http://blogs.msdn.com/b/psssql/archive/2009/09/11/fun-with-locked-pages-awe-task-manager-and-the-working-set.aspxI realize that the topic of “locked pages’ and AWE can be confusing. I don’t blame anyone for being confused on this. I also realize we have blogged and talked about this topic many times perhaps “beating it to death”. And I certainly know this is noten-USTelligent Evolution Platform Developer Build (Build: 5.6.50428.7875)http://blogs.msdn.com/b/psssql/archive/2009/09/11/fun-with-locked-pages-awe-task-manager-and-the-working-set.aspx#10386518Sat, 19 Jan 2013 16:07:17 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:10386518Saurabh Sinha DBA<p>Thanks a ton for sharing this info and the way you choose to explain (Q/A) is best to understand </p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=10386518" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/psssql/archive/2009/09/11/fun-with-locked-pages-awe-task-manager-and-the-working-set.aspx#10216451Mon, 26 Sep 2011 03:41:06 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:10216451matt.bowler<p>Great explanation of a difficult topic - thank you.</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=10216451" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/psssql/archive/2009/09/11/fun-with-locked-pages-awe-task-manager-and-the-working-set.aspx#10215187Thu, 22 Sep 2011 07:05:44 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:10215187wayne<p>excellent information on this feature. thanks for taking the time to put it together and post it</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=10215187" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/psssql/archive/2009/09/11/fun-with-locked-pages-awe-task-manager-and-the-working-set.aspx#10013096Fri, 14 May 2010 13:31:09 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:10013096James Yags<p>Here is an example to ask my question:</p> <p>If the first active cluster is locking 60GB with Locked Pages and then fails, does the new active cluster pull an additional 60GB due to the Lock Pages In MemoryIn Memory, meaning 120GB needs to be available, or will it drop the first locked 60GB and then relock it for this new cluster?</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=10013096" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/psssql/archive/2009/09/11/fun-with-locked-pages-awe-task-manager-and-the-working-set.aspx#9997164Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:19:20 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9997164Anders<p>Great explanation. </p> <p>However, if I am running two instances on separate cluster nodes, so that in case of a fail-over both instances are running on one node, would I still use the Locked Pages privilege, or would the buffer pools potentially conflict with each other?</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9997164" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/psssql/archive/2009/09/11/fun-with-locked-pages-awe-task-manager-and-the-working-set.aspx#9991918Wed, 07 Apr 2010 18:35:39 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9991918wqw<p>&gt;&gt; I think the confusion is related to the fact that Standard Edition for SQL Server for 64bit until recently did not support locked pages. &lt;&lt;</p> <p>No, actually. SQL2000 Standard x86 does *not* support AWE (which is a PITA), so in SQL2005 it's considered as an upgrade.</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9991918" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/psssql/archive/2009/09/11/fun-with-locked-pages-awe-task-manager-and-the-working-set.aspx#9991677Wed, 07 Apr 2010 11:31:53 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9991677Byron<p>Im still struggling with this concept. if you had a 64 bit os, I wouldnt need the pae switch ... and if i put 64bit sql on there, I could just enable the locked pages in memory...but what would happen if I run 64bit os and 32bit sql (im assuming thats possible) would i then need the awe still as the api would be running at os level...or have i missed something...I would have assumed that I would need it still as the sql is 32bit regardless of what the os is...</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9991677" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/psssql/archive/2009/09/11/fun-with-locked-pages-awe-task-manager-and-the-working-set.aspx#9991409Tue, 06 Apr 2010 21:55:14 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9991409DBA<p>Needed a Yes/No answer to this:</p> <p>&quot;Does enabling AWE on x64 give a performance gain?&quot;</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9991409" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/psssql/archive/2009/09/11/fun-with-locked-pages-awe-task-manager-and-the-working-set.aspx#9983277Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:53:15 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9983277Ravi<p>Bob</p> <p>Very well explained!</p> <p>Thanks you</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9983277" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/psssql/archive/2009/09/11/fun-with-locked-pages-awe-task-manager-and-the-working-set.aspx#9945932Fri, 08 Jan 2010 22:06:29 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9945932psssql<p>For SQL Server 2005, sys.dm_os_memory_clerks has an awe_allocated_kb column.</p> <p>Bob Ward</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9945932" width="1" height="1">