Itanium or x64

We're looking for information on x64 support of SQL 2000. Will the 64 bit
version of SQL 2000 install on an x64 machine? Do I need to install the 32
bit version and then apply service pack 4?
Any information on how sp4 adds support for x64 would be appreciated.
DanHi
Microsoft is still finalizing this.
Once they have made a decision, there will be a public statement on this.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"DanR" <DanR@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B7122D72-6462-4152-A650-A3AE5019FEF0@.microsoft.com...
> We're looking for information on x64 support of SQL 2000. Will the 64 bit
> version of SQL 2000 install on an x64 machine? Do I need to install the 32
> bit version and then apply service pack 4?
> Any information on how sp4 adds support for x64 would be appreciated.
> Dan
>|||The timing of all these changes couldn't be worse.
I have budget for a server upgrade but won't have the budget for SQL 2005
until next year and we're trying to figure out what server to purchase today.
We would like to go with x64 if possible, however I haven't come across any
statements from software or hardware manufacturers regarding SQL 2000
Enterprise running on Windows 2003 Enterprise x64. Some of the questions we
have are:
How much memory will be available to us?
Do we still need boot.ini switches?
Should we install 32 bit SQL until we can upgrade to SQL 2005?
Has anybody tried this environment?
Dan|||I have an IBM blade with the EM64t chip. I am not seeing the performance I
feel I should. It may be that Beta 2 is unoptimized. But in running
comparisons between a 32 bit box and the new install I am getting better
performance from the 32 bit. The cpu time is greater by a value of about 4
times. Those beings send I am continuing to investigate this issue. It is
our first venture into the 64 bit world, but we are committed to getting
there.
I will post what we further find out.
"DanR" wrote:
> The timing of all these changes couldn't be worse.
> I have budget for a server upgrade but won't have the budget for SQL 2005
> until next year and we're trying to figure out what server to purchase today.
> We would like to go with x64 if possible, however I haven't come across any
> statements from software or hardware manufacturers regarding SQL 2000
> Enterprise running on Windows 2003 Enterprise x64. Some of the questions we
> have are:
> How much memory will be available to us?
> Do we still need boot.ini switches?
> Should we install 32 bit SQL until we can upgrade to SQL 2005?
> Has anybody tried this environment?
> Dan

Itanium or x64

We're looking for information on x64 support of SQL 2000. Will the 64 bit
version of SQL 2000 install on an x64 machine? Do I need to install the 32
bit version and then apply service pack 4?
Any information on how sp4 adds support for x64 would be appreciated.
Dan
Hi
Microsoft is still finalizing this.
Once they have made a decision, there will be a public statement on this.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"DanR" <DanR@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B7122D72-6462-4152-A650-A3AE5019FEF0@.microsoft.com...
> We're looking for information on x64 support of SQL 2000. Will the 64 bit
> version of SQL 2000 install on an x64 machine? Do I need to install the 32
> bit version and then apply service pack 4?
> Any information on how sp4 adds support for x64 would be appreciated.
> Dan
>
|||The timing of all these changes couldn't be worse.
I have budget for a server upgrade but won't have the budget for SQL 2005
until next year and we're trying to figure out what server to purchase today.
We would like to go with x64 if possible, however I haven't come across any
statements from software or hardware manufacturers regarding SQL 2000
Enterprise running on Windows 2003 Enterprise x64. Some of the questions we
have are:
How much memory will be available to us?
Do we still need boot.ini switches?
Should we install 32 bit SQL until we can upgrade to SQL 2005?
Has anybody tried this environment?
Dan
|||I have an IBM blade with the EM64t chip. I am not seeing the performance I
feel I should. It may be that Beta 2 is unoptimized. But in running
comparisons between a 32 bit box and the new install I am getting better
performance from the 32 bit. The cpu time is greater by a value of about 4
times. Those beings send I am continuing to investigate this issue. It is
our first venture into the 64 bit world, but we are committed to getting
there.
I will post what we further find out.
"DanR" wrote:

> The timing of all these changes couldn't be worse.
> I have budget for a server upgrade but won't have the budget for SQL 2005
> until next year and we're trying to figure out what server to purchase today.
> We would like to go with x64 if possible, however I haven't come across any
> statements from software or hardware manufacturers regarding SQL 2000
> Enterprise running on Windows 2003 Enterprise x64. Some of the questions we
> have are:
> How much memory will be available to us?
> Do we still need boot.ini switches?
> Should we install 32 bit SQL until we can upgrade to SQL 2005?
> Has anybody tried this environment?
> Dan

Itanium or x64

We're looking for information on x64 support of SQL 2000. Will the 64 bit
version of SQL 2000 install on an x64 machine? Do I need to install the 32
bit version and then apply service pack 4?
Any information on how sp4 adds support for x64 would be appreciated.
DanHi
Microsoft is still finalizing this.
Once they have made a decision, there will be a public statement on this.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"DanR" <DanR@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B7122D72-6462-4152-A650-A3AE5019FEF0@.microsoft.com...
> We're looking for information on x64 support of SQL 2000. Will the 64 bit
> version of SQL 2000 install on an x64 machine? Do I need to install the 32
> bit version and then apply service pack 4?
> Any information on how sp4 adds support for x64 would be appreciated.
> Dan
>|||The timing of all these changes couldn't be worse.
I have budget for a server upgrade but won't have the budget for SQL 2005
until next year and we're trying to figure out what server to purchase today
.
We would like to go with x64 if possible, however I haven't come across any
statements from software or hardware manufacturers regarding SQL 2000
Enterprise running on Windows 2003 Enterprise x64. Some of the questions we
have are:
How much memory will be available to us?
Do we still need boot.ini switches?
Should we install 32 bit SQL until we can upgrade to SQL 2005?
Has anybody tried this environment?
Dan|||I have an IBM blade with the EM64t chip. I am not seeing the performance I
feel I should. It may be that Beta 2 is unoptimized. But in running
comparisons between a 32 bit box and the new install I am getting better
performance from the 32 bit. The cpu time is greater by a value of about 4
times. Those beings send I am continuing to investigate this issue. It is
our first venture into the 64 bit world, but we are committed to getting
there.
I will post what we further find out.
"DanR" wrote:

> The timing of all these changes couldn't be worse.
> I have budget for a server upgrade but won't have the budget for SQL 2005
> until next year and we're trying to figure out what server to purchase tod
ay.
> We would like to go with x64 if possible, however I haven't come across an
y
> statements from software or hardware manufacturers regarding SQL 2000
> Enterprise running on Windows 2003 Enterprise x64. Some of the questions w
e
> have are:
> How much memory will be available to us?
> Do we still need boot.ini switches?
> Should we install 32 bit SQL until we can upgrade to SQL 2005?
> Has anybody tried this environment?
> Dansql

