ITW wont save script file

Hi all,

I am running the ITW against several trace files that were created from a single trace file. I only have the following problem when attempting to save the script file from the analysis of any one of the multiple trace files. I have used the ITW against single trace files with no problem.

Here's the problem:
Everything works fine until I select the "Save Script File" option. After selecting this option, designating a file name to save to, and then clicking the "Next" button, the application appears to hang up. It displays an hourglass pointer, as though it is working, but just sits there forever. Also, when I look at the task manager this application reports that it is "not responding". I have allowed it to sit there in this state for several hours before finaly killing the process. Is there some additional configuration or method required to analyze multiple trace files from a single trace session?

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
RickThis could be a bug. You might want to contact PSS.

Issues/Problems with SQL MSDE running on Windows XP

Can anyone tell me if there are known problems/issues with running SQL MSDE
on Windows XP? We have a wise install program that installs an Excel
application with msde and it runs fine on Windows 2000 but not on XP. The
install program completes fine but when we go to view the database we find
that the SQL Server instance is there with the msdb, model, and other default
system databases but none of the databases that the install script creates.
When the same installation is ran on 2000 everything works beautifully.
Any help greatly appreciated!
Thanks,
Ang
This is likely an issue with your installation program and not with MSDE.
MSDE works just fine with XP. Contact your application vendor.
-Andrew
"Angela" <Angela@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E0E98FDB-4923-4CE0-9E1F-D2F8733B4B79@.microsoft.com...
> Can anyone tell me if there are known problems/issues with running SQL
> MSDE
> on Windows XP? We have a wise install program that installs an Excel
> application with msde and it runs fine on Windows 2000 but not on XP. The
> install program completes fine but when we go to view the database we find
> that the SQL Server instance is there with the msdb, model, and other
> default
> system databases but none of the databases that the install script
> creates.
> When the same installation is ran on 2000 everything works beautifully.
> Any help greatly appreciated!
> Thanks,
> Ang

Issues with Transaction Log backups

I'm pretty new to SQL, and am running into a problem. I had setup a
Maintenance plan on one of my databases and the Transaction Log Backups are
not working. I'm not getting any feedback in the error on why they are not
working. This is the error that I get:
JOB RUN: 'Transaction Log Backup Job for DB Maintenance Plan 'CRMDEV DB
Maintenance Plan'' was run on 9/7/2006 at 5:30:00 PM
DURATION: 0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds
STATUS: Failed
MESSAGES: The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 2 (Schedule 1).
The last step to run was step 1 (Step 1).
Does anyone know what could be causing the error? I first thought it was
because of the account assigned to run the job, so I switched it from the
administrator to the SA account. But, still fails. Any suggestions on what
could be going on would be appreciated...My daily backups configured in the
Maintenance plan of the database are working though.
Thank you, Sara
Thanks!Saral6978 wrote:
> I'm pretty new to SQL, and am running into a problem. I had setup a
> Maintenance plan on one of my databases and the Transaction Log Backups are
> not working. I'm not getting any feedback in the error on why they are not
> working. This is the error that I get:
> JOB RUN: 'Transaction Log Backup Job for DB Maintenance Plan 'CRMDEV DB
> Maintenance Plan'' was run on 9/7/2006 at 5:30:00 PM
> DURATION: 0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds
> STATUS: Failed
> MESSAGES: The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 2 (Schedule 1).
> The last step to run was step 1 (Step 1).
> Does anyone know what could be causing the error? I first thought it was
> because of the account assigned to run the job, so I switched it from the
> administrator to the SA account. But, still fails. Any suggestions on what
> could be going on would be appreciated...My daily backups configured in the
> Maintenance plan of the database are working though.
> Thank you, Sara
> Thanks!
>
>
Are you possibly trying to do a transaction log backup on a database
that is in Simple recovery mode?
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||I guess I'm not sure...how would I know that?
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:
> Saral6978 wrote:
> > I'm pretty new to SQL, and am running into a problem. I had setup a
> > Maintenance plan on one of my databases and the Transaction Log Backups are
> > not working. I'm not getting any feedback in the error on why they are not
> > working. This is the error that I get:
> >
> > JOB RUN: 'Transaction Log Backup Job for DB Maintenance Plan 'CRMDEV DB
> > Maintenance Plan'' was run on 9/7/2006 at 5:30:00 PM
> > DURATION: 0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds
> > STATUS: Failed
> > MESSAGES: The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 2 (Schedule 1).
> > The last step to run was step 1 (Step 1).
> >
> > Does anyone know what could be causing the error? I first thought it was
> > because of the account assigned to run the job, so I switched it from the
> > administrator to the SA account. But, still fails. Any suggestions on what
> > could be going on would be appreciated...My daily backups configured in the
> > Maintenance plan of the database are working though.
> >
> > Thank you, Sara
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> >
> Are you possibly trying to do a transaction log backup on a database
> that is in Simple recovery mode?
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
>|||Saral6978 wrote:
> I guess I'm not sure...how would I know that?
>
Check the database properties of each database you're attempting to back
up. If the recovery model is "Simple", you can't (nor do you need to)
run a transaction log backup against that database. Consult Books
Online to learn what the various recovery models (Simple, Full,
Bulk-Logged) mean and what they offer.
--
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Thank you, Tracy. The recovery model IS Simple...I will be taking a 2day
course on SQL in the next month, so I'm sure that will help too. Thank you
so much for your input.
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:
> Saral6978 wrote:
> > I guess I'm not sure...how would I know that?
> >
> Check the database properties of each database you're attempting to back
> up. If the recovery model is "Simple", you can't (nor do you need to)
> run a transaction log backup against that database. Consult Books
> Online to learn what the various recovery models (Simple, Full,
> Bulk-Logged) mean and what they offer.
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
>|||Saral6978 wrote:
> Thank you, Tracy. The recovery model IS Simple...I will be taking a 2day
> course on SQL in the next month, so I'm sure that will help too. Thank you
> so much for your input.
>
No problem. I won't go into my rant about the maintenance plan wizards
allowing you to do this to yourself... After you finish your course,
you should learn how to write your own maintenance scripts without
relying on those wizards.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Aww, c'mon Tracy. We love your rants. ;)
To the poster, I found that the SQL Server Unleashed book is invaluable
as a resource. I picked it up on Ebay for under $30 and I use it
nearly every day.
Tracy McKibben wrote:
> Saral6978 wrote:
> > Thank you, Tracy. The recovery model IS Simple...I will be taking a 2day
> > course on SQL in the next month, so I'm sure that will help too. Thank you
> > so much for your input.
> >
> No problem. I won't go into my rant about the maintenance plan wizards
> allowing you to do this to yourself... After you finish your course,
> you should learn how to write your own maintenance scripts without
> relying on those wizards.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com

Issues with Transaction Log backups

I'm pretty new to SQL, and am running into a problem. I had setup a
Maintenance plan on one of my databases and the Transaction Log Backups are
not working. I'm not getting any feedback in the error on why they are not
working. This is the error that I get:
JOB RUN: 'Transaction Log Backup Job for DB Maintenance Plan 'CRMDEV DB
Maintenance Plan'' was run on 9/7/2006 at 5:30:00 PM
DURATION: 0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds
STATUS: Failed
MESSAGES: The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 2 (Schedule 1).
The last step to run was step 1 (Step 1).
Does anyone know what could be causing the error? I first thought it was
because of the account assigned to run the job, so I switched it from the
administrator to the SA account. But, still fails. Any suggestions on what
could be going on would be appreciated...My daily backups configured in the
Maintenance plan of the database are working though.
Thank you, Sara
Thanks!Saral6978 wrote:
> I'm pretty new to SQL, and am running into a problem. I had setup a
> Maintenance plan on one of my databases and the Transaction Log Backups ar
e
> not working. I'm not getting any feedback in the error on why they are no
t
> working. This is the error that I get:
> JOB RUN: 'Transaction Log Backup Job for DB Maintenance Plan 'CRMDEV DB
> Maintenance Plan'' was run on 9/7/2006 at 5:30:00 PM
> DURATION: 0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds
> STATUS: Failed
> MESSAGES: The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 2 (Schedule 1).
> The last step to run was step 1 (Step 1).
> Does anyone know what could be causing the error? I first thought it was
> because of the account assigned to run the job, so I switched it from the
> administrator to the SA account. But, still fails. Any suggestions on wh
at
> could be going on would be appreciated...My daily backups configured in th
e
> Maintenance plan of the database are working though.
> Thank you, Sara
> Thanks!
>
>
Are you possibly trying to do a transaction log backup on a database
that is in Simple recovery mode?
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||I guess I'm not sure...how would I know that?
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:

