In memory OLTP table

Hello,
trying to cover tutorial on above issue, I get error on attempt to create FileGroup i.e.,
ALTER DATABASE DBName
ADD FILEGROUP DBNameINMEMORYOLTP
CONTAINS MEMORY_OPTIMIZED_DATA
GO
Incorrect syntax near 'CONTAINS'
Any idea what might be wrong on line 3?
thanks

Hello,
The Syntax is correct, see
ALTER DATABASE File and Filegroup Options (Transact-SQL).
But In-Memory was first introduced in SQL Server 2014, I guess you are using an other Version?
Olaf Helper
[ Blog] [ Xing] [ MVP]

Similar Messages

Issues while migrating data from a disk based table to a memory optimized table

Hi All,
I have a Disk based table with 400000000 rows in it, We are trying to convert it into a memory optimized table.
We have already created a memory optimized table with similar structure and trying to import data into this mem optimized table using 'insert into' from the disk table.
I am trying to Migrate around 10000000 rows at a time, but I am getting an error 'There is insufficient system memory in resource pool 'default' to run this query.' Altough we have 128 GB RAM on the server and SS is utilizing more than 120 GB RAM.
Altough the query has been cancelled.
Wanted to Know how could we migrate the table with the available RAM or do we have increase our RAM?
aa

Josh,
Microsoft's documentation on this subject isn't at its best right now (I believe there will be incremental improvements for better understanding), but here is what I read so far.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn133190.aspx
"A hash index consists of a collection of buckets organized in an array. A hash function maps
index keys to corresponding buckets in the hash index."
Judging by this statement, a hash index is a hash table just like the ones used as work tables for hash operators in queries (hash matching or grouping). Doesn't contain (or include) other columns, i. e. it doesnt store any data.
"Multiple index keys may be mapped to the same hash bucket."
This means there is some kind of mapping, but this is not explained in the article above. However...
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn282389.aspx
"For each hash index in the table, each row has an 8-byte address pointer to the next row in the index. Since there are 4 indexes, each row will allocate 32 bytes for index pointers (an 8 byte pointer for each index)."
Each row (in the table) has a pointer (for every index, 1:1 ratio) that points to a row (also known as bucket) in the hash index. So that is how the aforementioned mapping works huh!
> What happens if you include a column in two or three different indexes, or is that not allowed?
My conclusion is that the hash indexes works the same way as a hash worktable, with the addition of the column in the base table that is added to store pointers to the hash index.
When you create a new index, even if you use the same column twice, a hash table is created, hash calculations are distinctly made for each key and stored on it, and while this is done, the column that is exclusively used for this new index is populated
with pointers to this index. You can add a given column to the set of keys of different hash indexes as many times as you want. Correct if i'm wrong, I'm also new on this subject :D

Tables in memory (Nested tables ?)

For performance reasons, I would like to insert, update, etc...
a table in memory. Can I use a nested table as if it was a
normal table ? Can I do updates on nested tables with values
from normal database tables ??
Statement like : Update <nested-table> set <nested-
table>.x=<value> where <nested-table>.y = <normal-table>.y
Thanks for a quick response.

The answer is yes and no.
A nested table is a "collection" and can be referenced in a SQL
statement using the pseudo-functions THE, CAST, MULTISET and
TABLE. The nested table and varray collections can be a column
in a database table (Oracle8) and are persistent. SQL
statements cannot act on memory held nested tables, varray and
index-by collections, which are transient. Index-by collections
are same as the older PL/SQL tables.
SQL statements cannot operate directly on transient collections.
For speed you can define an index-by collection as a table of
rowtype, and move data back and forth from database tables and
memory held tables using SQL. Records and index-by tables are
more efficient in Oracle 8 than in Oracle 7
In PL/SQL you can use replacement (:=) on the record or
record.column of the rowtype index-by collection. The downside
is you have to keep track of your own indexing which is only
BINARY_INTEGER, no SELECT, UPDATE, INSERT using FROM and WHERE
on transient collections. This works in Oracle 7 also.
Good Luck.