ISV using SQL Authentication and a small concern

Hi,
I am an independent software vendor and my app will be deployed on users machine, it will use msde for db needs on clients machine. I am using sql authentication and my app will be connecting to the database using a fixed username and password always, fo
r e.g. sa as user and "myPassword$2" as password. (I know I know that this is not 100% great, but we want to keep things very very simple but dont want windows authentication)
Now, please imagine this situation:
a) small office environment
b) My app installed on three machines.
c) database on 4th machine
d) all 3 users running my app on their individual machines and talking to db.
my concern is, will this scenario work, I mean no matter who the user is, my app logs into msde using sa and "myPassword$2", so will MSDE allow 3 users with same logins to access database at the same time.
Looking forward to hearing from you..
Thanks
Hello,
It is working correctly, but if you want to have some security (for example
a part of the program is not enabled if a user is working on another part,
you will have some problems.). For example, if user 1 has a crash, the
program will still believe that user 1 is still connected. Unless you lock
the tables...
Marc Allard
Allcomp
"dev" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> a crit dans le message de
news:3C66C1B4-CD85-4473-8B9C-9BF40E84853F@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I am an independent software vendor and my app will be deployed on users
machine, it will use msde for db needs on clients machine. I am using sql
authentication and my app will be connecting to the database using a fixed
username and password always, for e.g. sa as user and "myPassword$2" as
password. (I know I know that this is not 100% great, but we want to keep
things very very simple but dont want windows authentication)
> Now, please imagine this situation:
> a) small office environment
> b) My app installed on three machines.
> c) database on 4th machine
> d) all 3 users running my app on their individual machines and talking to
db.
> my concern is, will this scenario work, I mean no matter who the user is,
my app logs into msde using sa and "myPassword$2", so will MSDE allow 3
users with same logins to access database at the same time.
> Looking forward to hearing from you..
> Thanks
|||Hello, (sorry I was in hollidays)
For example, in our program, when a user is working on a project (Project 1)
, any user can enter a new or a position in Project 1, but no other one
modify the project.
Another user can work with project 2 without any restriction so we can not
lock the full table. We had to write a column str_Wholocked on the Project
table to know that the a specific project is locked.
The problem is that if a user crash, he will not free the wholocked field so
you have to know if a user that has locked a fiel is still connected or not.
To make it, when a user connect in my application, I write his connectionID,
login_time... on a table. After that, I look at all the users connected. If
they have a login_time or connection ID different than the one on my table,
it mean that they have crashed so I can free the wholocked field. I make
this test for every connection and every access to something that can be
locked.
PS : I hope that I am clear enough, if not, please tell me what you don't
understand.
"dev" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> a crit dans le message de
news:765961A8-8196-4B6F-B87A-228DDB63F1F9@.microsoft.com...
> Allcomp please elaborate my what you mean by saying "but if you want to
have some security (for example
> a part of the program is not enabled if a user is working on another part,
you will have some problems.)."
> Thanks
sql

Issue with running reports on machine that does not have report services

I am trying to run reports from a web application. If I am on the machine
with reporting services then the report will pull up. If I try from a PC
that doesn't have reporting services I get a "Page cannot be displayed"
error. I have checked permissions on most everything I could think of.
Please help. I have been researching and trying to resolve this for over
two weeks. Thanks!
--
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.comDo you mean you can't get to http://servername/reports from a remote
machine? Or are you trying to embed a report viewer control in an asp.net
app that's on a different machine?
Mike G.
"JC via SQLMonster.com" <forum@.SQLMonster.com> wrote in message
news:f491c9d8986847cbbd8e3872e85aabca@.SQLMonster.com...
>I am trying to run reports from a web application. If I am on the machine
> with reporting services then the report will pull up. If I try from a PC
> that doesn't have reporting services I get a "Page cannot be displayed"
> error. I have checked permissions on most everything I could think of.
> Please help. I have been researching and trying to resolve this for over
> two weeks. Thanks!
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com|||I can get the http//servername/reportserver to pull up after logging in as
an administrator, but what I need I will explain below.
I have a reportviewer embedded in my asp.net webapplication, but when I
click on the link from a PC that does not have report services loaded it
gives me the page cannot be displayed error.
Thanks!
Jill
--
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com|||The report control doesn't require anything to be installed with the
browser. It just renders an iframe that points to the reportserver. This
may sound silly, but just to be sure, perhaps did you specify localhost as
part of the serverurl property of the viewer? If you did, the iframe won't
be pointing at the remote report server, but would still be looking at
localhost a.k.a itself.
Even if you didn't use localhost, from the client, type in what's in the
serverurl property and make sure you can get to the server from the client.
Also, you can always do a view source on the page, look for the iframe and
take a look at the src property.
Mike G.
"JC via SQLMonster.com" <forum@.SQLMonster.com> wrote in message
news:de02341f0922462dba9a2ec5cdcb3992@.SQLMonster.com...
>I can get the http//servername/reportserver to pull up after logging in as
> an administrator, but what I need I will explain below.
> I have a reportviewer embedded in my asp.net webapplication, but when I
> click on the link from a PC that does not have report services loaded it
> gives me the page cannot be displayed error.
> Thanks!
> Jill
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com|||Whoops...(blushes). I found where I had the localhost in the url. I
thought I had taken it out, but I must have not saved it. Thanks for that
tip.
The report is trying to come up now, but it prompts the user for a username
and password. I don't want the user to have to do that. Is there a way
around this?
Thanks!
--
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com|||What is IIS set to allow? For an intranet, you probably want just windows
integrated (not anonymous). Of course, that means giving giving the
users/groups the correct permissions to the reports in the report manager.
Mike G.
"JC via SQLMonster.com" <forum@.SQLMonster.com> wrote in message
news:183115a982ba408a8600324cca74f560@.SQLMonster.com...
> Whoops...(blushes). I found where I had the localhost in the url. I
> thought I had taken it out, but I must have not saved it. Thanks for that
> tip.
> The report is trying to come up now, but it prompts the user for a
> username
> and password. I don't want the user to have to do that. Is there a way
> around this?
> Thanks!
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com

issue with RS 2000, WSS and asp.net 2.0

I am having trouble upgrading a machine. It has Reporting Services(RS) 2000 SP2 and Windows Sharepoint Services (WSS) SP2 running side by side. They are working just fine and have been for quite some time. The problem is I would like to have .net 2.0 installed as well. When I installed it, some things broke.

Specifically, now when I go to http://machinename/reports or http://machinename/reportserver, I get an error page that says "Server Error in '/Reports' Application" and points to the web.config file. The Parser Error Message says "Unrecognized attribute 'processRequestInApplicationTrust' ".

Does anyone know how to get all three running on the same machine? Is this even allowed?

Any help that you can provide would be appreciated. I am stuck.

Dennis

The problem is that Web.Config files are inherited. So your "/reports" which is .net 1.1 is inheriting a .net 2.0 web.config and it doesn't recognize some tags. Only solution I know of is to rearrange the folder hierarchy to not have 1.1 apps under 2.0 apps. I would love a 2.0 version of Report Server... Anyone know if it exists?

-Jesse

Issue with launching Report Builder from client PC's

Hi,

I got a working installation of reporting services 2005 up and running, Im able to create models and launch the Report Builder on the machine on which the server is installed, however if I try and run it from another machine on the network I get an error and Im able to view the following exception.

Following errors were detected during this operation.
* [04 Jul 2005 10:39:34 +01:00] System.Deployment.Application.DeploymentDownloadException (Unknown subtype)
- Failed while downloading http://testserver/ReportServer/ReportBuilder/ReportBuilder.application
- Source: System.Deployment
- Stack trace:
at System.Deployment.Application.SystemNetDownloader.DownloadSingleFile(DownloadQueueItem next)
at System.Deployment.Application.SystemNetDownloader.DownloadAllFiles()
at System.Deployment.Application.FileDownloader.Download(SubscriptionState subState)
at System.Deployment.Application.DownloadManager.DownloadManifest(Uri& sourceUri, String targetPath, IDownloadNotification notification, DownloadOptions options, ManifestType manifestType, ServerInformation& serverInformation)
at System.Deployment.Application.DownloadManager.DownloadDeploymentManifestDirect(SubscriptionStore subStore, Uri& sourceUri, TempFile& tempFile, IDownloadNotification notification, DownloadOptions options, ServerInformation& serverInformation)
at System.Deployment.Application.DownloadManager.DownloadDeploymentManifest(SubscriptionStore subStore, Uri& sourceUri, TempFile& tempFile, IDownloadNotification notification, DownloadOptions options)
at System.Deployment.Application.ApplicationActivator.PerformDeploymentActivation(Uri activationUri, Boolean isShortcut)
at System.Deployment.Application.ApplicationActivator.ActivateDeploymentWorker(Object state)
Inner Exception
System.Net.WebException
- The remote server returned an error: (401) Unauthorized.
- Source: System
- Stack trace:
at System.Net.HttpWebRequest.GetResponse()
at System.Deployment.Application.SystemNetDownloader.DownloadSingleFile(DownloadQueueItem next)

Anyone able to help ?The error means that the client does not have the Whidbey CLR installed. You will need to install the Whidbey CLR on each client machine where you want to use report builder.