> Saral6978 wrote:
> Are you possibly trying to do a transaction log backup on a database
> that is in Simple recovery mode?
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
>|||Saral6978 wrote:
> I guess I'm not sure...how would I know that?
>
Check the database properties of each database you're attempting to back
up. If the recovery model is "Simple", you can't (nor do you need to)
run a transaction log backup against that database. Consult Books
Online to learn what the various recovery models (Simple, Full,
Bulk-Logged) mean and what they offer.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Thank you, Tracy. The recovery model IS Simple...I will be taking a 2day
course on SQL in the next month, so I'm sure that will help too. Thank you
so much for your input.
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:

> Saral6978 wrote:
> Check the database properties of each database you're attempting to back
> up. If the recovery model is "Simple", you can't (nor do you need to)
> run a transaction log backup against that database. Consult Books
> Online to learn what the various recovery models (Simple, Full,
> Bulk-Logged) mean and what they offer.
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
>|||Saral6978 wrote:
> Thank you, Tracy. The recovery model IS Simple...I will be taking a 2day
> course on SQL in the next month, so I'm sure that will help too. Thank yo
u
> so much for your input.
>
No problem. I won't go into my rant about the maintenance plan wizards
allowing you to do this to yourself... After you finish your course,
you should learn how to write your own maintenance scripts without
relying on those wizards.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Aww, c'mon Tracy. We love your rants. ;)
To the poster, I found that the SQL Server Unleashed book is invaluable
as a resource. I picked it up on Ebay for under $30 and I use it
nearly every day.
Tracy McKibben wrote:
> Saral6978 wrote:
> No problem. I won't go into my rant about the maintenance plan wizards
> allowing you to do this to yourself... After you finish your course,
> you should learn how to write your own maintenance scripts without
> relying on those wizards.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com

Issues with too many audittrace .trc files

Hi
I am running MSD 2005 Express Sequel Server and am noticing that in
the data folder located under C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server
\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\Data, that every 3 hours or so a .trc file (I am
assuming it is some sort of log file) is being created. Here is a
sample title of what the file is labled:
audittrace20070618090810_328.trc. These files are big, at least
200,000KB, and are taking up way too much space in my hard drive.
Does any body here know the source for these files? What type of file
is it or neccessary for? I am assuming there is some stored process in
the sequel server that is creating these big files. I am just not sure
where to find that process or where the command is coming from.
Any help is much appreciated. Thanks in advance!
JonathanIt is the "default trace", a Profile trace. You can turn it off using sp_con
figure. If you want to
check what events and columns it traces, see:
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_kara...
ce.aspx
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
<ridingtime516@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1184615740.955056.40490@.o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> Hi
> I am running MSD 2005 Express Sequel Server and am noticing that in
> the data folder located under C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server
> \MSSQL.1\MSSQL\Data, that every 3 hours or so a .trc file (I am
> assuming it is some sort of log file) is being created. Here is a
> sample title of what the file is labled:
> audittrace20070618090810_328.trc. These files are big, at least
> 200,000KB, and are taking up way too much space in my hard drive.
> Does any body here know the source for these files? What type of file
> is it or neccessary for? I am assuming there is some stored process in
> the sequel server that is creating these big files. I am just not sure
> where to find that process or where the command is coming from.
> Any help is much appreciated. Thanks in advance!
> Jonathan
>sql

Issues with too many audittrace .trc files

Hi
I am running MSD 2005 Express Sequel Server and am noticing that in
the data folder located under C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server
\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\Data, that every 3 hours or so a .trc file (I am
assuming it is some sort of log file) is being created. Here is a
sample title of what the file is labled:
audittrace20070618090810_328.trc. These files are big, at least
200,000KB, and are taking up way too much space in my hard drive.
Does any body here know the source for these files? What type of file
is it or neccessary for? I am assuming there is some stored process in
the sequel server that is creating these big files. I am just not sure
where to find that process or where the command is coming from.
Any help is much appreciated. Thanks in advance!
Jonathan
It is the "default trace", a Profile trace. You can turn it off using sp_configure. If you want to
check what events and columns it traces, see:
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi/archive/2007/03/12/whats-in-the-default-trace.aspx
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
<ridingtime516@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1184615740.955056.40490@.o61g2000hsh.googlegro ups.com...
> Hi
> I am running MSD 2005 Express Sequel Server and am noticing that in
> the data folder located under C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server
> \MSSQL.1\MSSQL\Data, that every 3 hours or so a .trc file (I am
> assuming it is some sort of log file) is being created. Here is a
> sample title of what the file is labled:
> audittrace20070618090810_328.trc. These files are big, at least
> 200,000KB, and are taking up way too much space in my hard drive.
> Does any body here know the source for these files? What type of file
> is it or neccessary for? I am assuming there is some stored process in
> the sequel server that is creating these big files. I am just not sure
> where to find that process or where the command is coming from.
> Any help is much appreciated. Thanks in advance!
> Jonathan
>

Issues with too many audittrace .trc files

Hi
I am running MSD 2005 Express Sequel Server and am noticing that in
the data folder located under C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server
\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\Data, that every 3 hours or so a .trc file (I am
assuming it is some sort of log file) is being created. Here is a
sample title of what the file is labled:
audittrace20070618090810_328.trc. These files are big, at least
200,000KB, and are taking up way too much space in my hard drive.
Does any body here know the source for these files? What type of file
is it or neccessary for? I am assuming there is some stored process in
the sequel server that is creating these big files. I am just not sure
where to find that process or where the command is coming from.
Any help is much appreciated. Thanks in advance!
JonathanIt is the "default trace", a Profile trace. You can turn it off using sp_configure. If you want to
check what events and columns it traces, see:
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi/archive/2007/03/12/whats-in-the-default-trace.aspx
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
<ridingtime516@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1184615740.955056.40490@.o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> Hi
> I am running MSD 2005 Express Sequel Server and am noticing that in
> the data folder located under C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server
> \MSSQL.1\MSSQL\Data, that every 3 hours or so a .trc file (I am
> assuming it is some sort of log file) is being created. Here is a
> sample title of what the file is labled:
> audittrace20070618090810_328.trc. These files are big, at least
> 200,000KB, and are taking up way too much space in my hard drive.
> Does any body here know the source for these files? What type of file
> is it or neccessary for? I am assuming there is some stored process in
> the sequel server that is creating these big files. I am just not sure
> where to find that process or where the command is coming from.
> Any help is much appreciated. Thanks in advance!
> Jonathan
>

Issues with SMO Transfer

I am trying to come up with a way to copy a database from one server to another. I have been running tests using the Transfer method from SMO. I can make it work in some cases and not in others. Currently I am trying to copy a database and am getting an error in a script to create a View. This View is the first one in the list of views from the source database. The problem appears to be that this View refers to another view that has yet to be created in the new database. Is there a way to handle this kind of dependency or is this a limitation to the Transfer method.I'm having the same issue. ScriptTransfer() doesn't seem to generate the scripts in the correct order. Have you been able to resolve it? If so how?|||Have you tried parsing the DependencyTree and scripting the objects based on that order?|||

I was hoping to avoid having to do that. The odd thing about this issue is when we create our database from scripts generated from DB Ghost and then attempt the transfer everything works fine. It's once certain types of changes to that database are made that this problem happens.

Is there an example out there that scripts the entire database using the DependencyTree?

|||

Dim srv As Server
Dim srvConn As ServerConnection
srv = New Server("MyServer")
srvConn = srv.ConnectionContext
srvConn.LoginSecure = True

Dim db As Database
db = srv.Databases("SourceDB")
Dim strDBName As String

strDBName = "DestDB"

Dim xfr As Transfer
xfr = New Transfer(db)
xfr.CopyAllObjects = True
xfr.CopyAllUsers = True
xfr.CopyData = True
xfr.Options.WithDependencies = True
xfr.Options.ContinueScriptingOnError = True
xfr.DestinationDatabase = strDBName
xfr.DestinationServer = srv.Name
xfr.DestinationLoginSecure = True
xfr.TransferData()

|||

Thanks for the response, but that is essentially the code that I'm using when I run into trouble. Except I'm using the ScriptTransfer() function. But, both methods get the same error.

To try and break it down a little further, I executed the scripts in the StringCollection individually:

strColl = xsfr.ScriptTransfer()

Dim i As Integer

For i = 0 To strColl.Count - 1

dbEngagement.ExecuteNonQuery(strColl(i))

Next

I get an exception complaining about a view that doesn't exist while trying to create another view that is dependent upon it. So for some reason the Transfer object is getting the scripts out of order.

Further information:

I just went into Server Manager to check dependencies on the view in question. Server Manager didn't get the dependencies correct either. It left out the the sub-query when checking objects that this object depends on.