Best way to update an OLTP table ?

Hi,
We have an OLTP table with huge data.
We need to update a status column from 'N' to 'Y' for almost 70% of rows based on some condition.
This table may be accessed by hundreds of sessions at a time.
So, what is the best way to do the same.
Rgds,
Rup

if someone is using the table, ddl cannot be done (or at least you would have to wait maybe a long time)
quick test...
SQL> create table bank
2 (id number primary key
3 ,acc number
4 ,ind varchar2(1)
5 )
6 /
Table created.
SQL> insert into bank
2 select rownum
3       , rownum * 10
4       , 'N'
5    from all_objects
6   where rownum <= 10
7 /
10 rows created.
SQL> commit;
Commit complete.
SQL> update bank
2     set acc = -10
3   where id = 10
4 /
1 row updated.new session
SQL> alter table bank
2 add new_ind varchar2(1)
3 /
alter table bank
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specifiedwell, not a long time... but anyway you can't do ddl while someone is working on the table.

The detail algorithm of OLTP table compress and basic table compress?

I'm doing a research on the detail algorithm of OLTP table compress and basic table compress, anyone who knows, please tell me. 3Q, and also the difference between them

http://www.oracle.com/us/products/database/db-advanced-compression-option-1525064.pdf
Edited by: Sanjaya Balasuriya on Dec 5, 2012 2:49 PM
Edited by: Sanjaya Balasuriya on Dec 5, 2012 2:49 PM

SQL Server 2014 RTM In-Memory OLTP sample

Hi I am trying to get the sample
https://msftdbprodsamples.codeplex.com/releases/view/114491
but it does not appear to be there, has it been moved?

If you want download In-Memory sample, please download it from this link:
SQL Server 2014 RTM In-Memory OLTP Sample.zip
If you want Adventure Works 2014, you can download it from the following link:
Adventure Works 2014 Full Database Backup.zip
T-SQL Articles
T-SQL e-book by TechNet Wiki Community
T-SQL blog

Writing XML from memory to table

Hi,
I do NOT wish to write XML to a file in
order store the XML into the database.
I am creating the XML using the DOM API
(addNode, etc.). Once created in memory,
what strategy should I use to write the
structure into (already created) tables?
Regards,
Diptendu

Hi,
I do NOT wish to write XML to a file in
order store the XML into the database.
I am creating the XML using the DOM API
(addNode, etc.). Once created in memory,
what strategy should I use to write the
structure into (already created) tables?
Regards,
Diptendu

Warehouse table in sync with OLTP table

I have a quick question, I have a table called orders and and also another table called orders_warehouse. We warehouse every day's data from orders to orders_warehouse. Question is when we add a new column to orders table is there a magic way to add that column to warehouse table also. The problem we have is developers tend to add new columns to orders table but not to warehouse table. because of this our warehouse process fails with mismatch of columns between warehouse and non warehouse tables. Is there way all the new ddl on orders table automatically applies to orders_warehouse table also.
Thanks for your help

I think you need to have some kind of change managment process imlemented in your organization. In warehouse, I also encountered where transaction systems changed the table structure but warehouse was not changed, as transaction system's developer's were not completely aware of impact of their change. I am not sure how your organization manages meta data information and also data profiling. IF you have well managed meta data and data profiling then you can stream line such process based on tools you are using.