-Lukasz|||Hi,
I was facing similar problem while accessing Report Manager installed on different system on the network, I was able to get Report Manager menu but can not see contents on Report Server. It was displayed Blank without any exception.

Report Server is installed on http://testsrv/Reports$sql2005.

I changed configuration of Reporting Service on Server , Report Server Configuration Manager > Windows Service Identity> Service account from "Local System" to "Local Services".

I can access Report Manager with contents.

Meanwhile I noticed that Report Builder is not launching on the system which is a different system from the Report Server. As per my understanding, Report Builder is a "End user tool" and will be launched without any upgradation of the system (Different system from server). I am getting prompt for "Open/Save document".
Where as Report Builder is working fine on Server itself.

While opening document, I can see XML contents to access Report Builder.
I am pasting part of that XML file in orange colour,

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>

- <asmv1:assembly xsi:schemaLocation="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v1 assembly.adaptive.xsd" manifestVersion="1.0" xmlns:dsig="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v2" xmlns:asmv1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v1" xmlns:asmv2="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v2" xmlns:xrml="urn:mpeg:mpeg21:2003:01-REL-R-NS" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">

<assemblyIdentity name="ReportBuilder.app" version="9.0.1116.8" publicKeyToken="49ef3e7f44a9c98c" language="neutral" processorArchitecture="msil" xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v1" />

<description asmv2:publisher="Microsoft" asmv2:product="Report Builder" xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v1" />

<deployment install="false" trustURLParameters="true" />

- <dependency>

- <dependentAssembly dependencyType="install" allowDelayedBinding="true" codebase="ReportBuilder.exe.manifest" size="7148">

<assemblyIdentity name="ReportBuilder.exe" version="9.0.1116.8" publicKeyToken="49ef3e7f44a9c98c" language="neutral" processorArchitecture="msil" type="win32" />

- <hash>

- <dsig:Transforms>

<dsig:Transform Algorithm="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:HashTransforms.Identity" />

</dsig:Transforms>

<dsig:DigestMethod Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#sha1" />

<dsig:DigestValue>aAi7VtRySyyvYXiAs4FuFXSiqLA=</dsig:DigestValue>

</hash>

</dependentAssembly>

Anyone knows how to fix this, It is required to upgrade my system, what are the upgrades require on the system to access Report Builder?

|||Your two issues are unrelated. Specifically for the Report Builder issue - the client machine (the one on which you want to run Report Builder) needs to have The .Net Framework 2.0 (CLR 2.0) installed on it.

The reason is that the Report Builder leverages the ClickOnce technology that is new in the .Net Framework 2.0.

Regarding your other issue - the Report Manager shows the top menu with a blank contents when your login does not have permissions on the root of the report server. You will need a role that has Read Properties (Browser roles has this) assigned to your login on the root of the report server namespace. Changing the account from Local System to Local Service should not affect this.

-Lukasz|||Thanks Lukasz, I have installed .NET Framework 2.0 on Client machine and able to launch Report Builder successfully.

I created a new user with sufficient permission and access to HOME directory on Report Server and able to access Reports/Data Sources/Models using Client Machine.

Thanks again!|||

I have what may be a similar problem. I try to click on the "Report Builder" button from a client machine and nothing happens, however I have tried things mentioned in the suggestions above and it did not seem to help. From a client PC, I logged in as myself and am not able to run "Report Builder", but when I login as a local admin I am able to run "Report Builder".

Our server has SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition and Visual Studio 2005 installed. I am able to run "Report Builder" from my PC where I had Visual Studio 2005 installed, but not SQL Server 2005 installed. I have local admin priviledges to my PC.

From a client PC, I logged in as myself and am not able to run "Report Builder". When I click on it nothing happens. I gave my Windows login "Content Manger" permissions under the SSRS Home -> Properties tab, and I also added my login and gave myself "System Administrator" and "System User" Roles under the SSRS ->Site Settings->Configure site-wide security option. This seems to be configured correctly, as "Report Builder" launches when I am on my PC. However, it does not launch on the client PC when logged in under my login.

Further, when I login as a local admin on the client PC, I am able to run "Report Builder", so I think the .net framework 2.0 is correctly installed and working properly. However, it is our policy not to give the user of the client PC local admin rights. My windows login does not have local admin rights to this particular PC.

Q1. Is local admin rights required on the client PC where "Report Builder" is ran? If so, is it only required for the first time it is loaded? It seems like it should not be required, however this would explain the symptoms detailed above.

Q2. Is there an error log that may help debug what this problem is? It is strange to me, that nothing happens, but no error is displayed on the http://.../reportserver/Pages page

Q3. When logged in as local admin, report builder installed to something like:

C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator.8ZR5551\Local Settings\Apps\2.0\VVJ0004J.B0N\H3KE16BP.Y07\repo..lder_89845dcd8080cc91_0009.0000_none_7ecce75e919dcccd

I am not sure if I can copy this install to another directory which the client has permission to run from. Is this a valid thing to do? I am guessing probably not since I tried this and it did not seem to work.I tried this and it did not seem to work..

Q4. I saw this posting talking about the need to run under PartialTrust mode, instead of FullTrust mode. So I reconfigured the RSWebApplication.config file to do that, and it still does not work.:

http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=280387&SiteID=1 which refers to the following link.

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms345245.aspx

I changed the C:\Program Files\MSSQL2005\MSSQL.3\Reporting Services\ReportManager\ RSWebApplication.config

From

<Configuration><UI> …

<ReportBuilderTrustLevel> FullTrust </ReportBuilderTrustLevel>

</UI>…</Configuration>

To

<Configuration><UI> …

<ReportBuilderTrustLevel>PartialTrust</ReportBuilderTrustLevel>

</UI>…</Configuration>

Stopped and restarted report server through reporting services configuration (not sure if I needed to do this) The problem still occurred, however.

|||

Well scratch that idea on local admin rights. Our IT department gave login admin to my windows login (My computer->Manage->System Tools: Local Users and Groups->Administrators) and it still did not work. When I click on "Report Builder" it still does not do anything. I also tried to use it directly at the following URL's and it still did not work, same result of not displaying anything:

http://.../reportserver/ReportBuilder/ReportBuilder.application

http://.../reportserver/ReportBuilder/ReportBuilderLocalIntranet.application

Q5. Is there any Internet Explorer settings that would cause this behavior? I tried disabling popup blocker, but this did not seem to help.

Q6. In the above posting, giving permission on the server HOME directory was required. What directory does this refer to? Does this mean each user of Report Builder needs Windows Directory level security to some directories like C:\Program Files\MSSQL2005\MSSQL.3\Reporting Services\ReportManager\ or others? This does not seem to make sense, but I was unsure which HOME directory was mentioned in the previous posting by Nilesh Trivedi.
.

|||Well this is almost a year old but I am facing the exact same problem as Chad Buher. Clicking on the Report Builder button does nothing, no error, nothing. Can this be caused by some network policy setting?

