SQL Server 2000 Std & Windows 2003 Server Std /3GB switch

We have just bought new servers for separating out exchange server and
SQL server.

We have Windows 2003 Server Standard Edition with 4GB RAM, SQL Server
2000 Standard as I understand it uses only 2GB of memory. I was told
about a switch you could add to make it recognise more than 2GB in the
boot.ini file /3GB. Should I do this or not?

I believe it will probably do more harm than good. I have read a lot of
articles and become quite confused over this, basically need some help
deciding if ti will make any difference? If I put it in will it cause
issues on the performance.

I suppose the last question is is it worth having 4GB in the server in
the first place also? Would it be better to remove 2GB. The network is
70 users, database is about 10GB.

Thanks in advance, John

2000 SE will only address 2GB for the buffer pool, regardless of the BOOT.IN
I switches. But remember
that the OS need memory as well. Perhaps 3GB in the machine is a good settin
g...

--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www. solidqualitylearning
.com/
Blog: http:// solidqualitylearning
.com/blogs/tibor/


<freeman642@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1143821572.633516.155010@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> We have just bought new servers for separating out exchange server and
> SQL server.
>
> We have Windows 2003 Server Standard Edition with 4GB RAM, SQL Server
> 2000 Standard as I understand it uses only 2GB of memory. I was told
> about a switch you could add to make it recognise more than 2GB in the
> boot.ini file /3GB. Should I do this or not?
>
> I believe it will probably do more harm than good. I have read a lot of
> articles and become quite confused over this, basically need some help
> deciding if ti will make any difference? If I put it in will it cause
> issues on the performance.
>
> I suppose the last question is is it worth having 4GB in the server in
> the first place also? Would it be better to remove 2GB. The network is
> 70 users, database is about 10GB.
>
> Thanks in advance, John
>