SQL Server 2014 New T-SQL Features

I have seen the following new T-SQL features:
1. In-memory OLTP tables.
2. Inline specification of CLUSTERED and NONCLUSTERED indexes is now allowed for disk-based tables.
3. The SELECT … INTO statement is improved and can now operate in parallel.
Any others? Thanks.
Kalman Toth Database & OLAP Architect
Free T-SQL Scripts
New Book / Kindle: Exam 70-461 Bootcamp: Querying Microsoft SQL Server 2012

http://windowsitpro.com/sql-server-2014/top-ten-new-features-sql-server-2014
http://www.sqlpass.org/sqlserver2014/Webinars.aspx
Enhanced query processing for better performance without app changes.
Buffer Pool extension to SSDs for faster paging.
Resource Governor controls IO along with CPU and memory.
Enhanced Always On now supports 8 secondary for better HA (High Availability

SQL Server 2014 New Database Design Features

SQL Server 2014 has three major database design related features:
1. In-memory OLTP tables (Hekaton)
2. Inline INDEX declaration in CREATE TABLE
3. Updateable clustered columnstore index
Any other new feature? Thanks.
Kalman Toth Database & OLAP Architect
SQL Server 2014 Design & Programming
New Book / Kindle: Exam 70-461 Bootcamp: Querying Microsoft SQL Server 2012

http://windowsitpro.com/sql-server-2014/top-ten-new-features-sql-server-2014
http://www.sqlpass.org/sqlserver2014/Webinars.aspx
Enhanced query processing for better performance without app changes.
Buffer Pool extension to SSDs for faster paging.
Resource Governor controls IO along with CPU and memory.
Enhanced Always On now supports 8 secondary for better HA (High Availability

SQL Server 2014 In-Memory Table Limitations

When I use the migration wizard to migrate a table into a memory-optimized table, I get serious limitations (see images below). It appears that practically a table has to be an isolated staging table for migration.
A frequently used table like Production.Product would be a good candidate to be memory resident, theoretically thinking.
What do I do?
Bigger question: what if I want the entire OLTP database in memory? After all memory capacities are expanding.
Thanks.
Kalman Toth Database & OLAP Architect
Free T-SQL Scripts
New Book / Kindle: Exam 70-461 Bootcamp: Querying Microsoft SQL Server 2012

... It appears that practically a table has to be an isolated staging table for migration.
Bigger question: what if I want the entire OLTP database in memory? After all memory capacities are expanding.
Hello
Yes, there are quite a few barriers for migrating tables to memory optimized.
For a list of unsupported features check this topic:
Transact-SQL Constructs Not Supported by In-Memory OLTP
and for datatypes check here: Supported Data Types
You probably do NOT want to put a whole database into the new In-Memory structures. Not all workloads actually profit from that. I.e. The more you have Updates the less you will benefit from the
In-Memory Optimized Tables because of the version chains.
You can read a bit here: Determining if a Table or Stored Procedure Should Be Ported to In-Memory OLTP
And also those are some of the topics which you may want to have read beforehand:
Memory Optimization Advisor
Requirements for Using Memory-Optimized Tables
Memory-Optimized Tables
Good luck
Andreas Wolter (Blog |
Twitter)
MCM - Microsoft Certified Master SQL Server 2008
MCSM - Microsoft Certified Solutions Master Data Platform, SQL Server 2012
www.andreas-wolter.com |
www.SarpedonQualityLab.com

Internal Table Memory Allocation

Hello all,
I could understand the difference between Internal Table with occurs 0 and internal table with type declaration...
correct me if i am wrong, occurs 0 declaration occupies 8kb memory and header line 256 bytes...
But what i could not get is...
Where can i view this internal table runtime memory usage?? Should i have to check that in some transaction???
If that is the case, what transaction i should look at?? Can i view this in debugging mode??? I tried GOTO -> STATUS DISPLAY -> MEMORY USE and i have tried even SETTINGS -> MEMORY MONITORING ->MEMORY DISPLAY ON...Nothing worked..
when i go for GOTO -> STATUS DISPLAY -> MEMORY USE in debugging
memory allocated seems to be same for Internal table with occur 0 and Internal table with type declaration
I have searched a lot about this in SDN....But could not come to a conclusion......
I don't have authorisation here for DBG_MEMORY_DIFFTOOL or S_MEMORY_INSPECTOR unfortunately.....
Waiting for your replies....