Issue with Installation of Service Pack 3a

All,
I successfully ran SQL Server Service Pack 3a on a machine that has two
instances of SQL Server. I ran the service pack against both instances. It
all appeared to run fine and I rebooted.
However, when I run the following select statement in Query Analyser:
select @.@.version
It is showing me:
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86)
It is not registering as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 to indicate
that the instances are at service pack 3a.
Did my service pack really run successfully? Is this a known issue?
Thanks,
Andrea Wright
andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com
Hi Andrea,
The version of sql server you are running is 8.00.818 which is a hotfixed
version of SQL server later than than sp3 (which is version 8.00.760).
Actually the 818 version is coming with the public critical SQL server
security roll up fix MS03-031. I Expect you have installed this SQL server
security fix after you've installed sp3.
Regards,
Jago
"Andrea Wright" wrote:

> All,
> I successfully ran SQL Server Service Pack 3a on a machine that has two
> instances of SQL Server. I ran the service pack against both instances. It
> all appeared to run fine and I rebooted.
> However, when I run the following select statement in Query Analyser:
> select @.@.version
> It is showing me:
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86)
> It is not registering as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 to indicate
> that the instances are at service pack 3a.
> Did my service pack really run successfully? Is this a known issue?
> Thanks,
> Andrea Wright
> andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com
>
>
|||Jago,
Thanks for your quick response.
I installed the following in this order:
Hotfix that fixed the security issue and the Slammer virus (Microsoft SQL
Server 2000 - 8.00.679)
Service Pack 3 (not sure of the number this put it at)
Service Pack 3a (Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760)
I did not realize there was another hotfix, and I didn't apply one manually.
Is this one perhaps coming with Windows updates?
Thanks,
Andrea
"Jago" <Jago@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B676216C-B1D0-4F05-A8A8-213BD997DC76@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Andrea,
> The version of sql server you are running is 8.00.818 which is a hotfixed
> version of SQL server later than than sp3 (which is version 8.00.760).
> Actually the 818 version is coming with the public critical SQL server
> security roll up fix MS03-031. I Expect you have installed this SQL server
> security fix after you've installed sp3.
> Regards,
> Jago
> "Andrea Wright" wrote:
|||Hi Andre,
No was not coming with windows update
Jago
"Andrea Wright" wrote:

> Jago,
> Thanks for your quick response.
> I installed the following in this order:
> Hotfix that fixed the security issue and the Slammer virus (Microsoft SQL
> Server 2000 - 8.00.679)
> Service Pack 3 (not sure of the number this put it at)
> Service Pack 3a (Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760)
> I did not realize there was another hotfix, and I didn't apply one manually.
> Is this one perhaps coming with Windows updates?
> Thanks,
> Andrea
> "Jago" <Jago@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B676216C-B1D0-4F05-A8A8-213BD997DC76@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||To confirm whether you are on SP3a, run the following command.
select serverproperty('productLevel')
Andrea Wright wrote:
> All,
> I successfully ran SQL Server Service Pack 3a on a machine that has two
> instances of SQL Server. I ran the service pack against both instances. It
> all appeared to run fine and I rebooted.
> However, when I run the following select statement in Query Analyser:
> select @.@.version
> It is showing me:
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86)
> It is not registering as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 to indicate
> that the instances are at service pack 3a.
> Did my service pack really run successfully? Is this a known issue?
> Thanks,
> Andrea Wright
> andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com
>
|||"Jonathan Yong" <jyong@.someplace.net> wrote in message
news:eP150unsEHA.624@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> To confirm whether you are on SP3a, run the following command.
> select serverproperty('productLevel')
And it should return... ? I "thought" I had SP3a - I definitely applied it
and received no errors. But I just ran this and it returns "SP3". When I
select @.@.version, I get 8.00.760.
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Andrea Wright wrote:
It[vbcol=seagreen]
indicate[vbcol=seagreen]
|||Mine says SP3 as well - the a is missing...
-- Andrea
"Ron Hinds" <__NoSpam@.__NoSpamramac.com> wrote in message
news:ug0$JutsEHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "Jonathan Yong" <jyong@.someplace.net> wrote in message
> news:eP150unsEHA.624@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> And it should return... ? I "thought" I had SP3a - I definitely applied it
> and received no errors. But I just ran this and it returns "SP3". When I
> select @.@.version, I get 8.00.760.
> It
> indicate
>
|||AFIK, SQL Server doesn't differentiate between SP 3 and SP 3a with Select
@.@.version or any other method in the database itself. You can look in the
registry for the correct version. If you're running SQL Server, run regedit
and locate HKLM\Software\Microsoft\MSSQLServer\MSSQLServer\Cu rrentVersion.
Then look at the CSDVersion value. It should be 8.00.761 for SP 3a,
8.00.760 for SP 3. There's also a file or two you can check for version
info in Windows Explorer, but I don't remember which ones off the top of my
head.
Thanks,
Michael C., MCDBA
"Andrea Wright" <andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com#nospam> wrote in message
news:%23XbgujRtEHA.1040@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Mine says SP3 as well - the a is missing...
> -- Andrea
> "Ron Hinds" <__NoSpam@.__NoSpamramac.com> wrote in message
> news:ug0$JutsEHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>