Issues with MSDE after installing WMSDE, WSUS

I have a stable 3rd party application which has been running on MSDE Sp3 (ver
2000.80.760.0) as the default instance. I installed WSUS, which apparently
uses WMSDE (version 2000.80.884.0), as a named instance. After this
installation I noticed that the original SQL server has a memory leak,
consuming the resources of the server over a few hours.
I upgraded (replaced) the Sp3 default instance with Sp4 (version
2000.80.2039.0). Howeveer the problem seems to be continuing. Is it wise to
have these 2 different database versions running on the same machine or
should I separate/amalgamate them?
TIA
hi,
Lance wrote:
> I have a stable 3rd party application which has been running on MSDE
> Sp3 (ver 2000.80.760.0) as the default instance. I installed WSUS,
> which apparently uses WMSDE (version 2000.80.884.0), as a named
> instance. After this installation I noticed that the original SQL
> server has a memory leak, consuming the resources of the server over
> a few hours.
> I upgraded (replaced) the Sp3 default instance with Sp4 (version
> 2000.80.2039.0). Howeveer the problem seems to be continuing. Is it
> wise to have these 2 different database versions running on the same
> machine or should I separate/amalgamate them?
> TIA
WMSDE is a modified version of MSDE that enables db size larger then 2gb per
database, that is one of the constraints/limitations of "standard" MSDE, and
is provided for SharePoint, AFAIK..
unfortunately no sp4 for this edition has still been provided, even if it
has been promised...
Andrea Montanari
http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtm
DbaMgr2k ver 0.15.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.60.0
(my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
interface)
-- remove DMO to reply
sql

Issues with Image data

Hello.
We're running SQL Server 2000.
I am considering creating Image columns for one of our databases. Currently
we have a varchar field that holds the path to the actual image which is
stored on an NTFS file system. The average image size is less than 256K.
What issues arise when considering Backup/Restore and Database recovery.
Any other insights are welcome.
Thanks in advance,
Mike"Mike Lopez" <MichaelLopez@.inds.com> wrote in message
news:Oz%23B9ZG7EHA.1400@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hello.
> We're running SQL Server 2000.
> I am considering creating Image columns for one of our databases.
> Currently we have a varchar field that holds the path to the actual image
> which is stored on an NTFS file system. The average image size is less
> than 256K.
> What issues arise when considering Backup/Restore and Database recovery.
> Any other insights are welcome.
> Thanks in advance,
> Mike
>
>
There are all kinds of performance issues to think about.
1. Someone may correct me on this one, but.. Each image will store a 16
byte pointer in the row in your regular base table. That pointer will then
point to a private 8k data page where your image will be stored. That means
that each image will take up at least 8k of database storage space and in
your case, a chain of 32 8k data pages that will need to be read from and
written to. That is a killer on disk i/o for SQL Server.
2. Having those images in the same table *could* really slow down the table
on your joins. You may wish to place the images in a 1 to 1 relationship
in a separate table.
2a. If you place those images in a separate table, you *could* put that one
table on it's own filegroup and then perform filegroup backups and restores.
This may improve your backup and recovery strategy especially if the images
don't change often. (eg. You would back up the images filegroup far less.
Restores would be quicker as you only need to do the affected filegroups and
TLogs.)
3. If you use the images frequently (reads/writes) put them on the fastest
read/write drives as possible. I would suggest a RAID 1 (striped - no
parity) and mirror that drive (RAID 0) if you need that type of failsafe.
HTH
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA|||Thank you Rick. Yes, that helps.
I'm leaning towards keeping the current system intact (image file in a
directory, image file's path in table column). I feel there's too much
overhead involved. I also don't like the idea that the image would not be
directly viewable by third-party image viewers.
Thanks again,
Mike
"Rick Sawtell" <quickening@.msn.com> wrote in message
news:eoFr3FO7EHA.2180@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> "Mike Lopez" <MichaelLopez@.inds.com> wrote in message
> news:Oz%23B9ZG7EHA.1400@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>
> There are all kinds of performance issues to think about.
> 1. Someone may correct me on this one, but.. Each image will store a 16
> byte pointer in the row in your regular base table. That pointer will
> then point to a private 8k data page where your image will be stored.
> That means that each image will take up at least 8k of database storage
> space and in your case, a chain of 32 8k data pages that will need to be
> read from and written to. That is a killer on disk i/o for SQL Server.
> 2. Having those images in the same table *could* really slow down the
> table on your joins. You may wish to place the images in a 1 to 1
> relationship in a separate table.
> 2a. If you place those images in a separate table, you *could* put that
> one table on it's own filegroup and then perform filegroup backups and
> restores. This may improve your backup and recovery strategy especially if
> the images don't change often. (eg. You would back up the images
> filegroup far less. Restores would be quicker as you only need to do the
> affected filegroups and TLogs.)
> 3. If you use the images frequently (reads/writes) put them on the
> fastest read/write drives as possible. I would suggest a RAID 1
> (striped - no parity) and mirror that drive (RAID 0) if you need that type
> of failsafe.
>
> HTH
> Rick Sawtell
> MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
>
>sql

Issues with Image data

Hello.
We're running SQL Server 2000.
I am considering creating Image columns for one of our databases. Currently
we have a varchar field that holds the path to the actual image which is
stored on an NTFS file system. The average image size is less than 256K.
What issues arise when considering Backup/Restore and Database recovery.
Any other insights are welcome.
Thanks in advance,
Mike
"Mike Lopez" <MichaelLopez@.inds.com> wrote in message
news:Oz%23B9ZG7EHA.1400@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hello.
> We're running SQL Server 2000.
> I am considering creating Image columns for one of our databases.
> Currently we have a varchar field that holds the path to the actual image
> which is stored on an NTFS file system. The average image size is less
> than 256K.
> What issues arise when considering Backup/Restore and Database recovery.
> Any other insights are welcome.
> Thanks in advance,
> Mike
>
>
There are all kinds of performance issues to think about.
1. Someone may correct me on this one, but.. Each image will store a 16
byte pointer in the row in your regular base table. That pointer will then
point to a private 8k data page where your image will be stored. That means
that each image will take up at least 8k of database storage space and in
your case, a chain of 32 8k data pages that will need to be read from and
written to. That is a killer on disk i/o for SQL Server.
2. Having those images in the same table *could* really slow down the table
on your joins. You may wish to place the images in a 1 to 1 relationship
in a separate table.
2a. If you place those images in a separate table, you *could* put that one
table on it's own filegroup and then perform filegroup backups and restores.
This may improve your backup and recovery strategy especially if the images
don't change often. (eg. You would back up the images filegroup far less.
Restores would be quicker as you only need to do the affected filegroups and
TLogs.)
3. If you use the images frequently (reads/writes) put them on the fastest
read/write drives as possible. I would suggest a RAID 1 (striped - no
parity) and mirror that drive (RAID 0) if you need that type of failsafe.
HTH
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
|||Thank you Rick. Yes, that helps.
I'm leaning towards keeping the current system intact (image file in a
directory, image file's path in table column). I feel there's too much
overhead involved. I also don't like the idea that the image would not be
directly viewable by third-party image viewers.
Thanks again,
Mike
"Rick Sawtell" <quickening@.msn.com> wrote in message
news:eoFr3FO7EHA.2180@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> "Mike Lopez" <MichaelLopez@.inds.com> wrote in message
> news:Oz%23B9ZG7EHA.1400@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>
> There are all kinds of performance issues to think about.
> 1. Someone may correct me on this one, but.. Each image will store a 16
> byte pointer in the row in your regular base table. That pointer will
> then point to a private 8k data page where your image will be stored.
> That means that each image will take up at least 8k of database storage
> space and in your case, a chain of 32 8k data pages that will need to be
> read from and written to. That is a killer on disk i/o for SQL Server.
> 2. Having those images in the same table *could* really slow down the
> table on your joins. You may wish to place the images in a 1 to 1
> relationship in a separate table.
> 2a. If you place those images in a separate table, you *could* put that
> one table on it's own filegroup and then perform filegroup backups and
> restores. This may improve your backup and recovery strategy especially if
> the images don't change often. (eg. You would back up the images
> filegroup far less. Restores would be quicker as you only need to do the
> affected filegroups and TLogs.)
> 3. If you use the images frequently (reads/writes) put them on the
> fastest read/write drives as possible. I would suggest a RAID 1
> (striped - no parity) and mirror that drive (RAID 0) if you need that type
> of failsafe.
>
> HTH
> Rick Sawtell
> MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
>
>

