Itanium vs Itanium 2

The 64 bit SQL Server version product blurb on the net specificaly reference
s the Itanium 2 processor. Are there any limitations to the original Itanium
? Obviously the Itanium servers are much cheaper to come by.
ThanksI agree with Joe. Don't buy a McKinley, make sure you get a Madison as they
are about twice as fast.
Andrew J. Kelly
SQL Server MVP
"joe chang" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2efa01c3e219$0ac15cd0$a301280a@.phx.gbl...[QUOTE]
> i would not waste time on the original itanium system no
> matter how cheap they are on ebay, unless you want a space
> heater
> i would not expect any better performance than a Pentium
> III Xeon 700MHz
>
> specificaly references the Itanium 2 processor. Are there
> any limitations to the original Itanium? Obviously the
> Itanium servers are much cheaper to come by.|||I had a discussion on that when I was @.IT FORUM.
Ofcourse 64 bit will perform better I fully agree, but most of the time
people just forget to optimize their databases, actually no one looks at how
their queries perform, how they can be optimized, especially when using some
customized ERP or CRM applications that used to have their own storage
engine and now support sql server as the backend storage
Regards,
Dandy Weyn
MCSE, MCSA, MCDBA, MCT
www.dandyman.net
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23zm%23QJj4DHA.2656@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

quote:

---

> I agree with Joe. Don't buy a McKinley, make sure you get a Madison as

---

they

quote:

---

> are about twice as fast.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly
> SQL Server MVP
>
> "joe chang" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:2efa01c3e219$0ac15cd0$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
>

---

Itanium vs Itanium 2

The 64 bit SQL Server version product blurb on the net specificaly references the Itanium 2 processor. Are there any limitations to the original Itanium? Obviously the Itanium servers are much cheaper to come by
Thanksi would not waste time on the original itanium system no
matter how cheap they are on ebay, unless you want a space
heater
i would not expect any better performance than a Pentium
III Xeon 700MHz
>--Original Message--
>The 64 bit SQL Server version product blurb on the net
specificaly references the Itanium 2 processor. Are there
any limitations to the original Itanium? Obviously the
Itanium servers are much cheaper to come by.
>Thanks
>.
>|||I agree with Joe. Don't buy a McKinley, make sure you get a Madison as they
are about twice as fast.
--
Andrew J. Kelly
SQL Server MVP
"joe chang" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2efa01c3e219$0ac15cd0$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> i would not waste time on the original itanium system no
> matter how cheap they are on ebay, unless you want a space
> heater
> i would not expect any better performance than a Pentium
> III Xeon 700MHz
> >--Original Message--
> >The 64 bit SQL Server version product blurb on the net
> specificaly references the Itanium 2 processor. Are there
> any limitations to the original Itanium? Obviously the
> Itanium servers are much cheaper to come by.
> >
> >Thanks
> >.
> >|||I had a discussion on that when I was @.IT FORUM.
Ofcourse 64 bit will perform better I fully agree, but most of the time
people just forget to optimize their databases, actually no one looks at how
their queries perform, how they can be optimized, especially when using some
customized ERP or CRM applications that used to have their own storage
engine and now support sql server as the backend storage
Regards,
Dandy Weyn
MCSE, MCSA, MCDBA, MCT
www.dandyman.net
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23zm%23QJj4DHA.2656@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> I agree with Joe. Don't buy a McKinley, make sure you get a Madison as
they
> are about twice as fast.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly
> SQL Server MVP
>
> "joe chang" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:2efa01c3e219$0ac15cd0$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> > i would not waste time on the original itanium system no
> > matter how cheap they are on ebay, unless you want a space
> > heater
> > i would not expect any better performance than a Pentium
> > III Xeon 700MHz
> >
> > >--Original Message--
> > >The 64 bit SQL Server version product blurb on the net
> > specificaly references the Itanium 2 processor. Are there
> > any limitations to the original Itanium? Obviously the
> > Itanium servers are much cheaper to come by.
> > >
> > >Thanks
> > >.
> > >
>sql

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

It's a computed column processing bug?

Hello everybody!

I have question about indexed and not indexed Persisted columns on sql server 2005. It's a bug?