Issue with Installation of Service Pack 3a

All,
I successfully ran SQL Server Service Pack 3a on a machine that has two
instances of SQL Server. I ran the service pack against both instances. It
all appeared to run fine and I rebooted.
However, when I run the following select statement in Query Analyser:
select @.@.version
It is showing me:
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86)
It is not registering as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 to indicate
that the instances are at service pack 3a.
Did my service pack really run successfully? Is this a known issue?
Thanks,
Andrea Wright
andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.comHi Andrea,
The version of sql server you are running is 8.00.818 which is a hotfixed
version of SQL server later than than sp3 (which is version 8.00.760).
Actually the 818 version is coming with the public critical SQL server
security roll up fix MS03-031. I Expect you have installed this SQL server
security fix after you've installed sp3.
Regards,
Jago
"Andrea Wright" wrote:
> All,
> I successfully ran SQL Server Service Pack 3a on a machine that has two
> instances of SQL Server. I ran the service pack against both instances. It
> all appeared to run fine and I rebooted.
> However, when I run the following select statement in Query Analyser:
> select @.@.version
> It is showing me:
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86)
> It is not registering as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 to indicate
> that the instances are at service pack 3a.
> Did my service pack really run successfully? Is this a known issue?
> Thanks,
> Andrea Wright
> andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com
>
>|||Jago,
Thanks for your quick response.
I installed the following in this order:
Hotfix that fixed the security issue and the Slammer virus (Microsoft SQL
Server 2000 - 8.00.679)
Service Pack 3 (not sure of the number this put it at)
Service Pack 3a (Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760)
I did not realize there was another hotfix, and I didn't apply one manually.
Is this one perhaps coming with Windows updates?
Thanks,
Andrea
"Jago" <Jago@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B676216C-B1D0-4F05-A8A8-213BD997DC76@.microsoft.com...
> Hi Andrea,
> The version of sql server you are running is 8.00.818 which is a hotfixed
> version of SQL server later than than sp3 (which is version 8.00.760).
> Actually the 818 version is coming with the public critical SQL server
> security roll up fix MS03-031. I Expect you have installed this SQL server
> security fix after you've installed sp3.
> Regards,
> Jago
> "Andrea Wright" wrote:
>> All,
>> I successfully ran SQL Server Service Pack 3a on a machine that has two
>> instances of SQL Server. I ran the service pack against both instances.
>> It
>> all appeared to run fine and I rebooted.
>> However, when I run the following select statement in Query Analyser:
>> select @.@.version
>> It is showing me:
>> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86)
>> It is not registering as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 to indicate
>> that the instances are at service pack 3a.
>> Did my service pack really run successfully? Is this a known issue?
>> Thanks,
>> Andrea Wright
>> andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com
>>|||Hi Andre,
No was not coming with windows update
Jago
"Andrea Wright" wrote:
> Jago,
> Thanks for your quick response.
> I installed the following in this order:
> Hotfix that fixed the security issue and the Slammer virus (Microsoft SQL
> Server 2000 - 8.00.679)
> Service Pack 3 (not sure of the number this put it at)
> Service Pack 3a (Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760)
> I did not realize there was another hotfix, and I didn't apply one manually.
> Is this one perhaps coming with Windows updates?
> Thanks,
> Andrea
> "Jago" <Jago@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B676216C-B1D0-4F05-A8A8-213BD997DC76@.microsoft.com...
> > Hi Andrea,
> >
> > The version of sql server you are running is 8.00.818 which is a hotfixed
> > version of SQL server later than than sp3 (which is version 8.00.760).
> > Actually the 818 version is coming with the public critical SQL server
> > security roll up fix MS03-031. I Expect you have installed this SQL server
> > security fix after you've installed sp3.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jago
> >
> > "Andrea Wright" wrote:
> >
> >> All,
> >>
> >> I successfully ran SQL Server Service Pack 3a on a machine that has two
> >> instances of SQL Server. I ran the service pack against both instances.
> >> It
> >> all appeared to run fine and I rebooted.
> >>
> >> However, when I run the following select statement in Query Analyser:
> >> select @.@.version
> >>
> >> It is showing me:
> >> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86)
> >>
> >> It is not registering as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 to indicate
> >> that the instances are at service pack 3a.
> >>
> >> Did my service pack really run successfully? Is this a known issue?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Andrea Wright
> >> andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>|||To confirm whether you are on SP3a, run the following command.
select serverproperty('productLevel')
Andrea Wright wrote:
> All,
> I successfully ran SQL Server Service Pack 3a on a machine that has two
> instances of SQL Server. I ran the service pack against both instances. It
> all appeared to run fine and I rebooted.
> However, when I run the following select statement in Query Analyser:
> select @.@.version
> It is showing me:
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86)
> It is not registering as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 to indicate
> that the instances are at service pack 3a.
> Did my service pack really run successfully? Is this a known issue?
> Thanks,
> Andrea Wright
> andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com
>|||"Jonathan Yong" <jyong@.someplace.net> wrote in message
news:eP150unsEHA.624@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> To confirm whether you are on SP3a, run the following command.
> select serverproperty('productLevel')
And it should return... ? I "thought" I had SP3a - I definitely applied it
and received no errors. But I just ran this and it returns "SP3". When I
select @.@.version, I get 8.00.760.
>
> Andrea Wright wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > I successfully ran SQL Server Service Pack 3a on a machine that has two
> > instances of SQL Server. I ran the service pack against both instances.
It
> > all appeared to run fine and I rebooted.
> >
> > However, when I run the following select statement in Query Analyser:
> > select @.@.version
> >
> > It is showing me:
> > Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86)
> >
> > It is not registering as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 to
indicate
> > that the instances are at service pack 3a.
> >
> > Did my service pack really run successfully? Is this a known issue?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Andrea Wright
> > andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com
> >
> >|||Mine says SP3 as well - the a is missing...
-- Andrea
"Ron Hinds" <__NoSpam@.__NoSpamramac.com> wrote in message
news:ug0$JutsEHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "Jonathan Yong" <jyong@.someplace.net> wrote in message
> news:eP150unsEHA.624@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> To confirm whether you are on SP3a, run the following command.
>> select serverproperty('productLevel')
> And it should return... ? I "thought" I had SP3a - I definitely applied it
> and received no errors. But I just ran this and it returns "SP3". When I
> select @.@.version, I get 8.00.760.
>>
>> Andrea Wright wrote:
>> > All,
>> >
>> > I successfully ran SQL Server Service Pack 3a on a machine that has two
>> > instances of SQL Server. I ran the service pack against both
>> > instances.
> It
>> > all appeared to run fine and I rebooted.
>> >
>> > However, when I run the following select statement in Query Analyser:
>> > select @.@.version
>> >
>> > It is showing me:
>> > Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86)
>> >
>> > It is not registering as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 to
> indicate
>> > that the instances are at service pack 3a.
>> >
>> > Did my service pack really run successfully? Is this a known issue?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Andrea Wright
>> > andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com
>> >
>> >
>|||AFIK, SQL Server doesn't differentiate between SP 3 and SP 3a with Select
@.@.version or any other method in the database itself. You can look in the
registry for the correct version. If you're running SQL Server, run regedit
and locate HKLM\Software\Microsoft\MSSQLServer\MSSQLServer\CurrentVersion.
Then look at the CSDVersion value. It should be 8.00.761 for SP 3a,
8.00.760 for SP 3. There's also a file or two you can check for version
info in Windows Explorer, but I don't remember which ones off the top of my
head.
Thanks,
Michael C., MCDBA
"Andrea Wright" <andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com#nospam> wrote in message
news:%23XbgujRtEHA.1040@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Mine says SP3 as well - the a is missing...
> -- Andrea
> "Ron Hinds" <__NoSpam@.__NoSpamramac.com> wrote in message
> news:ug0$JutsEHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> "Jonathan Yong" <jyong@.someplace.net> wrote in message
>> news:eP150unsEHA.624@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> To confirm whether you are on SP3a, run the following command.
>> select serverproperty('productLevel')
>> And it should return... ? I "thought" I had SP3a - I definitely applied
>> it
>> and received no errors. But I just ran this and it returns "SP3". When I
>> select @.@.version, I get 8.00.760.
>>
>>
>> Andrea Wright wrote:
>> > All,
>> >
>> > I successfully ran SQL Server Service Pack 3a on a machine that has
>> > two
>> > instances of SQL Server. I ran the service pack against both
>> > instances.
>> It
>> > all appeared to run fine and I rebooted.
>> >
>> > However, when I run the following select statement in Query Analyser:
>> > select @.@.version
>> >
>> > It is showing me:
>> > Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86)
>> >
>> > It is not registering as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 to
>> indicate
>> > that the instances are at service pack 3a.
>> >
>> > Did my service pack really run successfully? Is this a known issue?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Andrea Wright
>> > andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com
>> >
>> >
>>
>

Issue with Installation of Service Pack 3a

All,
I successfully ran SQL Server Service Pack 3a on a machine that has two
instances of SQL Server. I ran the service pack against both instances. It
all appeared to run fine and I rebooted.
However, when I run the following select statement in Query Analyser:
select @.@.version
It is showing me:
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86)
It is not registering as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 to indicate
that the instances are at service pack 3a.
Did my service pack really run successfully? Is this a known issue?
Thanks,
Andrea Wright
andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.comHi Andrea,
The version of sql server you are running is 8.00.818 which is a hotfixed
version of SQL server later than than sp3 (which is version 8.00.760).
Actually the 818 version is coming with the public critical SQL server
security roll up fix MS03-031. I Expect you have installed this SQL server
security fix after you've installed sp3.
Regards,
Jago
"Andrea Wright" wrote:

> All,
> I successfully ran SQL Server Service Pack 3a on a machine that has two
> instances of SQL Server. I ran the service pack against both instances.
It
> all appeared to run fine and I rebooted.
> However, when I run the following select statement in Query Analyser:
> select @.@.version
> It is showing me:
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86)
> It is not registering as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 to indicate
> that the instances are at service pack 3a.
> Did my service pack really run successfully? Is this a known issue?
> Thanks,
> Andrea Wright
> andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com
>
>|||Jago,
Thanks for your quick response.
I installed the following in this order:
Hotfix that fixed the security issue and the Slammer virus (Microsoft SQL
Server 2000 - 8.00.679)
Service Pack 3 (not sure of the number this put it at)
Service Pack 3a (Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760)
I did not realize there was another hotfix, and I didn't apply one manually.
Is this one perhaps coming with Windows updates?
Thanks,
Andrea
"Jago" <Jago@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B676216C-B1D0-4F05-A8A8-213BD997DC76@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Andrea,
> The version of sql server you are running is 8.00.818 which is a hotfixed
> version of SQL server later than than sp3 (which is version 8.00.760).
> Actually the 818 version is coming with the public critical SQL server
> security roll up fix MS03-031. I Expect you have installed this SQL server
> security fix after you've installed sp3.
> Regards,
> Jago
> "Andrea Wright" wrote:
>|||Hi Andre,
No was not coming with windows update
Jago
"Andrea Wright" wrote:

