SitsWithMouse
Sun May 18 07:01:00 PDT 2008
It is WSUS 3.0 SP1 that gets downloaded by WSUS 2.x that is installed
directly of the R2 media
"Henrik (Hear)" wrote:
> Ok, It was a thought though. You are writing that you are using the 3.0
> version of WSUS, any thoughts on going to WSUS 3.0 SP1 that comes with WSUS
> downloads In the 3.0 RTM version? Maybe you will have a solution there, I
> dont know exactly what fixes It includes.
>
> //Henrik
>
>
> "SitsWithMouse" <SitsWithMouse@discussions.microsoft.com> skrev i
> meddelandet news:9F7816B9-9F15-44C0-985E-8DE52D8BE940@microsoft.com...
> > Hi Henrik
> >
> > That is actually part of a service we offer our clients. We have their
> > server reports come to us daily and we verifiy their server statuses that
> > way. All SQL memory usage is managed as per Susans website. We set the
> > max
> > memory usage to 70 to tweak the servers performances and do that for all
> > sql
> > instances running.
> >
> > The WSUS 3.0 causing the failing of server reports is picked up because of
> > these daily reports.
> >
> > We consider 2Gb minimum server memory (that was prior to WSUS 3.0), so it
> > sounds like low memory resources is not something any of our servers
> > suffer
> > from, which makes this all tbe more frustrating.
> >
> > There have been plenty of threads around this topic so its strange that
> > there is no definitive solution to this particular issue.
> >
> >
> >
> > "Henrik (Hear)" wrote:
> >
> >> Here Is an excellent blog post on this from Susann Bradley.
> >>
http://msmvps.com/blogs/bradley/archive/2007/12/25/adjusting-sql-embedded-instances.aspx
> >>
> >> //Henrik
> >>
> >> "Henrik (Hear)" <henrik-at-hotmail-com> skrev i meddelandet
> >> news:evOx8IOuIHA.5096@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> >> > Ok, thats my experience to.
> >> > What I also know Is that even If you have 3 or 4 Gb of Ram it doesnt
> >> > always help, the system gets short of resources.
> >> > It also often occurs when the reports are written, often at the time
> >> > that
> >> > Backups has been clsed or even still are running.
> >> > A server ,default installed, doesnt have Its DBs tuned eating up Ram
> >> > (Even
> >> > If SQL releases It fairly well) and with Exchange running taking alot
> >> > of
> >> > Ram, when backups are running the server lacks resources. This Is my
> >> > experince with systems that has a couple of years on the neck.
> >> >
> >> > Tune your systems regarding DBs, backup windows and other scheduled
> >> > jobbs
> >> > to see if its easing things up.
> >> > Im currently running my own SBS on 2Gb and doesnt have this problem,
> >> > having alot of Ram availible.
> >> >
> >> > //Henrik, MCP-SBS
> >> >
> >> > "SitsWithMouse" <SitsWithMouse@discussions.microsoft.com> skrev i
> >> > meddelandet news:D24533C6-6239-4762-BEFF-EAE29366DF60@microsoft.com...
> >> >> Thanks for your reply Henrik
> >> >>
> >> >> It would appear to be so in most cases. We have found servers with
> >> >> 2Gb
> >> >> RAM
> >> >> running WSUS 2.0 don't give this error, but when WSUS 3.0 SP1 gets
> >> >> loaded,
> >> >> the problem appears.
> >> >>
> >> >> We look after about 30 SBS servers and this pattern is emerging,
> >> >> except
> >> >> for
> >> >> on one server that does have 4Gb ram already. This is also a fairly
> >> >> recently
> >> >> implemented server, so I am confident that it is not suffering form
> >> >> other
> >> >> problems. In fact, the day after accepting and applying the WSUS 3.0
> >> >> SP1
> >> >> update, it reported the 'error'.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "Henrik (Hear)" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> I have had that problems just a few times and Its has always been
> >> >>> related to
> >> >>> the fact that the server was running out of resources (Ram etc).
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I cant speak for your environment but can you relate to this, the
> >> >>> lack
> >> >>> of
> >> >>> resources?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> //Henrik, MCP-SBS,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> "SitsWithMouse" <SitsWithMouse@discussions.microsoft.com> skrev i
> >> >>> meddelandet
> >> >>> news:93FF82AF-E23D-4C22-A6A6-455C58BCC911@microsoft.com...
> >> >>> > hi Les
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Yes, this one
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > An error occurred on the page you are trying to view.
> >> >>> > ________________________________________
> >> >>> > To work around this problem, perform the following steps. After
> >> >>> > each
> >> >>> > step,
> >> >>> > try again to access the page.
> >> >>> > . Ensure that the MSSQL$SBSMONITORING service is started.
> >> >>> > . Ensure that the server is not low on memory or disk space.
> >> >>> > . Restart the server.
> >> >>> > . Verify that the server is functional and that there are no
> >> >>> > system-wide
> >> >>> > problems.
> >> >>> > . Run the Set Up Monitoring Reports and Alerts task in the Server
> >> >>> > Management
> >> >>> > Monitoring and Reporting taskpad.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > "Les Connor [SBS MVP]" wrote:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> I'm not clear on what the problem is. Is it that the monitoring
> >> >>> >> page
> >> >>> >> won't
> >> >>> >> render (display)?
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> --
> >> >>> >> Les Connor [SBS MVP]
> >> >>> >> ________________________
> >> >>> >> Get the SBS BPA here:
> >> >>> >>
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/940439/en-us
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> "SitsWithMouse" <SitsWithMouse@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> >> >>> >> message
> >> >>> >> news:2A64AF3C-DA74-4C19-BE71-3E1B64AD1A60@microsoft.com...
> >> >>> >> > Good morning forum
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > Has anyone found a solution to the WSUS 3.0 SP1 and
> >> >>> >> > MSSQP$SBSMonitoring
> >> >>> >> > issue that works and stays working?
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > I have read some of Les's posts but they were followed with
> >> >>> >> > posts
> >> >>> >> > that
> >> >>> >> > appear as though the problem still exists?
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > Its quite frustrating as the reports work for a number of days,
> >> >>> >> > then
> >> >>> >> > the
> >> >>> >> > SBSMonitoring page gets emailed and then it works again the
> >> >>> >> > following
> >> >>> >> > days
> >> >>> >> > with no intervention.
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>