http://sqlblog.com
>
> "Ekrem nsoy" <ekrem@.btegitim.com> wrote in message
> news:B2358AFA-38B1-48E3-B8FC-64FF72EA9834@.microsoft.com...
>