> Jago,
> Thanks for your quick response.
> I installed the following in this order:
> Hotfix that fixed the security issue and the Slammer virus (Microsoft SQL
> Server 2000 - 8.00.679)
> Service Pack 3 (not sure of the number this put it at)
> Service Pack 3a (Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760)
> I did not realize there was another hotfix, and I didn't apply one manuall
y.
> Is this one perhaps coming with Windows updates?
> Thanks,
> Andrea
> "Jago" <Jago@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B676216C-B1D0-4F05-A8A8-213BD997DC76@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||To confirm whether you are on SP3a, run the following command.
select serverproperty('productLevel')
Andrea Wright wrote:
> All,
> I successfully ran SQL Server Service Pack 3a on a machine that has two
> instances of SQL Server. I ran the service pack against both instances.
It
> all appeared to run fine and I rebooted.
> However, when I run the following select statement in Query Analyser:
> select @.@.version
> It is showing me:
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86)
> It is not registering as Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 to indicate
> that the instances are at service pack 3a.
> Did my service pack really run successfully? Is this a known issue?
> Thanks,
> Andrea Wright
> andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com
>|||"Jonathan Yong" <jyong@.someplace.net> wrote in message
news:eP150unsEHA.624@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> To confirm whether you are on SP3a, run the following command.
> select serverproperty('productLevel')
And it should return... ? I "thought" I had SP3a - I definitely applied it
and received no errors. But I just ran this and it returns "SP3". When I
select @.@.version, I get 8.00.760.
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Andrea Wright wrote:
It[vbcol=seagreen]
indicate[vbcol=seagreen]|||Mine says SP3 as well - the a is missing...
-- Andrea
"Ron Hinds" <__NoSpam@.__NoSpamramac.com> wrote in message
news:ug0$JutsEHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "Jonathan Yong" <jyong@.someplace.net> wrote in message
> news:eP150unsEHA.624@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> And it should return... ? I "thought" I had SP3a - I definitely applied it
> and received no errors. But I just ran this and it returns "SP3". When I
> select @.@.version, I get 8.00.760.
>
> It
> indicate
>|||AFIK, SQL Server doesn't differentiate between SP 3 and SP 3a with Select
@.@.version or any other method in the database itself. You can look in the
registry for the correct version. If you're running SQL Server, run regedit
and locate HKLM\Software\Microsoft\MSSQLServer\MSSQ
LServer\CurrentVersion.
Then look at the CSDVersion value. It should be 8.00.761 for SP 3a,
8.00.760 for SP 3. There's also a file or two you can check for version
info in Windows Explorer, but I don't remember which ones off the top of my
head.
Thanks,
Michael C., MCDBA
"Andrea Wright" <andrea.wright@.ips-sendero.com#nospam> wrote in message
news:%23XbgujRtEHA.1040@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Mine says SP3 as well - the a is missing...
> -- Andrea
> "Ron Hinds" <__NoSpam@.__NoSpamramac.com> wrote in message
> news:ug0$JutsEHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>

Issue with DB on particular machine

Hi,

I am at a bit of a loss about what to do with a problem I am having. I
have a 7GB database, loaded on to SQL Server 2000 SP4 on 2 different
machines.

Machines have following specs:

1) Intel Pentium 4 Dual Core 3.40 GHz, 3 GB RAM, 2GBb RAM available to
SQL Server. Windows 2003 SP1
2) AMD Athlon 2500 + (1.8GHz), 2GB RAM, , 2GBb RAM available to SQL
Server. Windows 2003 R2 SP1

I hope this is enough relevant information.

The 2nd machine handles the database fine, complex queries are OK etc.
The 1st machine cannot even handle generating an estimated execution
plan for a query on a single table. It dies and has to be killed via
the power button.

However, I have another 9GB DB on the same machine that I can run
complex queries against with no problem.

I thought that there may be a particular issue with that DB so I ran
DBCC CHECKDB against it but no errors were reported. I have also run
Check Disk on the machine and again, no problems were found. So I am
currently at a complete loss about what to do. Both instances of the DB
have come from the same backup. I do not really know what else to try
with this.

If anybody has any ideas at all it would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance,

PaulHi Paul - what are the disk drives like on both servers? Where are the
databases' data files located on each server? If you doing a lot of I/O
(which I suspect your are) then you might want to look at Disk I/O
and/or disk thru put.

JD

Paul wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Hi,
>
I am at a bit of a loss about what to do with a problem I am having. I
have a 7GB database, loaded on to SQL Server 2000 SP4 on 2 different
machines.
>
Machines have following specs:
>
1) Intel Pentium 4 Dual Core 3.40 GHz, 3 GB RAM, 2GBb RAM available to
SQL Server. Windows 2003 SP1
2) AMD Athlon 2500 + (1.8GHz), 2GB RAM, , 2GBb RAM available to SQL
Server. Windows 2003 R2 SP1
>
I hope this is enough relevant information.
>
The 2nd machine handles the database fine, complex queries are OK etc.
The 1st machine cannot even handle generating an estimated execution
plan for a query on a single table. It dies and has to be killed via
the power button.
>
However, I have another 9GB DB on the same machine that I can run
complex queries against with no problem.
>
I thought that there may be a particular issue with that DB so I ran
DBCC CHECKDB against it but no errors were reported. I have also run
Check Disk on the machine and again, no problems were found. So I am
currently at a complete loss about what to do. Both instances of the DB
have come from the same backup. I do not really know what else to try
with this.
>
If anybody has any ideas at all it would be greatly appreciated.
>
Thanks in advance,
>
Paul

issue with a login name

Hi All,
Our network admin logged on to a machine with a Windows
Advanced Server OS as an administrator and installed SQL
Server 2000.
In the dialog box for the Account Services he selected
the system account option (not the Local). He entered my
login name and my password for the user login and the
password (mitra/mitra)
I logged on to the machine with an administrator login
and password (not my user login and password that we
entered for the services). I created a database using
MSSQL Enterprise Manager. I clicked "Login" in
the "Security" folder, there I saw three login names:
<Builtin\administrator>
<domain_name\mitra>
<sa>
I created a database. I clicked "Users" in my new
database. I did not see the <domain_name\mitra> being
listed as a user. Then I right-clicked on the "User" and
added this <domain_name\mitra> as a user to my new
database (the login name was already listed in the Login
drop-list).
I launched our application and tried to create the
database schema using <domain_name\mitra> for the login
name. I kept getting a sql message that the login is
invalid. I tried the <sa> login, no problem, i was able
to create my database schema.
Can someone please tell me why i could not create the
database schema using <domain_name\mitra> login name.
Thanks,
--Mitra> I launched our application and tried to create the
> database schema using <domain_name\mitra> for the login
> name. I kept getting a sql message that the login is
> invalid. I tried the <sa> login, no problem, i was able
> to create my database schema.
> Can someone please tell me why i could not create the
> database schema using <domain_name\mitra> login name.
I would expect a different error message (e.g. 'CREATE TABLE permission
denied'), given the steps you described. This is because a user needs to be
granted CREATE permissions in order to create a database object. If the
objects are to be owned by that user, you can grant the user CREATE
permission for the desired object types. For example:
GRANT CREATE TABLE TO [domain_name\mitra]
In order to create objects in a different schema (e.g. 'dbo'), the user
needs to be a member of one of the roles below. These roles have
permissions to create objects in any schema:
1) sysadmin server role
2) db_owner fixed database role
3) db_ddladmin fixed database role
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"mitra fatolahi" <mitra928@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11af101c410a3$d08e31f0$a301280a@.phx
.gbl...
> Hi All,
> Our network admin logged on to a machine with a Windows
> Advanced Server OS as an administrator and installed SQL
> Server 2000.
> In the dialog box for the Account Services he selected
> the system account option (not the Local). He entered my
> login name and my password for the user login and the
> password (mitra/mitra)
> I logged on to the machine with an administrator login
> and password (not my user login and password that we
> entered for the services). I created a database using
> MSSQL Enterprise Manager. I clicked "Login" in
> the "Security" folder, there I saw three login names:
> <Builtin\administrator>
> <domain_name\mitra>
> <sa>
> I created a database. I clicked "Users" in my new
> database. I did not see the <domain_name\mitra> being
> listed as a user. Then I right-clicked on the "User" and
> added this <domain_name\mitra> as a user to my new
> database (the login name was already listed in the Login
> drop-list).
> I launched our application and tried to create the
> database schema using <domain_name\mitra> for the login
> name. I kept getting a sql message that the login is
> invalid. I tried the <sa> login, no problem, i was able
> to create my database schema.
> Can someone please tell me why i could not create the
> database schema using <domain_name\mitra> login name.
> Thanks,
> --Mitra
>

Issue using the JDBC driver to connect to a remote server

Hi All,

We have a customer in Japan who's using our tool to connect to their SQL Server. Our application runs on a Linux machine and uses the MSSQL JDBC driver for connectivity.

