Windows Vista/7 Readyboost

**DimPrawn** · 8 December 2009, 17:24

I think it is MS marketing bulltulip. I've never noticed any difference.

**VectraMan** · 8 December 2009, 21:03

Never tried it, but it sounds like it might be useful if you have not a lot of RAM and a slow hard disk.

But RAM is cheap.

**AtW** · 8 December 2009, 21:07

If you are swapping it means you ain't got enough RAM.

We turn off swaps on our Windoze servers, they have 48 GB of RAM.

HTH

**Spacecadet** · 8 December 2009, 21:44

From what I can see on the net it boosts performance for machines with under 1GB ram.
However the testing methods I've seen don't really push the systems, basically they're just doing some basic ops and comparing with and without ready boost
I've got 2GB which most of the time is only 50%-70% used, however SQL Server pushes that right up when I'm churning through a lot of data but there doesn't seem to be any method of seeing how and if readyboost is being used.
The only measure I have at the moment is that minimised windows appear to be restoring to screen a bit faster

**AtW** · 8 December 2009, 22:16

Originally posted by Spacecadet View Post

however SQL Server pushes that right up when I'm churning through a lot of data

It is possible to limit amount of RAM used by SQL server.

**Spacecadet** · 8 December 2009, 23:25

Originally posted by AtW View Post

It is possible to limit amount of RAM used by SQL server.

That just moves the ram/hard disk management from windows to SQL Server which will then mean that the readyboost section in the USB drive won't be getting used as SQL Server commits more from memory to disk rather than allowing the OS to use the available virtual memory more effectively.

Readyboost isn't a straightforward extension to regular memory - it more of an extra swap file on a drive which for random IO is faster than the regular hard drive.

**AtW** · 8 December 2009, 23:28

You can put DB on an SSD. Limiting memory on SQL Server does not necesserily will limit performance - if you have issues you need to look at your SQL and indexes that you created on tables, chances are it's you who is the problem.

HTH

**Spacecadet** · 8 December 2009, 23:48

Originally posted by AtW View Post

You can put DB on an SSD.

That might not be a bad idea, although it will mean having to swap DB's around or buy a a couple more large memory sticks(in which case I might as well buy more ram and a SSD harddive for the lappy

)

Originally posted by AtW View Post

Limiting memory on SQL Server does not necesserily will limit performance - if you have issues you need to look at your SQL and indexes that you created on tables, chances are it's you who is the problem.

Trust me, I have no problems with indexes and SQL.

What I do have a problem is with keeping my laptop as responsive as I like whilst I'm also using it as a test platform for ETL processes which are transforming and moving several gigs worth of data between 2 databases and less than 500mb of memory left for SQL Server to use.

Before you ask. Data files are on their own partion and they have sufficient free space so that the database engine isn't having to extend them during loading

And back to the indexes... typically I'll be reading from one database which in production I won't be able to change anything on, even the indexes. And when writing large volumes of data I typically include scripts to drop the indexes prior to loading then rebuild them afterwards.

**ribble** · 9 December 2009, 10:45

Originally posted by Spacecadet View Post

That might not be a bad idea, although it will mean having to swap DB's around or buy a a couple more large memory sticks(in which case I might as well buy more ram and a SSD harddive for the lappy

)

Trust me, I have no problems with indexes and SQL.

What I do have a problem is with keeping my laptop as responsive as I like whilst I'm also using it as a test platform for ETL processes which are transforming and moving several gigs worth of data between 2 databases and less than 500mb of memory left for SQL Server to use.

Before you ask. Data files are on their own partion and they have sufficient free space so that the database engine isn't having to extend them during loading

And back to the indexes... typically I'll be reading from one database which in production I won't be able to change anything on, even the indexes. And when writing large volumes of data I typically include scripts to drop the indexes prior to loading then rebuild them afterwards.

Why do you use your laptop for that... Isn't that is what a dev/test server is for?

Windows Vista/7 Readyboost