Skip to main content
replaced http://serverfault.com/ with https://serverfault.com/
Source Link

Should this question be reopened?
Noooooooo

It's not only basic knowledge for most who use MSSQL.
Which doesn't actually matter all that much.

But primarily!
It is aa clearclear duplicateduplicate.
There are so many posts on serverfault / dba about the memory usage of SQL Server, I don't see why it's not just closed as a duplicate.
It would answer the OP's question quite quickly if it was just closed as a duplicate, serve as a pointer to the tremendous amount of answers about SQL Server memory, and push the point please do your own research more than simply closing it does. (not taking into account comments who are generally regarded as non-existent in the long run)

When a question comes up that is clearly common knowledge, chances are you'll find a post on ServerFault about it. For any other questions a well written ServerFault answer won't harm anyone if one does not already exist.

Should this question be reopened?
Noooooooo

It's not only basic knowledge for most who use MSSQL.
Which doesn't actually matter all that much.

But primarily!
It is a clear duplicate.
There are so many posts on serverfault / dba about the memory usage of SQL Server, I don't see why it's not just closed as a duplicate.
It would answer the OP's question quite quickly if it was just closed as a duplicate, serve as a pointer to the tremendous amount of answers about SQL Server memory, and push the point please do your own research more than simply closing it does. (not taking into account comments who are generally regarded as non-existent in the long run)

When a question comes up that is clearly common knowledge, chances are you'll find a post on ServerFault about it. For any other questions a well written ServerFault answer won't harm anyone if one does not already exist.

Should this question be reopened?
Noooooooo

It's not only basic knowledge for most who use MSSQL.
Which doesn't actually matter all that much.

But primarily!
It is a clear duplicate.
There are so many posts on serverfault / dba about the memory usage of SQL Server, I don't see why it's not just closed as a duplicate.
It would answer the OP's question quite quickly if it was just closed as a duplicate, serve as a pointer to the tremendous amount of answers about SQL Server memory, and push the point please do your own research more than simply closing it does. (not taking into account comments who are generally regarded as non-existent in the long run)

When a question comes up that is clearly common knowledge, chances are you'll find a post on ServerFault about it. For any other questions a well written ServerFault answer won't harm anyone if one does not already exist.

added 223 characters in body
Source Link
Reaces
  • 5.6k
  • 14
  • 24

Should this question be reopened?
Noooooooo

It's not only basic knowledge for most who use MSSQL.
Which doesn't actually matter all that much.

But primarily!
It is a clear duplicate.
There are so many posts on serverfault / dba about the memory usage of SQL Server, I don't see why it's not just closed as a duplicate.
It would answer the OP's question quite quickly if it was just closed as a duplicate, serve as a pointer to the tremendous amount of answers about SQL Server memory, and push the point please do your own research more than simply closing it does. (not taking into account comments who are generally regarded as non-existent in the long run)

When a question comes up that is clearly common knowledge, chances are you'll find a post on ServerFault about it. For any other questions a well written ServerFault answer won't harm anyone if one does not already exist.

Should this question be reopened?
Noooooooo

It's not only basic knowledge for most who use MSSQL.
Which doesn't actually matter all that much.

But primarily!
It is a clear duplicate.
There are so many posts on serverfault / dba about the memory usage of SQL Server, I don't see why it's not just closed as a duplicate.
It would answer the OP's question quite quickly if it was just closed as a duplicate, serve as a pointer to the tremendous amount of answers about SQL Server memory, and push the point please do your own research more than simply closing it does. (not taking into account comments who are generally regarded as non-existent in the long run)

Should this question be reopened?
Noooooooo

It's not only basic knowledge for most who use MSSQL.
Which doesn't actually matter all that much.

But primarily!
It is a clear duplicate.
There are so many posts on serverfault / dba about the memory usage of SQL Server, I don't see why it's not just closed as a duplicate.
It would answer the OP's question quite quickly if it was just closed as a duplicate, serve as a pointer to the tremendous amount of answers about SQL Server memory, and push the point please do your own research more than simply closing it does. (not taking into account comments who are generally regarded as non-existent in the long run)

When a question comes up that is clearly common knowledge, chances are you'll find a post on ServerFault about it. For any other questions a well written ServerFault answer won't harm anyone if one does not already exist.

Source Link
Reaces
  • 5.6k
  • 14
  • 24

Should this question be reopened?
Noooooooo

It's not only basic knowledge for most who use MSSQL.
Which doesn't actually matter all that much.

But primarily!
It is a clear duplicate.
There are so many posts on serverfault / dba about the memory usage of SQL Server, I don't see why it's not just closed as a duplicate.
It would answer the OP's question quite quickly if it was just closed as a duplicate, serve as a pointer to the tremendous amount of answers about SQL Server memory, and push the point please do your own research more than simply closing it does. (not taking into account comments who are generally regarded as non-existent in the long run)