The forum will experience an outage sometime between February 10 at 7:00pm EST and February 12 at 11:59 EST for installation of security updates. The actual time and duration of the outage are unknown but attempts will be made to minimize the downtime. We apologize for any inconvenience.

hello I am new to sqlanywhere I am using the -c option to set the initial ammount of memory, i have set the option in syabase central. when I start the service and look in task manager I can see that the service has not claimed the ammount of memory I have set, have I understood the -c option does it not set the ammount of ram the service should claim at start ?

i have set -c 1500m

thank you for your response.

asked 23 Apr '14, 15:28

danvik's gravatar image

accept rate: 0%

Use SELECT PROPERTY ( 'CurrentCacheSize' ) to determine how big the cache is, in kilobytes. The -c option specifies the initial value, and the actual value can change over time unless you also specify -ca 0 to turn off automatic cache sizing. You can also control the minimum and maximum cache sizes with -cl and -ch. The memory numbers in Task Manager are not very useful IMO.

If SQL Anywhere is sharing a computer with other applications than automatic cache sizing is a wonderful thing for varying workloads. However, if the computer is dedicated to an industrial-strength SQL Anywhere database then settings like -c 90p -ca 0 make sense (cache size fixed at 90% of physical memory).

The rule of thumb is "you can never have too much cache".

permanent link

answered 23 Apr '14, 15:54

Breck%20Carter's gravatar image

Breck Carter
accept rate: 21%

edited 23 Apr '14, 15:56

And to directly address the disconnect between cache size and the value in the task manager: the task manager shows the process' "working set size", not the amount of allocated memory. To see the amount of memory allocated by the process, use perfmon and look at the "Process/Private Bytes" counter.

(23 Apr '14, 16:29) John Smirnios

Breck, why?

The rule of thumb is "you can never have too much cache".

with more chace we don't have better performance?


(23 Apr '14, 20:04) DRauber
Replies hidden

Yes, that is what I am saying... with more cache you have better performance. Another way of saying that is that "too much cache" is an impossibility. It is like saying "you can never have too much money" :)

(23 Apr '14, 20:51) Breck Carter

with more cache you have better performance

Hm, I like your original rule of thumb more - the cited statement is certainly correct when cache itself is a limitation (and that will be true in many cases). However, if you are using a database that "fits into the current cache" (including memory for heavy queries and the like) - not unlikely for "small" embedded databases -, more cache won't necessarily lead to better performance, just as a faster processor won't help when I/O is the bottleneck...

On the other hand, it won't reduce performance, either, therefore it's a reasonable rule of thumb:)

(24 Apr '14, 02:58) Volker Barth

sorry, messed up the translation! I am Brazilian and my English is poor: (

(24 Apr '14, 07:45) DRauber

I wouldn't worry - you are making yourself understood, which is a lot more than I could in Portuguese :)

(24 Apr '14, 08:30) Justin Willey
showing 2 of 6 show all flat view
Your answer
toggle preview

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here



Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text]( "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Question tags:


question asked: 23 Apr '14, 15:28

question was seen: 1,306 times

last updated: 24 Apr '14, 08:30