We're getting errors back that are not-decipherable because, I presume, they're in Japanese, and then our logs don't log them in Unicode, so they get flattened out as question marks. The errors come out looking something like this:

Microsoft][SQLServer 2000 Driver for JDBC][SQLServer]? 'MSSQL'

?

SQL State: HY000

SQL Code: 4060

[Microsoft][SQLServer 2000 Driver for JDBC][SQLServer]? 'sa' ?

SQL State: 28000

SQL Code: 18456

[Microsoft][SQLServer 2000 Driver for JDBC]An error occured while attempting to

log onto the database.

SQL State: 08001

SQL Code: 0

I think we could troubleshoot the problem if we could only read the errors coming back. I know in the ODBC world there are options like "Change the language of SQL Server system messages" and "Perform transaltion for character data" in the ODBC control panel. I couldn't find any similar options available in the JDBC driver however. Do they exist?

Even if they don't, just scanning the messages makes it pretty clear that there's an authentication/permissions issue at work here. We have another app using the same credentials that works fine though - so if there are any known issues about using JDBC to authenticate in a multi-lingual environment, that would be helpful too. Our tcpdumps seem to suggest that the JDBC driver is using multi-byte strings when communicating with the server, however the "working" application is using single-byte encoding. Could that be why we're not authenticating? How is that controlled? Note that at this point I'm just talking about authentication, not the codepages/encodings of the data in the database - right now I'm just worried about logging in.

Thanks!
Tom

I do not think app using single byte encoding should make any difference when logging in. You really should get the error string in English to understand what is going on.

|||

Error 4060 is "Cannot open database "..." requested by the login. The login failed.", 18456 is "Login failed for user ...".

I am moving to the "SQL Server Security" forum for further follow-up.

Issue in setting up the database Mirrioring environment for SQL Server 2005.

Environment:SQL Server 2005 Enterprise in Win2k3 Enterprise on 32(x86) bit machine

I am able to enable the Trace Flag 1400 using DBCC TRACEON (1400) GO. Only then we can able to configure for the ENDPOINTS.

I successfully configured the ENDPOINTS for both the principal server and Mirror server .And then when I started the START MIRRORING.

I got the error message. Please find the Message below.

An error occured while starting mirroring.

additional Information:
:..>Alter failed for Database 'KQDB', (Microsoft SqlServer.Smo)

:..>An exception occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch
[Microsoft SqlServer.Connection.info]

:..>Database mirroring Transport is disabled in the endpoint configuration.
[Microsft SQL Server,Error: 1486]

If anyone have a solution on how to setup a database mirroring environment.Please send.

You must start up the sql service with trace flag 1400. It is not enough to use DBCC TRACE ON.

Thanks,

Mark

|||I've been encountering the same issue. I've set the trace flag on startup, and still have no luck.
I've gone through every step in the online help, verified that BOTH server instances are listening (the pids corresponds to the ports) and I cannot shake this message:

"Database Mirroring Transport is disabled in the endpoint configuration."

The error comes following the command:

alter database AdventureWorks SET PARTNER = 'TCP://10.0.25.72:5022'
go

It does not seem to matter what port I enter, and it doesn't matter what the IP address is. I've tried this on both the Mirror and on the Primary (ie - in every order).

The mirroring endpoints seem be created properly. I've explored all steps in the msdn "Troubleshooting Database Mirroring Setup" document, checking the various system tables for status, etc. but it is to no avail.

I disabled the 'VIA' protocol in the Configuartion Manager, one of the hints I found from the various newsgroups i've browsed.

I am trying to mirror (without a witness) between two instances on the same server. I am well aware that this is not supported, but I need to kick the tires in a testing playground.

Is this a common problem? The lack of postings with this issue indicate that it may not be, but honestly, i'm stymied.

If anyone has encountered and solved this, please respond, and hopefully it will help others as well.

Cheers,

brentj

|||Can you just please tell use how to start the sql service with trace flag 1400.|||

chanmm wrote:

Can you just please tell use how to start the sql service with trace flag 1400.

You don't need the trace flag if you install SP1 which has now released.

Otherwise if SP1 isn't yet an option (which it really should be if you want to use db mirroring), you can add -T1400 as a startup parameter via the SQL Configuration Manager, properties of the SQL Server service -> advanced tab ->Startup Parameters.

it's not particularly well indexed or cross-referenced but BOL has details here :

ms-help://MS.SQLCC.v9/MS.SQLSVR.v9.en/udb9/html/c82d19e5-5557-4235-9a70-37983607a1fd.htm

thx, Simon.

|||I'm wondering if the thread started for this post resolved this issue? I have set Trace Flag 1400 "-T1400;..." in startup configuration options, rebooted and restarted servers and still not able to mirror. Also given the error "Database Mirroring Transport is disabled."

Anyone figure this out? Next I install SQL 2005 SP1.|||To update on my experience:
I installed SP1 and interestingly it even strips the Trace Flag 1400 out of the startup options for you so you don't leave that remnant of a failed Mirroring Attempt - good work guys!

I got an asynchronous mirror working after installing SQL 2005 SP1 but have not fully tested it.|||Sample is there in the updated SQL BOL docs. No gotchas except the fact that security configuration is the MOST critical. If you get that done, the rest is a breeze.

Issue in setting up the database Mirrioring environment for SQL Server 2005.

Environment:SQL Server 2005 Enterprise in Win2k3 Enterprise on 32(x86) bit machine

I am able to enable the Trace Flag 1400 using DBCC TRACEON (1400) GO. Only then we can able to configure for the ENDPOINTS.

I successfully configured the ENDPOINTS for both the principal server and Mirror server .And then when I started the START MIRRORING.

I got the error message. Please find the Message below.

An error occured while starting mirroring.

additional Information:
:..>Alter failed for Database 'KQDB', (Microsoft SqlServer.Smo)

:..>An exception occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch
[Microsoft SqlServer.Connection.info]

:..>Database mirroring Transport is disabled in the endpoint configuration.
[Microsft SQL Server,Error: 1486]

If anyone have a solution on how to setup a database mirroring environment.Please send.

You must start up the sql service with trace flag 1400. It is not enough to use DBCC TRACE ON.

Thanks,

Mark

|||I've been encountering the same issue. I've set the trace flag on startup, and still have no luck.
I've gone through every step in the online help, verified that BOTH server instances are listening (the pids corresponds to the ports) and I cannot shake this message:

"Database Mirroring Transport is disabled in the endpoint configuration."

The error comes following the command:

alter database AdventureWorks SET PARTNER = 'TCP://10.0.25.72:5022'
go

It does not seem to matter what port I enter, and it doesn't matter what the IP address is. I've tried this on both the Mirror and on the Primary (ie - in every order).

The mirroring endpoints seem be created properly. I've explored all steps in the msdn "Troubleshooting Database Mirroring Setup" document, checking the various system tables for status, etc. but it is to no avail.

I disabled the 'VIA' protocol in the Configuartion Manager, one of the hints I found from the various newsgroups i've browsed.

I am trying to mirror (without a witness) between two instances on the same server. I am well aware that this is not supported, but I need to kick the tires in a testing playground.

Is this a common problem? The lack of postings with this issue indicate that it may not be, but honestly, i'm stymied.

If anyone has encountered and solved this, please respond, and hopefully it will help others as well.

Cheers,

brentj

|||Can you just please tell use how to start the sql service with trace flag 1400.|||

chanmm wrote:

Can you just please tell use how to start the sql service with trace flag 1400.

You don't need the trace flag if you install SP1 which has now released.

