[dba-SQLServer] [AccessD] A real puzzler

John W. Colby jwcolby at gmail.com
Sat Aug 8 13:16:12 CDT 2015


This is a custom built server (by me).  The motherboard does not allow 
overclocking - it is a real server motherboard.

John W. Colby

On 8/8/2015 1:31 PM, Jim Lawrence wrote:
> Hi Damien:
>
> Good call.
>
> ...But then what type of CPU are we taking about...there are very limited number of suppliers with 90 plus percent being Intel and AMD. A bad CPU and motherboard combination?
>
> IMHO, it is still most likely internal power supply related; like in some recent HP servers. (We are assuming that the computer has not been over-clock as all guarantees, then fly right out the window.)
>   
> Jim
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Damien Solodow" <Damien.Solodow at harrison.edu>
> To: "Discussion concerning MS SQL Server" <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>
> Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 9:42:32 AM
> Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] [AccessD] A real puzzler
>
> Other possibility could be related to CPU power states; when it's under light load it tries to step down and it bounces. Should be able to disable cpu power saving in the bios, and possibly in Windows as well.
>
> DAMIEN SOLODOW
> Senior Systems Engineer
> 317.447.6033 (office)
> 317.447.6014 (fax)
> HARRISON COLLEGE
>
> ________________________________________
> From: dba-SQLServer [dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] on behalf of Jim Lawrence [accessd at shaw.ca]
> Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 12:39 PM
> To: Discussion concerning MS SQL Server
> Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] [AccessD] A real puzzler
>
> I have no idea what the issue could be but the server rebooting while not under load gives a suggestion of the cause.
>
> It must be power related. Obviously it is not external power so it leaves only the internal power supply and related wiring. IMHO, that is the problem and I would replace that power hardware as soon as convenient.
>
> Jim
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John W. Colby" <jwcolby at gmail.com>
> To: "Access Developers discussion and problem solving" <accessd at databaseadvisors.com>, "Discussion concerning MS SQL Server" <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>
> Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 5:14:47 AM
> Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] [AccessD] A real puzzler
>
> For the last several days I have been flogging away at the system
> (performing real work), causing the system to stay active.  All cores
> running, 75 (out of 80) GB used for SQL Server.  No reboots during that
> entire time.  And yet:
>
> Critical    8/4/2015 6:56:10 AM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    8/4/2015 4:42:07 AM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    8/3/2015 10:04:36 PM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    8/3/2015 5:32:06 PM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    8/3/2015 2:22:15 PM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    8/2/2015 3:29:33 PM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    8/2/2015 11:21:46 AM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    8/2/2015 10:51:30 AM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    8/2/2015 7:17:21 AM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    7/31/2015 11:50:45 PM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    7/31/2015 1:05:39 PM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    7/30/2015 10:11:57 PM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    7/30/2015 4:59:26 PM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    7/29/2015 2:32:50 PM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    7/28/2015 5:20:38 PM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    7/28/2015 12:12:57 PM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    7/28/2015 4:15:38 AM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
> Critical    7/28/2015 2:47:12 AM    Kernel-Power    41    (63)
>
> WEIRD!!!
>
> Notice no pattern in number of events per day, nor time of day. There is
> no memory dump being created, the system just reboots as if the power
> was turned off and back on.  When I was in the room with it, (several
> years ago) the system would beep as it rebooted.
>
> Here is the last such event:
>
> Log Name:      System
> Source:        Microsoft-Windows-Kernel-Power
> Date:          8/4/2015 6:56:10 AM
> Event ID:      41
> Task Category: (63)
> Level:         Critical
> Keywords:      (2)
> User:          SYSTEM
> Computer:      Azul
> Description:
> The system has rebooted without cleanly shutting down first. This error
> could be caused if the system stopped responding, crashed, or lost power
> unexpectedly.
> Event Xml:
> <Event xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/win/2004/08/events/event">
>     <System>
>       <Provider Name="Microsoft-Windows-Kernel-Power"
> Guid="{331C3B3A-2005-44C2-AC5E-77220C37D6B4}" />
>       <EventID>41</EventID>
>       <Version>2</Version>
>       <Level>1</Level>
>       <Task>63</Task>
>       <Opcode>0</Opcode>
>       <Keywords>0x8000000000000002</Keywords>
>       <TimeCreated SystemTime="2015-08-04T10:56:10.006809600Z" />
>       <EventRecordID>270735</EventRecordID>
>       <Correlation />
>       <Execution ProcessID="4" ThreadID="8" />
>       <Channel>System</Channel>
>       <Computer>Azul</Computer>
>       <Security UserID="S-1-5-18" />
>     </System>
>     <EventData>
>       <Data Name="BugcheckCode">0</Data>
>       <Data Name="BugcheckParameter1">0x0</Data>
>       <Data Name="BugcheckParameter2">0x0</Data>
>       <Data Name="BugcheckParameter3">0x0</Data>
>       <Data Name="BugcheckParameter4">0x0</Data>
>       <Data Name="SleepInProgress">false</Data>
>       <Data Name="PowerButtonTimestamp">0</Data>
>     </EventData>
> </Event>
>
> John W. Colby
>
> On 8/8/2015 7:57 AM, James Button wrote:
>> Guest that!
>>
>> Re memory diagnostic - I have found with past experiences of accelerating
>> frequency of shut-downs, that the system didn't get a chance to record any
>> events.
>> And memory checks showed no problems - providing the rest of the system wasn't
>> being stressed.
>>
>> One system I found that removing a memory module - any of them stopped the
>> shutdowns, and I eventually 'bodged' the system by increasing the memory refresh
>> by a cycle. It was an old system and a 'new' memory module was, being old tech,
>> horrendously expensive
>> That worked for several years, and eventually management agreed the system was
>> too slow - as in users kept complaining about the system's response, so we were
>> actually allowed to BUY a new one!
>>
>> JimB
>>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>



More information about the dba-SQLServer mailing list