First?, my version of SQL Server is

Microsoft SQL Server 2005 - 9.00.3186.00 (Intel X86) Aug 11 2007 03:13:58 Copyright (c) 1988-2005 Microsoft Corporation Developer Edition on Windows NT 5.1 (Build 2600: Service Pack 2)

Now I create two tables and try four select queries:

Code Snippet

SET ANSI_NULLS ON

SET ANSI_PADDING ON

SET ANSI_WARNINGS ON

SET ARITHABORT ON

SET CONCAT_NULL_YIELDS_NULL ON

SET NUMERIC_ROUNDABORT OFF

SET QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON

GO

create table t1 (id int primary key, id_bigint as cast(id as bigint))

GO

create table t2 (id int primary key, id_bigint as cast(id as bigint) persisted)

GO

select * from t1 -- (1)

-- Clustered index scan with two times Compute Scalar

GO

select * from t2 -- (2)

-- Clustered index scan with one times Compute Scalar

GO

create index IX_t2 on t2 (id_bigint)

GO

select * from t2 -- (3)

-- Index Scan with one times Compute Scalar

GO

select * from t2 where id_bigint = 0 -- (4)

-- Index Seek with one times Compute Scalar

GO

drop table t1

GO

drop table t2

GO

SET ANSI_PADDING OFF

1. I don't understand why access to computed column raise scalar computation wto times?

2. I don't understand why access to persisted computed column raise any scalar computation?

3. I don't understand why access to persisted computed column over index required any scalar computations?

Can anyone from Microsoft SQL Server Team told me about this mistake?

It's a BUG or I incorrect understand value of the "PERSISTED" word?

--

Thanks with avanced.

WBR, Roman S. Golubin

grominc[at]gmail.com

Bug request on SQL Server 2005 Feedback for this icident.

To solve this problem while Microsoft SQL Server Team not fix this bug, use update with triggers instead persisted computed columns.

--

WBR, Roman S. Golubin

73! GL! RA1OGE/3

|||

It works.

Use 'WITH SCHEMABINDING'

Courtesy of Kent Tegels!

It's a computed column processing bug?

Hello everybody!

I have question about indexed and not indexed Persisted columns on sql server 2005. It's a bug?

First?, my version of SQL Server is

Microsoft SQL Server 2005 - 9.00.3186.00 (Intel X86) Aug 11 2007 03:13:58 Copyright (c) 1988-2005 Microsoft Corporation Developer Edition on Windows NT 5.1 (Build 2600: Service Pack 2)

Now I create two tables and try four select queries:

Code Snippet

SET ANSI_NULLS ON

SET ANSI_PADDING ON

SET ANSI_WARNINGS ON

SET ARITHABORT ON

SET CONCAT_NULL_YIELDS_NULL ON

SET NUMERIC_ROUNDABORT OFF

SET QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON

GO

create table t1 (id int primary key, id_bigint as cast(id as bigint))

GO

create table t2 (id int primary key, id_bigint as cast(id as bigint) persisted)

GO

select * from t1 -- (1)

-- Clustered index scan with two times Compute Scalar

GO

select * from t2 -- (2)

-- Clustered index scan with one times Compute Scalar

GO

create index IX_t2 on t2 (id_bigint)

GO

select * from t2 -- (3)

-- Index Scan with one times Compute Scalar

GO

select * from t2 where id_bigint = 0 -- (4)

-- Index Seek with one times Compute Scalar

GO

drop table t1

GO

drop table t2

GO

SET ANSI_PADDING OFF

1. I don't understand why access to computed column raise scalar computation wto times?

2. I don't understand why access to persisted computed column raise any scalar computation?

3. I don't understand why access to persisted computed column over index required any scalar computations?

Can anyone from Microsoft SQL Server Team told me about this mistake?

It's a BUG or I incorrect understand value of the "PERSISTED" word?

--

Thanks with avanced.

WBR, Roman S. Golubin

grominc[at]gmail.com

Bug request on SQL Server 2005 Feedback for this icident.

To solve this problem while Microsoft SQL Server Team not fix this bug, use update with triggers instead persisted computed columns.

--

WBR, Roman S. Golubin

73! GL! RA1OGE/3

|||

It works.

Use 'WITH SCHEMABINDING'

Courtesy of Kent Tegels!

Issues with 2000 SP4 Upgrade.