Otherwise if SP1 isn't yet an option (which it really should be if you want to use db mirroring), you can add -T1400 as a startup parameter via the SQL Configuration Manager, properties of the SQL Server service -> advanced tab ->Startup Parameters.

it's not particularly well indexed or cross-referenced but BOL has details here :

ms-help://MS.SQLCC.v9/MS.SQLSVR.v9.en/udb9/html/c82d19e5-5557-4235-9a70-37983607a1fd.htm

thx, Simon.

|||I'm wondering if the thread started for this post resolved this issue? I have set Trace Flag 1400 "-T1400;..." in startup configuration options, rebooted and restarted servers and still not able to mirror. Also given the error "Database Mirroring Transport is disabled."

Anyone figure this out? Next I install SQL 2005 SP1.|||To update on my experience:
I installed SP1 and interestingly it even strips the Trace Flag 1400 out of the startup options for you so you don't leave that remnant of a failed Mirroring Attempt - good work guys!

I got an asynchronous mirror working after installing SQL 2005 SP1 but have not fully tested it.|||Sample is there in the updated SQL BOL docs. No gotchas except the fact that security configuration is the MOST critical. If you get that done, the rest is a breeze.

Issue in setting up the database Mirrioring environment for SQL Server 2005.

Environment:SQL Server 2005 Enterprise in Win2k3 Enterprise on 32(x86) bit machine

I am able to enable the Trace Flag 1400 using DBCC TRACEON (1400) GO. Only then we can able to configure for the ENDPOINTS.

I successfully configured the ENDPOINTS for both the principal server and Mirror server .And then when I started the START MIRRORING.

I got the error message. Please find the Message below.

An error occured while starting mirroring.

additional Information:
:..>Alter failed for Database 'KQDB', (Microsoft SqlServer.Smo)

:..>An exception occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch
[Microsoft SqlServer.Connection.info]

:..>Database mirroring Transport is disabled in the endpoint configuration.
[Microsft SQL Server,Error: 1486]

If anyone have a solution on how to setup a database mirroring environment.Please send.

You must start up the sql service with trace flag 1400. It is not enough to use DBCC TRACE ON.

Thanks,

Mark

|||I've been encountering the same issue. I've set the trace flag on startup, and still have no luck.
I've gone through every step in the online help, verified that BOTH server instances are listening (the pids corresponds to the ports) and I cannot shake this message:

"Database Mirroring Transport is disabled in the endpoint configuration."

The error comes following the command:

alter database AdventureWorks SET PARTNER = 'TCP://10.0.25.72:5022'
go

It does not seem to matter what port I enter, and it doesn't matter what the IP address is. I've tried this on both the Mirror and on the Primary (ie - in every order).

The mirroring endpoints seem be created properly. I've explored all steps in the msdn "Troubleshooting Database Mirroring Setup" document, checking the various system tables for status, etc. but it is to no avail.

I disabled the 'VIA' protocol in the Configuartion Manager, one of the hints I found from the various newsgroups i've browsed.

I am trying to mirror (without a witness) between two instances on the same server. I am well aware that this is not supported, but I need to kick the tires in a testing playground.

Is this a common problem? The lack of postings with this issue indicate that it may not be, but honestly, i'm stymied.

If anyone has encountered and solved this, please respond, and hopefully it will help others as well.

Cheers,

brentj

|||Can you just please tell use how to start the sql service with trace flag 1400.|||

chanmm wrote:

Can you just please tell use how to start the sql service with trace flag 1400.

You don't need the trace flag if you install SP1 which has now released.

Otherwise if SP1 isn't yet an option (which it really should be if you want to use db mirroring), you can add -T1400 as a startup parameter via the SQL Configuration Manager, properties of the SQL Server service -> advanced tab ->Startup Parameters.

it's not particularly well indexed or cross-referenced but BOL has details here :

ms-help://MS.SQLCC.v9/MS.SQLSVR.v9.en/udb9/html/c82d19e5-5557-4235-9a70-37983607a1fd.htm

thx, Simon.

|||I'm wondering if the thread started for this post resolved this issue? I have set Trace Flag 1400 "-T1400;..." in startup configuration options, rebooted and restarted servers and still not able to mirror. Also given the error "Database Mirroring Transport is disabled."

Anyone figure this out? Next I install SQL 2005 SP1.|||To update on my experience:
I installed SP1 and interestingly it even strips the Trace Flag 1400 out of the startup options for you so you don't leave that remnant of a failed Mirroring Attempt - good work guys!

I got an asynchronous mirror working after installing SQL 2005 SP1 but have not fully tested it.|||Sample is there in the updated SQL BOL docs. No gotchas except the fact that security configuration is the MOST critical. If you get that done, the rest is a breeze.

Issue

Anyone know this answer?
[New].[Configuration:]
O/S: Windows XP Service Pack2 on a machine named MERCURY
SQL Server Developer's Edition SP4
[Old].[Configuration]
O/S: Windows 2000 on a machine called PIONEER
SQL Server Developer's Edition SP4
[Problem].[ Description:]
1. Created 25 clean, functional DTS packages on PIONEER. On that machine,
any task in DTS designer which allows the user to select a single table name
from a drop-down list (Combo Box) (such as Bulk Insert Tasks), have Square
Delimited Indentifiers. For example:
[DBO].[TABLENAME1]
[DBO].[TABLENAME1]
[DBO].[TABLENAME1]
[DBO].[TABLENAME1]
2. Packages were then moved to a new computer, running the configuration
shown at the top.On that computer, the ODBC Administrator has default
settings for each new connection. These settings include the check box for
ANSI Quoted Identifiers which are ON (Checked). That is the same default as
Windows 2000 ODBC. We unchecked the box for every new connection.
3. When the packages from the PIONEER machine with square bracketed
identifiers in the Drop down lists were opened then square brackets
disappeared from the first display item as soon as you click the button of
the drop-down list. The drop down functionality apparently dropped the list
items from the old package, required the database with the same name on
PIONEER, repopulated the list, but this time, EVERY SINGLE IDENTIFIER WAS
DELIMITED WITH DOUBLE-QUOTES, and, worst of all, the correct name was
replaced with the first alphabetical name.The new list looked like this:
"DBO"."TABLENAME1"
"DBO"."TABLENAME1"
"DBO"."TABLENAME1"
"DBO"."TABLENAME1"
Doesn't that JUST BLOW!
Also, it appears that no connections can recognize the objects anymore.
Robert

> Anyone know this answer?
> [New].[Configuration:]
> O/S: Windows XP Service Pack2 on a machine named MERCURY
> SQL Server Developer's Edition SP4
> [Old].[Configuration]
> O/S: Windows 2000 on a machine called PIONEER
> SQL Server Developer's Edition SP4
> [Problem].[ Description:]
> 1. Created 25 clean, functional DTS packages on PIONEER. On that machine,
> any task in DTS designer which allows the user to select a single table
> name from a drop-down list (Combo Box) (such as Bulk Insert Tasks), have
> Square Delimited Indentifiers. For example:
> [DBO].[TABLENAME1]
> [DBO].[TABLENAME1]
> [DBO].[TABLENAME1]
> [DBO].[TABLENAME1]
> 2. Packages were then moved to a new computer, running the configuration
> shown at the top.On that computer, the ODBC Administrator has default
> settings for each new connection. These settings include the check box for
> ANSI Quoted Identifiers which are ON (Checked). That is the same default
> as Windows 2000 ODBC. We unchecked the box for every new connection.
> 3. When the packages from the PIONEER machine with square bracketed
> identifiers in the Drop down lists were opened then square brackets
> disappeared from the first display item as soon as you click the button of
> the drop-down list. The drop down functionality apparently dropped the
> list items from the old package, required the database with the same name
> on PIONEER, repopulated the list, but this time, EVERY SINGLE IDENTIFIER
> WAS DELIMITED WITH DOUBLE-QUOTES, and, worst of all, the correct name was
> replaced with the first alphabetical name.
>
>
>