Issues with Image data

Hello.
We're running SQL Server 2000.
I am considering creating Image columns for one of our databases. Currently
we have a varchar field that holds the path to the actual image which is
stored on an NTFS file system. The average image size is less than 256K.
What issues arise when considering Backup/Restore and Database recovery.
Any other insights are welcome.
Thanks in advance,
Mike"Mike Lopez" <MichaelLopez@.inds.com> wrote in message
news:Oz%23B9ZG7EHA.1400@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hello.
> We're running SQL Server 2000.
> I am considering creating Image columns for one of our databases.
> Currently we have a varchar field that holds the path to the actual image
> which is stored on an NTFS file system. The average image size is less
> than 256K.
> What issues arise when considering Backup/Restore and Database recovery.
> Any other insights are welcome.
> Thanks in advance,
> Mike
>
>
There are all kinds of performance issues to think about.
1. Someone may correct me on this one, but.. Each image will store a 16
byte pointer in the row in your regular base table. That pointer will then
point to a private 8k data page where your image will be stored. That means
that each image will take up at least 8k of database storage space and in
your case, a chain of 32 8k data pages that will need to be read from and
written to. That is a killer on disk i/o for SQL Server.
2. Having those images in the same table *could* really slow down the table
on your joins. You may wish to place the images in a 1 to 1 relationship
in a separate table.
2a. If you place those images in a separate table, you *could* put that one
table on it's own filegroup and then perform filegroup backups and restores.
This may improve your backup and recovery strategy especially if the images
don't change often. (eg. You would back up the images filegroup far less.
Restores would be quicker as you only need to do the affected filegroups and
TLogs.)
3. If you use the images frequently (reads/writes) put them on the fastest
read/write drives as possible. I would suggest a RAID 1 (striped - no
parity) and mirror that drive (RAID 0) if you need that type of failsafe.
HTH
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA|||Thank you Rick. Yes, that helps.
I'm leaning towards keeping the current system intact (image file in a
directory, image file's path in table column). I feel there's too much
overhead involved. I also don't like the idea that the image would not be
directly viewable by third-party image viewers.
Thanks again,
Mike
"Rick Sawtell" <quickening@.msn.com> wrote in message
news:eoFr3FO7EHA.2180@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> "Mike Lopez" <MichaelLopez@.inds.com> wrote in message
> news:Oz%23B9ZG7EHA.1400@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>> Hello.
>> We're running SQL Server 2000.
>> I am considering creating Image columns for one of our databases.
>> Currently we have a varchar field that holds the path to the actual image
>> which is stored on an NTFS file system. The average image size is less
>> than 256K.
>> What issues arise when considering Backup/Restore and Database recovery.
>> Any other insights are welcome.
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Mike
>>
>
> There are all kinds of performance issues to think about.
> 1. Someone may correct me on this one, but.. Each image will store a 16
> byte pointer in the row in your regular base table. That pointer will
> then point to a private 8k data page where your image will be stored.
> That means that each image will take up at least 8k of database storage
> space and in your case, a chain of 32 8k data pages that will need to be
> read from and written to. That is a killer on disk i/o for SQL Server.
> 2. Having those images in the same table *could* really slow down the
> table on your joins. You may wish to place the images in a 1 to 1
> relationship in a separate table.
> 2a. If you place those images in a separate table, you *could* put that
> one table on it's own filegroup and then perform filegroup backups and
> restores. This may improve your backup and recovery strategy especially if
> the images don't change often. (eg. You would back up the images
> filegroup far less. Restores would be quicker as you only need to do the
> affected filegroups and TLogs.)
> 3. If you use the images frequently (reads/writes) put them on the
> fastest read/write drives as possible. I would suggest a RAID 1
> (striped - no parity) and mirror that drive (RAID 0) if you need that type
> of failsafe.
>
> HTH
> Rick Sawtell
> MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
>
>

Issues with DBCC SHOWCONTIG

I am trying to resolve database fragmentation and I am having two issues wit
h
the DBCC SHOWCONTIG command.
1. Running DBCC SHOWCONTIG WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS shows
different values for logical fragmentation then running DBCC
SHOWCONTIG(<tablename> ) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS. Which value
should be considered as correct?
2. For some tables DBCC SHOWCONTIG(<tablename> ) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES,
TABLERESULTS shows results for indexes that do not appear in the QA Object
Browser or the EM Manage Indexes/Relationship window. Consequently, running
DBCC INDEXDEFRAG on those indexes results in an error on Parameter 3, the
index name. What is going on here?
BONUS QUESTION:
1. Which is a more accurate reflection of fragmentation: Logical
Fragmentation or Scan Density?1) Can you elaborate, or show an example?
2) What indexid? Remember that 0 is the datapages for a table, and that is n
ot an index.
3) Logical Fragmentation. Scan Density will be (as I remember) removed from
next version as it will
show bogus values of the filegroup have more than one file.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Gordon" <Gordon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D90B5D30-BAA3-4114-8A51-48ECF2DD714D@.microsoft.com...
>I am trying to resolve database fragmentation and I am having two issues wi
th
> the DBCC SHOWCONTIG command.
> 1. Running DBCC SHOWCONTIG WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS shows
> different values for logical fragmentation then running DBCC
> SHOWCONTIG(<tablename> ) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS. Which value
> should be considered as correct?
> 2. For some tables DBCC SHOWCONTIG(<tablename> ) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES,
> TABLERESULTS shows results for indexes that do not appear in the QA Object
> Browser or the EM Manage Indexes/Relationship window. Consequently, runnin
g
> DBCC INDEXDEFRAG on those indexes results in an error on Parameter 3, the
> index name. What is going on here?
> BONUS QUESTION:
> 1. Which is a more accurate reflection of fragmentation: Logical
> Fragmentation or Scan Density?|||1. This is known bug in SQL Server 2000. If you specify ALL_INDEXES or all
tables (by not passing in any parameter), logical fragmentation information
for some indexes might be a little bit off (It does not matter if the index
is large; the difference will show up if the index is small).
The problem is fixed in SQL Server 2000 SP4 (which is in Beta stage now).
2. I have no clue on this. Remember, index could be dropped between you
call DBCC SHOWCONTIG and when you use DBCC INDEXDEFRAG. That might be the
problem you see.
Bonus 1: Agree with Tibor's reply, Logical Fragmentation, with one
correction: for backward compatiable, Scan Density will still be supported
in DBCC SHOWCONTIG when SQL Server 2005 ships. (DBCC SHOWCONTIG will be
deprecated and replaced by a dynamic managed view - checkout SQL Server 2005
Beta 2 for more details)
Hope this helps.
Stephen Jiang
Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Gordon" <Gordon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D90B5D30-BAA3-4114-8A51-48ECF2DD714D@.microsoft.com...
> I am trying to resolve database fragmentation and I am having two issues
with
> the DBCC SHOWCONTIG command.
> 1. Running DBCC SHOWCONTIG WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS shows
> different values for logical fragmentation then running DBCC
> SHOWCONTIG(<tablename> ) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS. Which value
> should be considered as correct?
> 2. For some tables DBCC SHOWCONTIG(<tablename> ) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES,
> TABLERESULTS shows results for indexes that do not appear in the QA Object
> Browser or the EM Manage Indexes/Relationship window. Consequently,
running
> DBCC INDEXDEFRAG on those indexes results in an error on Parameter 3, the
> index name. What is going on here?
> BONUS QUESTION:
> 1. Which is a more accurate reflection of fragmentation: Logical
> Fragmentation or Scan Density?

Issues with DBCC SHOWCONTIG

I am trying to resolve database fragmentation and I am having two issues with
the DBCC SHOWCONTIG command.
1. Running DBCC SHOWCONTIG WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS shows
different values for logical fragmentation then running DBCC
SHOWCONTIG(<tablename>) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS. Which value
should be considered as correct?
2. For some tables DBCC SHOWCONTIG(<tablename>) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES,
TABLERESULTS shows results for indexes that do not appear in the QA Object
Browser or the EM Manage Indexes/Relationship window. Consequently, running
DBCC INDEXDEFRAG on those indexes results in an error on Parameter 3, the
index name. What is going on here?
BONUS QUESTION:
1. Which is a more accurate reflection of fragmentation: Logical
Fragmentation or Scan Density?
1) Can you elaborate, or show an example?
2) What indexid? Remember that 0 is the datapages for a table, and that is not an index.
3) Logical Fragmentation. Scan Density will be (as I remember) removed from next version as it will
show bogus values of the filegroup have more than one file.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Gordon" <Gordon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D90B5D30-BAA3-4114-8A51-48ECF2DD714D@.microsoft.com...
>I am trying to resolve database fragmentation and I am having two issues with
> the DBCC SHOWCONTIG command.
> 1. Running DBCC SHOWCONTIG WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS shows
> different values for logical fragmentation then running DBCC
> SHOWCONTIG(<tablename>) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS. Which value
> should be considered as correct?
> 2. For some tables DBCC SHOWCONTIG(<tablename>) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES,
> TABLERESULTS shows results for indexes that do not appear in the QA Object
> Browser or the EM Manage Indexes/Relationship window. Consequently, running
> DBCC INDEXDEFRAG on those indexes results in an error on Parameter 3, the
> index name. What is going on here?
> BONUS QUESTION:
> 1. Which is a more accurate reflection of fragmentation: Logical
> Fragmentation or Scan Density?
|||1. This is known bug in SQL Server 2000. If you specify ALL_INDEXES or all
tables (by not passing in any parameter), logical fragmentation information
for some indexes might be a little bit off (It does not matter if the index
is large; the difference will show up if the index is small).
The problem is fixed in SQL Server 2000 SP4 (which is in Beta stage now).
2. I have no clue on this. Remember, index could be dropped between you
call DBCC SHOWCONTIG and when you use DBCC INDEXDEFRAG. That might be the
problem you see.
Bonus 1: Agree with Tibor's reply, Logical Fragmentation, with one
correction: for backward compatiable, Scan Density will still be supported
in DBCC SHOWCONTIG when SQL Server 2005 ships. (DBCC SHOWCONTIG will be
deprecated and replaced by a dynamic managed view - checkout SQL Server 2005
Beta 2 for more details)
Hope this helps.
Stephen Jiang
Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Gordon" <Gordon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D90B5D30-BAA3-4114-8A51-48ECF2DD714D@.microsoft.com...
> I am trying to resolve database fragmentation and I am having two issues
with
> the DBCC SHOWCONTIG command.
> 1. Running DBCC SHOWCONTIG WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS shows
> different values for logical fragmentation then running DBCC
> SHOWCONTIG(<tablename>) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS. Which value
> should be considered as correct?
> 2. For some tables DBCC SHOWCONTIG(<tablename>) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES,
> TABLERESULTS shows results for indexes that do not appear in the QA Object
> Browser or the EM Manage Indexes/Relationship window. Consequently,
running
> DBCC INDEXDEFRAG on those indexes results in an error on Parameter 3, the
> index name. What is going on here?
> BONUS QUESTION:
> 1. Which is a more accurate reflection of fragmentation: Logical
> Fragmentation or Scan Density?