Hi Jagannathan,
You can view this on Debugger(ECC6.0) onwards.
To find out how much memory internal tables occupy, choose Goto --> Display Condition --> Memory Usage.
Choose Change Settings to display a window, in which you can choose the Internal Tables button.
Hope this will assists you for your quest.
Regards,
-Syed.

Table creation

Code :
CREATE TABLE [techforum_member_list](
[TfmID] INT NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED HASH WITH (BUCKET_COUNT = 1000000),
[Name] NVARCHAR(250) NOT NULL INDEX [IName] HASH WITH (BUCKET_COUNT = 1000000),
[JoiningDate] DATETIME NULL
WITH (MEMORY_OPTIMIZED = ON, DURABILITY = SCHEMA_AND_DATA);
Error
Msg 12328, Level 16, State 102, Line 49
Indexes on character columns that do not use a *_BIN2 collation are not supported with indexes on memory optimized tables.
Msg 1750, Level 16, State 0, Line 49
Could not create constraint or index. See previous errors.

A couple comments in addition to Ahsan reply.
Keep in mind, that BIN2 collation is case- and accent- sensitive. This could be the breaking change for the application behavior if you decided to convert existing system to use In-Memory OLTP.
Another one is more the observation on design. In-memory OLTP provides you the most benefits by removing latch contention, e.g. it helps the most with OLTP tables with highly volatile data. Moving static catalog tables to in-memory area are less beneficial.
Granted, you can get some performance improvements especially with native compilation involved; however, they would not be as noticeable as in case of the tables with volatile transactional data.
Thank you!
Dmitri V. Korotkevitch (MVP, MCM, MCPD)
My blog: http://aboutsqlserver.com

Distribution database & In memory

Hi,
Can I use the In memory new SQL Server 2014 feature on the distribution database.
We use a distributor with a lot of publications and subscriber and facing locks problem on the commands table.
Perhaps, the new lock manager process of the In memory feature can help us.
Is there anyone tried this configuration ??
Thks
Fred

Hello,
For sure In Memory OLTP will be improved on the future. Meanwhile you can create a Connect item suggesting support for tables located
on a distributor. The more votes the item gets the more is considered in future changes.
http://connect.microsoft.com/sql
Thank you for visiting MSDN Forums! Have a great day!
Regards,
Alberto Morillo
SQLCoffee.com

Read Table Vs Loop at

Dear All,
Please let me know which one of the two should I use to improve the performance, for tables containing a lot of data ?
Regards,
Thanks in anticipation.
Alok.

Hi,
    Follow below steps.
    In se30 transaction you can look for
    Tip&TRicks button on application toolbar
    apart from below conventions
   Follow below steps
1) Remove corresponding from select satement
2) Remove * from select
3) Select field in sequence as defined in database
4) Avoid unnecessary selects
i.e check for internal table not initial
5) Use all entries and sort table by key fields
6) Remove selects ferom loop and use binary search
7) Try to use secondary index when you don't have
full key.
8) Modify internal table use transporting option
9) Avoid nested loop . Use read table and loop at itab
from sy-tabix statement.
10) free intrenal table memory wnen table is not
required for further processing.
11)
Follow below logic.
FORM SUB_SELECTION_AUFKTAB.
if not it_plant[] is initial.
it_plant1[] = it_plant[].
sort it_plant1 by werks.
delete adjacent duplicates from it_plant1 comparing werks
SELECT AUFNR KTEXT USER4 OBJNR INTO CORRESPONDING FIELDS OF TABLE I_AUFKTAB
FROM AUFK
FOR ALL ENTRIES IN it_plant1
WHERE AUFNR IN S_AUFNR AND
KTEXT IN S_KTEXT AND
WERKS IN S_WERKS AND
AUART IN S_AUART AND
USER4 IN S_USER4 AND
werks eq it_plant1-werks.
free it_plant1.
Endif.
ENDFORM. "SUB_SELECTION_AUFKTAB
Regards
Amole

In memory OLTP table

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for