Keeping SQL out of the buffer or finding a way to improve page life expectancy?
Posted
by Stewart Robinson
on Stack Overflow
See other posts from Stack Overflow
or by Stewart Robinson
Published on 2010-03-19T15:43:25Z
Indexed on
2010/03/19
18:21 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 185
sql-server-2008
My SQL Server 2008 server gets flooded with dynamic SQL from one stored procedure. I am wondering whether I can tell SQL Server not to store this one stored procedure in the pool as it doesn't matter too much whether it executes quickly. Perhaps there is an equivalent of (nolock) for (nobuffer) or similar?
Any ideas?
© Stack Overflow or respective owner