Issues with DBCC SHOWCONTIG

I am trying to resolve database fragmentation and I am having two issues with
the DBCC SHOWCONTIG command.
1. Running DBCC SHOWCONTIG WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS shows
different values for logical fragmentation then running DBCC
SHOWCONTIG(<tablename>) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS. Which value
should be considered as correct?
2. For some tables DBCC SHOWCONTIG(<tablename>) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES,
TABLERESULTS shows results for indexes that do not appear in the QA Object
Browser or the EM Manage Indexes/Relationship window. Consequently, running
DBCC INDEXDEFRAG on those indexes results in an error on Parameter 3, the
index name. What is going on here?
BONUS QUESTION:
1. Which is a more accurate reflection of fragmentation: Logical
Fragmentation or Scan Density?1) Can you elaborate, or show an example?
2) What indexid? Remember that 0 is the datapages for a table, and that is not an index.
3) Logical Fragmentation. Scan Density will be (as I remember) removed from next version as it will
show bogus values of the filegroup have more than one file.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Gordon" <Gordon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D90B5D30-BAA3-4114-8A51-48ECF2DD714D@.microsoft.com...
>I am trying to resolve database fragmentation and I am having two issues with
> the DBCC SHOWCONTIG command.
> 1. Running DBCC SHOWCONTIG WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS shows
> different values for logical fragmentation then running DBCC
> SHOWCONTIG(<tablename>) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS. Which value
> should be considered as correct?
> 2. For some tables DBCC SHOWCONTIG(<tablename>) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES,
> TABLERESULTS shows results for indexes that do not appear in the QA Object
> Browser or the EM Manage Indexes/Relationship window. Consequently, running
> DBCC INDEXDEFRAG on those indexes results in an error on Parameter 3, the
> index name. What is going on here?
> BONUS QUESTION:
> 1. Which is a more accurate reflection of fragmentation: Logical
> Fragmentation or Scan Density?|||1. This is known bug in SQL Server 2000. If you specify ALL_INDEXES or all
tables (by not passing in any parameter), logical fragmentation information
for some indexes might be a little bit off (It does not matter if the index
is large; the difference will show up if the index is small).
The problem is fixed in SQL Server 2000 SP4 (which is in Beta stage now).
2. I have no clue on this. Remember, index could be dropped between you
call DBCC SHOWCONTIG and when you use DBCC INDEXDEFRAG. That might be the
problem you see.
Bonus 1: Agree with Tibor's reply, Logical Fragmentation, with one
correction: for backward compatiable, Scan Density will still be supported
in DBCC SHOWCONTIG when SQL Server 2005 ships. (DBCC SHOWCONTIG will be
deprecated and replaced by a dynamic managed view - checkout SQL Server 2005
Beta 2 for more details)
Hope this helps.
--
Stephen Jiang
Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Gordon" <Gordon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D90B5D30-BAA3-4114-8A51-48ECF2DD714D@.microsoft.com...
> I am trying to resolve database fragmentation and I am having two issues
with
> the DBCC SHOWCONTIG command.
> 1. Running DBCC SHOWCONTIG WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS shows
> different values for logical fragmentation then running DBCC
> SHOWCONTIG(<tablename>) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES, TABLERESULTS. Which value
> should be considered as correct?
> 2. For some tables DBCC SHOWCONTIG(<tablename>) WITH FAST, ALL_INDEXES,
> TABLERESULTS shows results for indexes that do not appear in the QA Object
> Browser or the EM Manage Indexes/Relationship window. Consequently,
running
> DBCC INDEXDEFRAG on those indexes results in an error on Parameter 3, the
> index name. What is going on here?
> BONUS QUESTION:
> 1. Which is a more accurate reflection of fragmentation: Logical
> Fragmentation or Scan Density?

Issues running reports from browser vs RS SP2 Viewer

Some people can run reports via IE.
It seems that people running Server 2003 (a slight few) and IE with Enhanced
secutity can't run the reports via IE.
Running reports from our app using the report viewer worked fine at one
point.
Now we've changed something (not sure what) but now the report viewer is
putting up a login dialog box. (If I log in an administrator it does
generate the report.)
Can someone point us in the right direction.
Kyle!I figured it out...
I was a browser setting issue.
The report server must be listed in the Local Intranet and the security for
the Local Intranet must be set to the default level.
This causes the broswer to try to log in with the users credentials. RS is
set up to all all Domain Users to browse (or run programatically) reports.
Kyle!
"Kyle Jedrusiak" <kjedrusiak@.princetoninformation.com> wrote in message
news:%238EtvuGbFHA.1312@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Some people can run reports via IE.
> It seems that people running Server 2003 (a slight few) and IE with
> Enhanced secutity can't run the reports via IE.
> Running reports from our app using the report viewer worked fine at one
> point.
> Now we've changed something (not sure what) but now the report viewer is
> putting up a login dialog box. (If I log in an administrator it does
> generate the report.)
> Can someone point us in the right direction.
> Kyle!
>

Issues running DTS Packages

Hello,

I have a sql 2005 cluster. I recently moved a new server in place of an old server we had

Both the servers now have w2k3 sp2 sql 2005 sp1 both have 2000 dts designer package.

My problem is that i have a dts package that runs on sql01\inst01 without any issues but the same package when i try to run it from sql02\inst02 just hangs ... digging deeper i found that - when i try to parse a query / build query / try giving parameters in a Execute SQL task it says

"The selected connection does not provide sql support"

The connection it reference is a postgres connection looking up info from a udl file.

I am not sure what is missing.

Any help is appreciated as soon as possible...

Resolved. Thanks

Issues PLEASE HELP

i am running the following and i keep getting process errors " can not read next data row for data set SERVER. transaction process id 838 was deadlocked on lock comminication buffer resources with another process and has been chosen as the deadlock victum rerun transactions."

SELECT transactions.practice_id, practice.practice_name, CONVERT(smalldatetime, transactions.closing_date) AS Date, transactions.type,

ISNULL(SUM(trans_detail.paid_amt), 0) AS Pmts, ISNULL(SUM(trans_detail.adj_amt), 0) AS Adjs, 0 AS NSF, transactions.tran_code_id, 0 AS Debits,

0 AS Credits, 0 AS Capitation, 0 AS UnAppl, trans_detail.system_charge_code,''

FROM provider_mstr RIGHT OUTER JOIN

charges ON provider_mstr.provider_id = charges.rendering_id LEFT OUTER JOIN

location_mstr ON charges.location_id = location_mstr.location_id RIGHT OUTER JOIN

transactions INNER JOIN

trans_detail ON transactions.trans_id = trans_detail.trans_id INNER JOIN

practice ON transactions.practice_id = practice.practice_id ON charges.charge_id = trans_detail.charge_id

where (CONVERT(smalldatetime, transactions.closing_date) BETWEEN @.begin_date AND @.end_date) and (transactions.practice_id = @.practice_id) and (convert(char(36), charges.rendering_id) like @.provider_id) and (convert(char(36), charges.location_id) like @.location_id)

GROUP BY transactions.practice_id, CONVERT(smalldatetime, transactions.closing_date), transactions.type, practice.practice_name, transactions.tran_code_id,

trans_detail.system_charge_code

HAVING (transactions.type = 'C' OR transactions.type = 'R')

AND transactions.tran_code_id NOT IN ('14759070-3370-4E4D-B752-01AE84A350EF', '23783F6F-8661-4785-922C-F55C154349F9', '36037DC4-4799-4E84-9AAB-78BE4F271CCD', '5F1665EE-08DC-47FF-8BC4-6F4BA6CC84C0',

'39137DD5-796F-4824-860B-EBD00D66CBB0') AND (trans_detail.system_charge_code is null)

UNION

SELECT tr.practice_id, pr.practice_name, CONVERT(smalldatetime, tr.closing_date) AS Date, tr.type, 0 AS Pmts, 0 AS Adjs, ISNULL(SUM(td.adj_amt), 0) AS NSF,

tr.tran_code_id, 0, 0, 0, 0, '',''

FROM provider_mstr pm1 RIGHT OUTER JOIN

charges c1 ON pm1.provider_id = c1.rendering_id LEFT OUTER JOIN

location_mstr lm1 ON c1.location_id = lm1.location_id RIGHT OUTER JOIN

transactions tr INNER JOIN

trans_detail td ON tr.trans_id = td.trans_id INNER JOIN

practice pr ON tr.practice_id = pr.practice_id ON c1.charge_id = td.charge_id

where (CONVERT(smalldatetime, tr.closing_date) BETWEEN @.begin_date AND @.end_date) AND (convert(char(36), c1.rendering_id) like @.provider_id) and (convert(char(36), c1.location_id) like @.location_id)

GROUP BY tr.practice_id, CONVERT(smalldatetime, tr.closing_date), tr.type, pr.practice_name, tr.tran_code_id

HAVING (tr.practice_id = @.practice_id) AND (tr.type = 'A') AND

(tr.tran_code_id = 'CEC50D49-3317-404D-A082-36610DAE6F0F')

UNION

SELECT tn.practice_id, prs.practice_name, CONVERT(smalldatetime, tn.closing_date) AS Date, tn.type, 0 AS Pmts, 0 AS Adjs, 0 AS NSF, tn.tran_code_id,

isnull(SUM(tds.paid_amt), 0) AS Debits, 0, 0, 0, '',''

FROM provider_mstr pm2 RIGHT OUTER JOIN

charges c2 ON pm2.provider_id = c2.rendering_id LEFT OUTER JOIN

location_mstr lm2 ON c2.location_id = lm2.location_id RIGHT OUTER JOIN

transactions tn INNER JOIN

trans_detail tds ON tn.trans_id = tds.trans_id INNER JOIN

practice prs ON tn.practice_id = prs.practice_id ON c2.charge_id = tds.charge_id

where (CONVERT(smalldatetime, tn.closing_date) BETWEEN @.begin_date AND @.end_date) AND (convert(char(36), c2.rendering_id) like @.provider_id) and (convert(char(36), c2.location_id) like @.location_id)

GROUP BY tn.practice_id, CONVERT(smalldatetime, tn.closing_date), tn.type, prs.practice_name, tn.tran_code_id

HAVING (tn.practice_id = @.practice_id) AND (tn.type = 'C') AND

(tn.tran_code_id = '14759070-3370-4E4D-B752-01AE84A350EF' OR

tn.tran_code_id = '23783F6F-8661-4785-922C-F55C154349F9' OR tn.tran_code_id='B6BA0D7D-BAC6-4653-9050-C5C5E8029DCB') AND isnull(SUM(tds.paid_amt), 0) > 0

UNION

SELECT trs.practice_id, ps.practice_name, CONVERT(smalldatetime, trs.closing_date) AS Date, trs.type, 0 AS Pmts, 0 AS Adjs, 0 AS NSF, trs.tran_code_id, 0,

isnull(SUM(ts .paid_amt), 0) AS Credits, 0, 0, '',''

FROM provider_mstr pm3 RIGHT OUTER JOIN

charges c3 ON pm3.provider_id = c3.rendering_id LEFT OUTER JOIN

location_mstr lm3 ON c3.location_id = lm3.location_id RIGHT OUTER JOIN

transactions trs INNER JOIN

trans_detail ts ON trs.trans_id = ts .trans_id INNER JOIN

practice ps ON trs.practice_id = ps.practice_id ON c3.charge_id = ts .charge_id

where (CONVERT(smalldatetime, trs.closing_date) BETWEEN @.begin_date AND @.end_date) AND (convert(char(36), c3.rendering_id) like @.provider_id) and (convert(char(36), c3.location_id) like @.location_id)

GROUP BY trs.practice_id, CONVERT(smalldatetime, trs.closing_date), trs.type, ps.practice_name, trs.tran_code_id

HAVING (trs.practice_id = @.practice_id) AND (trs.type = 'C') AND

(trs.tran_code_id = '14759070-3370-4E4D-B752-01AE84A350EF' OR

trs.tran_code_id = '23783F6F-8661-4785-922C-F55C154349F9' OR trs.tran_code_id='B6BA0D7D-BAC6-4653-9050-C5C5E8029DCB') AND isnull(SUM(ts .paid_amt), 0) < 0

UNION

SELECT tran1.practice_id, ps1.practice_name, CONVERT(smalldatetime, tran1.closing_date) AS Date, tran1.type, 0 AS Pmts, 0 AS Adjs, 0 AS NSF,

tran1.tran_code_id, 0, 0, isnull(SUM(ts1.paid_amt), 0), 0, '',''

FROM provider_mstr pm4 RIGHT OUTER JOIN

charges c4 ON pm4.provider_id = c4.rendering_id LEFT OUTER JOIN

location_mstr lm4 ON c4.location_id = lm4.location_id RIGHT OUTER JOIN

transactions tran1 INNER JOIN

trans_detail ts1 ON tran1.trans_id = ts1.trans_id INNER JOIN

practice ps1 ON tran1.practice_id = ps1.practice_id ON c4.charge_id = ts1.charge_id

where (CONVERT(smalldatetime, tran1.closing_date) BETWEEN @.begin_date AND @.end_date) AND (convert(char(36), c4.rendering_id) like @.provider_id) and (convert(char(36), c4.location_id) like @.location_id)

GROUP BY tran1.practice_id, CONVERT(smalldatetime, tran1.closing_date), tran1.type, ps1.practice_name, tran1.tran_code_id

HAVING (tran1.practice_id = @.practice_id) AND (tran1.type = 'C')

AND (tran1.tran_code_id IN ('36037DC4-4799-4E84-9AAB-78BE4F271CCD', '5F1665EE-08DC-47FF-8BC4-6F4BA6CC84C0', '39137DD5-796F-4824-860B-EBD00D66CBB0'))

UNION

SELECT tran2.practice_id, ps2.practice_name, CONVERT(smalldatetime, tran2.closing_date) AS Date, tran2.type, 0 AS Pmts, 0 AS Adjs, 0 AS NSF,

tran2.tran_code_id, 0, 0, 0, isnull(SUM(ts2.paid_amt), 0), ts2.system_charge_code,''

FROM provider_mstr pm5 RIGHT OUTER JOIN

charges c5 ON pm5.provider_id = c5.rendering_id LEFT OUTER JOIN

location_mstr lm5 ON c5.location_id = lm5.location_id RIGHT OUTER JOIN

transactions tran2 INNER JOIN

trans_detail ts2 ON tran2.trans_id = ts2.trans_id INNER JOIN

practice ps2 ON tran2.practice_id = ps2.practice_id ON c5.charge_id = ts2.charge_id

where (CONVERT(smalldatetime, tran2.closing_date) BETWEEN @.begin_date AND @.end_date) AND (isnull(convert(char(36), c5.rendering_id),'') like @.provider_id) and (isnull(convert(char(36), c5.location_id),'') like @.location_id)

GROUP BY tran2.practice_id, CONVERT(smalldatetime, tran2.closing_date), tran2.type, ps2.practice_name, tran2.tran_code_id, ts2.system_charge_code

HAVING (tran2.practice_id = @.practice_id) AND (tran2.type = 'C')

AND ts2.system_charge_code is not null

ORDER BY CONVERT(smalldatetime, transactions.closing_date)

Try moving all your "HAVING" clauses to WHERE clauses.

HAVING is for calculated fields. Your fields appear to be static, except for the "isnull(SUM(ts .paid_amt), 0) < 0" which will need to be in the HAVING clause.

I would suspect it is retrieving all records, multiple times, to check the having clauses, when it doesn't need too.

|||Also, try posting this to the TSQL forum, you will probably have better luck.

Issues getting ASP.NET and SQL to talk

Hi! This is my first time messing with SQL and ASP.NET. I'm having issues getting the SQL to work with ASP.NET. I am using win XP Pro running IIS. I have all patches and upgrades installed on the computer. All files are served off localhost.
When I try to visit the ASP.NET page I get the following error message.

Server Error in '/PortalVBSDK' Application.

SQL Server does not exist or access denied.

Description:An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code.
Exception Details:System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: SQL Server does not exist or access denied.
Source Error:

Line 28: Dim links As New ASPNET.StarterKit.Portal.LinkDB()Line 29:Line 30: myDataList.DataSource = links.GetLinks(ModuleId)Line 31: myDataList.DataBind()Line 32:

Source File:C:\Program Files\ASP.NET Starter Kits\ASP.NET Portal (VBSDK)\PortalVBSDK\DesktopModules\QuickLinks.ascx Line:30
with the stack trace of

[SqlException: SQL Server does not exist or access denied.] System.Data.SqlClient.ConnectionPool.GetConnection(Boolean& isInTransaction) +474 System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnectionPoolManager.GetPooledConnection(SqlConnectionString options, Boolean& isInTransaction) +372 System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.Open() +384 ASPNET.StarterKit.Portal.LinkDB.GetLinks(Int32 moduleId) ASP.QuickLinks_ascx.Page_Load(Object sender, EventArgs e) in C:\Program Files\ASP.NET Starter Kits\ASP.NET Portal (VBSDK)\PortalVBSDK\DesktopModules\QuickLinks.ascx:30 System.EventHandler.Invoke(Object sender, EventArgs e) +0 System.Web.UI.Control.OnLoad(EventArgs e) +67 System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() +35 System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() +98 System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() +98 System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() +98 System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain() +750

---

Version Information: Microsoft .NET Framework Version:1.1.4322.2032; ASP.NET Version:1.1.4322.2032
Any help would be greatly appriciated!
Joshua
seems like your connectionstring is not correct|||Are you sure you have the right connection string in web.config?

Issues for 64 bit 2003 OS Server from Advanced 2000

Running Standard Edition SQL 2000 on Advanced Server with PAE enabled in the
boot ini (8 gig ram on Adv Svr but only two allocates for Standard)
System is migrating to a 64 bit Advanced Server with 8 GIG RAM... also
Standard Edition SQL 2000 which as we know well, can access only first two
GIG of RAM thus, I think, AWE is completely out of the question.
Is it necessary to enable PAE on the 2003 server? Are there issues that
should be considered for the 64 bit server running SQL 2000 that are
different from an instance running on Advanced Server 2000?
--
Regards,
Jamie
BOL
Configuration -Enabling AWE Memory for SQL Server (2000?)
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673.aspx
Configuration -Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179301.aspx (2000?)PAE is only useful on 32 bit systems as X64 can access the memory directly
and does not require it. With SQL2000 Std you will only ever be able to use
2GB max. So why bother going thru these motions? Most of the 8GB is wasted
and you will reap none of the benefits of X64 in this state. I highly
recommend you upgrade to SQL2005 Std X64 edition otherwise this is most
likely a waste of your time.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors
"thejamie" <thejamie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B1414628-6F34-46A7-83B8-6E8EFB4241F9@.microsoft.com...
> Running Standard Edition SQL 2000 on Advanced Server with PAE enabled in
> the
> boot ini (8 gig ram on Adv Svr but only two allocates for Standard)
> System is migrating to a 64 bit Advanced Server with 8 GIG RAM... also
> Standard Edition SQL 2000 which as we know well, can access only first two
> GIG of RAM thus, I think, AWE is completely out of the question.
> Is it necessary to enable PAE on the 2003 server? Are there issues that
> should be considered for the 64 bit server running SQL 2000 that are
> different from an instance running on Advanced Server 2000?
> --
> Regards,
> Jamie
> BOL
> Configuration -Enabling AWE Memory for SQL Server (2000?)
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673.aspx
> Configuration -Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179301.aspx (2000?)
>|||A decision was made to wait for SP1 on SQL Server 2008. When that hits, we
upgrade.
Meanwhile...
--
Regards,
Jamie
"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> PAE is only useful on 32 bit systems as X64 can access the memory directly
> and does not require it. With SQL2000 Std you will only ever be able to use
> 2GB max. So why bother going thru these motions? Most of the 8GB is wasted
> and you will reap none of the benefits of X64 in this state. I highly
> recommend you upgrade to SQL2005 Std X64 edition otherwise this is most
> likely a waste of your time.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> Solid Quality Mentors
>
> "thejamie" <thejamie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B1414628-6F34-46A7-83B8-6E8EFB4241F9@.microsoft.com...
> > Running Standard Edition SQL 2000 on Advanced Server with PAE enabled in
> > the
> > boot ini (8 gig ram on Adv Svr but only two allocates for Standard)
> > System is migrating to a 64 bit Advanced Server with 8 GIG RAM... also
> > Standard Edition SQL 2000 which as we know well, can access only first two
> > GIG of RAM thus, I think, AWE is completely out of the question.
> >
> > Is it necessary to enable PAE on the 2003 server? Are there issues that
> > should be considered for the 64 bit server running SQL 2000 that are
> > different from an instance running on Advanced Server 2000?
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Jamie
> > BOL
> > Configuration -Enabling AWE Memory for SQL Server (2000?)
> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673.aspx
> >
> > Configuration -Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179301.aspx (2000?)
> >
> >
>|||I'm primarily concerned that there may be pitfalls unknown when we do this
move from the old server to the new. It isn't by choice that we are putting
2000 on this new 64 bit server (16 Gig Ram - 8 Processors). Our production
server is failing and we are scrambling to get it fixed and running on the
new server ASAP. I agree that it would be wiser to go with 2005.
--
Regards,
Jamie
"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> PAE is only useful on 32 bit systems as X64 can access the memory directly
> and does not require it. With SQL2000 Std you will only ever be able to use
> 2GB max. So why bother going thru these motions? Most of the 8GB is wasted
> and you will reap none of the benefits of X64 in this state. I highly
> recommend you upgrade to SQL2005 Std X64 edition otherwise this is most
> likely a waste of your time.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> Solid Quality Mentors
>
> "thejamie" <thejamie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B1414628-6F34-46A7-83B8-6E8EFB4241F9@.microsoft.com...
> > Running Standard Edition SQL 2000 on Advanced Server with PAE enabled in
> > the
> > boot ini (8 gig ram on Adv Svr but only two allocates for Standard)
> > System is migrating to a 64 bit Advanced Server with 8 GIG RAM... also
> > Standard Edition SQL 2000 which as we know well, can access only first two
> > GIG of RAM thus, I think, AWE is completely out of the question.
> >
> > Is it necessary to enable PAE on the 2003 server? Are there issues that
> > should be considered for the 64 bit server running SQL 2000 that are
> > different from an instance running on Advanced Server 2000?
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Jamie
> > BOL
> > Configuration -Enabling AWE Memory for SQL Server (2000?)
> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673.aspx
> >
> > Configuration -Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179301.aspx (2000?)
> >
> >
>|||Wow, must be nice to have wasted resources sitting around for 1 year +,
which is probably when you will be able to upgrade to SQL 2008, sp1. :)
--
Kevin G. Boles
TheSQLGuru
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"thejamie" <thejamie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B5A4ED33-8758-49C2-BFA3-5960066E5568@.microsoft.com...
>A decision was made to wait for SP1 on SQL Server 2008. When that hits, we
> upgrade.
> Meanwhile...
> --
> Regards,
> Jamie
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
>> PAE is only useful on 32 bit systems as X64 can access the memory
>> directly
>> and does not require it. With SQL2000 Std you will only ever be able to
>> use
>> 2GB max. So why bother going thru these motions? Most of the 8GB is
>> wasted
>> and you will reap none of the benefits of X64 in this state. I highly
>> recommend you upgrade to SQL2005 Std X64 edition otherwise this is most
>> likely a waste of your time.
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>> Solid Quality Mentors
>>
>> "thejamie" <thejamie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:B1414628-6F34-46A7-83B8-6E8EFB4241F9@.microsoft.com...
>> > Running Standard Edition SQL 2000 on Advanced Server with PAE enabled
>> > in
>> > the
>> > boot ini (8 gig ram on Adv Svr but only two allocates for Standard)
>> > System is migrating to a 64 bit Advanced Server with 8 GIG RAM... also
>> > Standard Edition SQL 2000 which as we know well, can access only first
>> > two
>> > GIG of RAM thus, I think, AWE is completely out of the question.
>> >
>> > Is it necessary to enable PAE on the 2003 server? Are there issues
>> > that
>> > should be considered for the 64 bit server running SQL 2000 that are
>> > different from an instance running on Advanced Server 2000?
>> > --
>> > Regards,
>> > Jamie
>> > BOL
>> > Configuration -Enabling AWE Memory for SQL Server (2000?)
>> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673.aspx
>> >
>> > Configuration -Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
>> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179301.aspx (2000?)
>> >
>> >
>>|||You are probably talking close to a year away for that. Oh well.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors
"thejamie" <thejamie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B5A4ED33-8758-49C2-BFA3-5960066E5568@.microsoft.com...
>A decision was made to wait for SP1 on SQL Server 2008. When that hits, we
> upgrade.
> Meanwhile...
> --
> Regards,
> Jamie
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
>> PAE is only useful on 32 bit systems as X64 can access the memory
>> directly
>> and does not require it. With SQL2000 Std you will only ever be able to
>> use
>> 2GB max. So why bother going thru these motions? Most of the 8GB is
>> wasted
>> and you will reap none of the benefits of X64 in this state. I highly
>> recommend you upgrade to SQL2005 Std X64 edition otherwise this is most
>> likely a waste of your time.
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>> Solid Quality Mentors
>>
>> "thejamie" <thejamie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:B1414628-6F34-46A7-83B8-6E8EFB4241F9@.microsoft.com...
>> > Running Standard Edition SQL 2000 on Advanced Server with PAE enabled
>> > in
>> > the
>> > boot ini (8 gig ram on Adv Svr but only two allocates for Standard)
>> > System is migrating to a 64 bit Advanced Server with 8 GIG RAM... also
>> > Standard Edition SQL 2000 which as we know well, can access only first
>> > two
>> > GIG of RAM thus, I think, AWE is completely out of the question.
>> >
>> > Is it necessary to enable PAE on the 2003 server? Are there issues
>> > that
>> > should be considered for the 64 bit server running SQL 2000 that are
>> > different from an instance running on Advanced Server 2000?
>> > --
>> > Regards,
>> > Jamie
>> > BOL
>> > Configuration -Enabling AWE Memory for SQL Server (2000?)
>> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673.aspx
>> >
>> > Configuration -Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
>> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179301.aspx (2000?)
>> >
>> >
>>|||Sure there is always the unknown unless you test it first. It is a whole new
OS, drivers etc. Theoretically it should work fine as long as you have all
the proper drivers and are doing just basic database operations. But I have
to assume there are other apps on the same server correct? Otherwise that
is a lot of wasted hardware since 200 Std only supports 4 procs and 2GB of
memory.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors
"thejamie" <thejamie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:EC033C23-2758-42D5-9BA8-BB61DF2772D2@.microsoft.com...
> I'm primarily concerned that there may be pitfalls unknown when we do this
> move from the old server to the new. It isn't by choice that we are
> putting
> 2000 on this new 64 bit server (16 Gig Ram - 8 Processors). Our
> production
> server is failing and we are scrambling to get it fixed and running on the
> new server ASAP. I agree that it would be wiser to go with 2005.
> --
> Regards,
> Jamie
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
>> PAE is only useful on 32 bit systems as X64 can access the memory
>> directly
>> and does not require it. With SQL2000 Std you will only ever be able to
>> use
>> 2GB max. So why bother going thru these motions? Most of the 8GB is
>> wasted
>> and you will reap none of the benefits of X64 in this state. I highly
>> recommend you upgrade to SQL2005 Std X64 edition otherwise this is most
>> likely a waste of your time.
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>> Solid Quality Mentors
>>
>> "thejamie" <thejamie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:B1414628-6F34-46A7-83B8-6E8EFB4241F9@.microsoft.com...
>> > Running Standard Edition SQL 2000 on Advanced Server with PAE enabled
>> > in
>> > the
>> > boot ini (8 gig ram on Adv Svr but only two allocates for Standard)
>> > System is migrating to a 64 bit Advanced Server with 8 GIG RAM... also
>> > Standard Edition SQL 2000 which as we know well, can access only first
>> > two
>> > GIG of RAM thus, I think, AWE is completely out of the question.
>> >
>> > Is it necessary to enable PAE on the 2003 server? Are there issues
>> > that
>> > should be considered for the 64 bit server running SQL 2000 that are
>> > different from an instance running on Advanced Server 2000?
>> > --
>> > Regards,
>> > Jamie
>> > BOL
>> > Configuration -Enabling AWE Memory for SQL Server (2000?)
>> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673.aspx
>> >
>> > Configuration -Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
>> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179301.aspx (2000?)
>> >
>> >
>>|||I experienced a worse scenario. Listen to this:
I was setting up SQL Server Cluster on two DL580 of HPs with 4 Dual Core
CPUs and 16GB of RAMs... Nice config, yea?
There was a failed cluster node when we went to the scene. I mean, they were
using their SQL Servers for about 6 months...
Servers were x86 and non of the /PAE and AWE was being used. Even /3GB
wasn't used.
I went to the hospital's IT manager and told him about the situation. I told
him you have 16GB of RAM on your servers and your SQL Servers are using only
2GB of RAM out of 16GB and the rest of it is just sitting for months. And
guest what he said? He said, "I knew, but I didn't wanna touch it". Funny,
huh?
--
Ekrem Ã?nsoy
http://www.ekremonsoy.net , http://ekremonsoy.blogspot.com
MCBDA, MCITP:DBA, MCSD.Net, MCSE, MCBMSP, MCT
"thejamie" <thejamie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B5A4ED33-8758-49C2-BFA3-5960066E5568@.microsoft.com...
>A decision was made to wait for SP1 on SQL Server 2008. When that hits, we
> upgrade.
> Meanwhile...
> --
> Regards,
> Jamie
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
>> PAE is only useful on 32 bit systems as X64 can access the memory
>> directly
>> and does not require it. With SQL2000 Std you will only ever be able to
>> use
>> 2GB max. So why bother going thru these motions? Most of the 8GB is
>> wasted
>> and you will reap none of the benefits of X64 in this state. I highly
>> recommend you upgrade to SQL2005 Std X64 edition otherwise this is most
>> likely a waste of your time.
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>> Solid Quality Mentors
>>
>> "thejamie" <thejamie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:B1414628-6F34-46A7-83B8-6E8EFB4241F9@.microsoft.com...
>> > Running Standard Edition SQL 2000 on Advanced Server with PAE enabled
>> > in
>> > the
>> > boot ini (8 gig ram on Adv Svr but only two allocates for Standard)
>> > System is migrating to a 64 bit Advanced Server with 8 GIG RAM... also
>> > Standard Edition SQL 2000 which as we know well, can access only first
>> > two
>> > GIG of RAM thus, I think, AWE is completely out of the question.
>> >
>> > Is it necessary to enable PAE on the 2003 server? Are there issues
>> > that
>> > should be considered for the 64 bit server running SQL 2000 that are
>> > different from an instance running on Advanced Server 2000?
>> > --
>> > Regards,
>> > Jamie
>> > BOL
>> > Configuration -Enabling AWE Memory for SQL Server (2000?)
>> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673.aspx
>> >
>> > Configuration -Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
>> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179301.aspx (2000?)
>> >
>> >
>>|||Definitely a case of fear paralysis. If they didn't NEED the performance
then it was just money sitting for nothing. But if they also had poor
performance then they could have actively been losing money due to the
slowness and that is when it is really a shame!!
--
Kevin G. Boles
TheSQLGuru
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"Ekrem Önsoy" <ekrem@.btegitim.com> wrote in message
news:2B1B5E4E-A07D-4D19-9D69-93F1E0C6ADA5@.microsoft.com...
>I experienced a worse scenario. Listen to this:
> I was setting up SQL Server Cluster on two DL580 of HPs with 4 Dual Core
> CPUs and 16GB of RAMs... Nice config, yea?
> There was a failed cluster node when we went to the scene. I mean, they
> were using their SQL Servers for about 6 months...
> Servers were x86 and non of the /PAE and AWE was being used. Even /3GB
> wasn't used.
> I went to the hospital's IT manager and told him about the situation. I
> told him you have 16GB of RAM on your servers and your SQL Servers are
> using only 2GB of RAM out of 16GB and the rest of it is just sitting for
> months. And guest what he said? He said, "I knew, but I didn't wanna touch
> it". Funny, huh?
> --
> Ekrem Önsoy
> http://www.ekremonsoy.net , http://ekremonsoy.blogspot.com
> MCBDA, MCITP:DBA, MCSD.Net, MCSE, MCBMSP, MCT
>
> "thejamie" <thejamie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B5A4ED33-8758-49C2-BFA3-5960066E5568@.microsoft.com...
>>A decision was made to wait for SP1 on SQL Server 2008. When that hits,
>>we
>> upgrade.
>> Meanwhile...
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Jamie
>>
>> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
>> PAE is only useful on 32 bit systems as X64 can access the memory
>> directly
>> and does not require it. With SQL2000 Std you will only ever be able to
>> use
>> 2GB max. So why bother going thru these motions? Most of the 8GB is
>> wasted
>> and you will reap none of the benefits of X64 in this state. I highly
>> recommend you upgrade to SQL2005 Std X64 edition otherwise this is most
>> likely a waste of your time.
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>> Solid Quality Mentors
>>
>> "thejamie" <thejamie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:B1414628-6F34-46A7-83B8-6E8EFB4241F9@.microsoft.com...
>> > Running Standard Edition SQL 2000 on Advanced Server with PAE enabled
>> > in
>> > the
>> > boot ini (8 gig ram on Adv Svr but only two allocates for Standard)
>> > System is migrating to a 64 bit Advanced Server with 8 GIG RAM... also
>> > Standard Edition SQL 2000 which as we know well, can access only first
>> > two
>> > GIG of RAM thus, I think, AWE is completely out of the question.
>> >
>> > Is it necessary to enable PAE on the 2003 server? Are there issues
>> > that
>> > should be considered for the 64 bit server running SQL 2000 that are
>> > different from an instance running on Advanced Server 2000?
>> > --
>> > Regards,
>> > Jamie
>> > BOL
>> > Configuration -Enabling AWE Memory for SQL Server (2000?)
>> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673.aspx
>> >
>> > Configuration -Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical
>> > Memory
>> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179301.aspx (2000?)
>> >
>> >
>>
>