February 14, 2006 at 7:32 am
In SQL Server 2000, one can pin a table using DBCC PINTABLE or sp_tableoption. SQL Server 2005 documentation indicates pinning tables is no longer allowed. Is this true? If yes, why was this functionality removed?
Other DBMS like Oracle still have it.
February 14, 2006 at 7:49 am
Hello Daryl,
Please go through this link as Microsoft is conveying that it has highly unwanted side-effects. These include the potential to damage the buffer pool.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms178015.aspx
Thanks and have a nice day!!!
Lucky
February 14, 2006 at 7:58 am
I guess removing this functionality is one way to handle the unwanted side-effects but another way is to fix the problem. This makes for another option other DBMS have over SQL Server.
February 15, 2006 at 6:01 am
Not really. It prevents SQLs new memory management system from handling it dynamically. I believe Oracle does things the same way.
February 15, 2006 at 9:32 am
The thing about pinning tables in memory is that you want to do it for small, frequently used tables right? Well, small, frequently used tables are likely to be in and remain in the buffer pool anyway, so what's the point?
/*****************
If most people are not willing to see the difficulty, this is mainly because, consciously or unconsciously, they assume that it will be they who will settle these questions for the others, and because they are convinced of their own capacity to do this. -Friedrich August von Hayek
*****************/
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply