Skip to main content

Timeline for SQL Server 2000 performance

Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0

11 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jan 14, 2013 at 15:01 answer added HLGEM timeline score: 0
Jan 10, 2013 at 14:37 comment added Marian @MartinSmith: you're right, that was also my first thought :-). 2 GB of RAM and CPU at 50%? Is it a dual processor and you've disabled parallelism by any chance? How do you check the RAM usage? If it's by using Task Manager, it's not reliable at all. Let's go from this info and we'll go on further. So: what version of OS, what version of SQL Server, how many CPUs, how much RAM do you have?
Jan 10, 2013 at 13:20 comment added Martin Smith BTW: You don't tell us anything about the server. If it is 32 bit then the RAM as shown in taskmgr won't go above 2GB except if you are using the 3GB switch. Also how big is the database in GB and what is the page life expectancy on the server?
Jan 9, 2013 at 22:49 history edited Jon Seigel
edited tags
Jan 9, 2013 at 21:28 comment added Martin Smith Sounds like you are probably missing some useful indexes.
Jan 9, 2013 at 21:22 history migrated from stackoverflow.com (revisions)
Jan 9, 2013 at 16:19 comment added user1922240 We are using some old software that integrates with SQL server 2000 and i'm not sure of the possible problems with upgrading as the company who developed the software is no longer in business. And the GUID is not used for the PK.
Jan 9, 2013 at 16:13 comment added Zane Are the GUID's used for the Primary key and if so are they set up for NewsequentialID? Also Agree with the above you guys might want to think about upgrading to a version that is less than 10 years old.
Jan 9, 2013 at 16:10 answer added Danielle Paquette-Harvey timeline score: 0
Jan 9, 2013 at 16:07 answer added Eugene Roeder timeline score: 1
Jan 9, 2013 at 16:03 history asked user1922240 CC BY-SA 3.0