I have two servers now, which I am getting the same issue. The servers are
Windows 2000 O/S. The SQL Servers were at 760 version. The setup gets
through copying files and then says "Initializing Server for Upgrade". I se
e
that the server starts but nothing happens......Hi
What does your log file "sqlsp.log" in your c:\windows or c:\winnt directory
say ?
--
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/
"Tom" <Tom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:996FEBDC-FC3B-4FEF-A052-E764A080E419@.microsoft.com...
>I have two servers now, which I am getting the same issue. The servers are
> Windows 2000 O/S. The SQL Servers were at 760 version. The setup gets
> through copying files and then says "Initializing Server for Upgrade". I
> see
> that the server starts but nothing happens......
>
>|||Here is the last portion of the log.
....
....
14:03:17 End Action: CreateRegistrySetSQL
14:03:17 Begin Action: RegWriteSetupEntry
14:03:17 End Action: RegWriteSetupEntry
14:03:17 *** Unable to get RegisteredOwner to apply to Serial number
14:03:17 Begin Action: CreateSer
14:03:17 End Action: CreateSer
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for C:\WINNT\setup.iss returned: 0, 0
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for C:\WINNT\sqlsp.log returned: 0, 0
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for returned: 3, 3
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for C:\WINNT\sqlsp.log returned: 0, 0
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for C:\WINNT\sqlstp.log returned: 0, 0
14:03:17 SetFileSecPerfAndLogUsers for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL\Binn\SQLCTR80.DLL returned: 1332, 1332
14:03:17 Begin ServPriv (MSSQLSERVER)
14:03:17 End ServPriv()
14:03:18 Upgrading databases
14:03:18 Upgrading databases on instance 'MSSQLSERVER'
14:03:18 C:\DOCUME~1\SQL_SE~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\2\Sql
Setup\Bin\scm.exe -Silent
1 -Action 6 -Service MSSQLSERVER
14:03:18 Process Exit Code: (0)
14:03:18 C:\DOCUME~1\SQL_SE~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\2\Sql
Setup\Bin\scm.exe -Silent
1 -Action 6 -Service MSSQLSERVER
14:03:18 Process Exit Code: (0)
14:03:18 C:\DOCUME~1\SQL_SE~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\2\Sql
Setup\Bin\scm.exe -Silent
1 -Action 1 -Service MSSQLSERVER -StartupOptions \-T4022 \-T4010 \-m
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:

> Hi
> What does your log file "sqlsp.log" in your c:\windows or c:\winnt directo
ry
> say ?
> --
> --
> 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/
> "Tom" <Tom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:996FEBDC-FC3B-4FEF-A052-E764A080E419@.microsoft.com...
>
>

Issues with 2000 SP4 Upgrade.

I have two servers now, which I am getting the same issue. The servers are
Windows 2000 O/S. The SQL Servers were at 760 version. The setup gets
through copying files and then says "Initializing Server for Upgrade". I see
that the server starts but nothing happens......
Hi
What does your log file "sqlsp.log" in your c:\windows or c:\winnt directory
say ?
--
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/
"Tom" <Tom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:996FEBDC-FC3B-4FEF-A052-E764A080E419@.microsoft.com...
>I have two servers now, which I am getting the same issue. The servers are
> Windows 2000 O/S. The SQL Servers were at 760 version. The setup gets
> through copying files and then says "Initializing Server for Upgrade". I
> see
> that the server starts but nothing happens......
>
>
|||Here is the last portion of the log.
.....
.....
14:03:17 End Action: CreateRegistrySetSQL
14:03:17 Begin Action: RegWriteSetupEntry
14:03:17 End Action: RegWriteSetupEntry
14:03:17 *** Unable to get RegisteredOwner to apply to Serial number
14:03:17 Begin Action: CreateSer
14:03:17 End Action: CreateSer
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for C:\WINNT\setup.iss returned: 0, 0
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for C:\WINNT\sqlsp.log returned: 0, 0
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for returned: 3, 3
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for C:\WINNT\sqlsp.log returned: 0, 0
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for C:\WINNT\sqlstp.log returned: 0, 0
14:03:17 SetFileSecPerfAndLogUsers for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL\Binn\SQLCTR80.DLL returned: 1332, 1332
14:03:17 Begin ServPriv (MSSQLSERVER)
14:03:17 End ServPriv()
14:03:18 Upgrading databases
14:03:18 Upgrading databases on instance 'MSSQLSERVER'
14:03:18 C:\DOCUME~1\SQL_SE~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\2\SqlSetup\Bin\ scm.exe -Silent
1 -Action 6 -Service MSSQLSERVER
14:03:18 Process Exit Code: (0)
14:03:18 C:\DOCUME~1\SQL_SE~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\2\SqlSetup\Bin\ scm.exe -Silent
1 -Action 6 -Service MSSQLSERVER
14:03:18 Process Exit Code: (0)
14:03:18 C:\DOCUME~1\SQL_SE~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\2\SqlSetup\Bin\ scm.exe -Silent
1 -Action 1 -Service MSSQLSERVER -StartupOptions \-T4022 \-T4010 \-m
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:

> Hi
> What does your log file "sqlsp.log" in your c:\windows or c:\winnt directory
> say ?
> --
> --
> 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/
> "Tom" <Tom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:996FEBDC-FC3B-4FEF-A052-E764A080E419@.microsoft.com...
>
>

Issues with 2000 SP4 Upgrade.

I have two servers now, which I am getting the same issue. The servers are
Windows 2000 O/S. The SQL Servers were at 760 version. The setup gets
through copying files and then says "Initializing Server for Upgrade". I see
that the server starts but nothing happens......Hi
What does your log file "sqlsp.log" in your c:\windows or c:\winnt directory
say ?
--
--
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/
"Tom" <Tom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:996FEBDC-FC3B-4FEF-A052-E764A080E419@.microsoft.com...
>I have two servers now, which I am getting the same issue. The servers are
> Windows 2000 O/S. The SQL Servers were at 760 version. The setup gets
> through copying files and then says "Initializing Server for Upgrade". I
> see
> that the server starts but nothing happens......
>
>|||Here is the last portion of the log.
....
....
14:03:17 End Action: CreateRegistrySetSQL
14:03:17 Begin Action: RegWriteSetupEntry
14:03:17 End Action: RegWriteSetupEntry
14:03:17 *** Unable to get RegisteredOwner to apply to Serial number
14:03:17 Begin Action: CreateSer
14:03:17 End Action: CreateSer
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for C:\WINNT\setup.iss returned: 0, 0
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for C:\WINNT\sqlsp.log returned: 0, 0
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for returned: 3, 3
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for C:\WINNT\sqlsp.log returned: 0, 0
14:03:17 SetFileSecuritySQLAndAdmin for C:\WINNT\sqlstp.log returned: 0, 0
14:03:17 SetFileSecPerfAndLogUsers for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL\Binn\SQLCTR80.DLL returned: 1332, 1332
14:03:17 Begin ServPriv (MSSQLSERVER)
14:03:17 End ServPriv()
14:03:18 Upgrading databases
14:03:18 Upgrading databases on instance 'MSSQLSERVER'
14:03:18 C:\DOCUME~1\SQL_SE~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\2\SqlSetup\Bin\scm.exe -Silent
1 -Action 6 -Service MSSQLSERVER
14:03:18 Process Exit Code: (0)
14:03:18 C:\DOCUME~1\SQL_SE~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\2\SqlSetup\Bin\scm.exe -Silent
1 -Action 6 -Service MSSQLSERVER
14:03:18 Process Exit Code: (0)
14:03:18 C:\DOCUME~1\SQL_SE~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\2\SqlSetup\Bin\scm.exe -Silent
1 -Action 1 -Service MSSQLSERVER -StartupOptions \-T4022 \-T4010 \-m
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
> Hi
> What does your log file "sqlsp.log" in your c:\windows or c:\winnt directory
> say ?
> --
> --
> 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/
> "Tom" <Tom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:996FEBDC-FC3B-4FEF-A052-E764A080E419@.microsoft.com...
> >I have two servers now, which I am getting the same issue. The servers are
> > Windows 2000 O/S. The SQL Servers were at 760 version. The setup gets
> > through copying files and then says "Initializing Server for Upgrade". I
> > see
> > that the server starts but nothing happens......
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Issue with identity column in a view

Thanks a lot, Greg!

Well, I have another question.

In SQL-2005, till SP2 version, there is a bug, dialed with treating an identity column in a view as an ordinary int column, when the compatibility verison of the DB is set to 80: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/920974

In SQL Server 2005 Express Edition CTP (since version 9.00.3027), which is available to download from Microsoft site, this bug was fixed.

Please tell if you know, how can I get an evaluation copy of any other edition of this version, where merge publication feature could be tested?

Creating a new thread since your question is a new topic.

This issue is fixed in the latest SQL Server 2005 SP2 CTP, you can access it and read about the fixes here: http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1055809&SiteID=1.

isqlw won't start

Hi there,

I tried to install MS SQL Server 2000 on my desktop computer after
uninstalling a version 7 instance. Everything worked fine. Using
Enterprise Manager I can manage databases and the database enginge itself.

My problem is now, that ISQLW.exe, i.e Query Analayzer won't start. The
taskmanager shows a process isqlw.exe but nothing happens. MSSQL Log
files give no hints, neither does the Windows 2000 event log.

I assume a problem with the previously installed MSSQL7 version, but
walked through the registry as well.

Are there any hints why isqlw doesn't want to speak to me?

Thanks,
AndreAndre Ma@.ss schrieb:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Are there any hints why isqlw doesn't want to speak to me?

Meanwhile I have solved the problem. I have installed SP3 and have
repaired the registry entries. After that Query Analyzer worked fine.

Thanks,
Andre|||Andre Ma@.ss (Samweis11@.gmx.de) writes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

I tried to install MS SQL Server 2000 on my desktop computer after
uninstalling a version 7 instance. Everything worked fine. Using
Enterprise Manager I can manage databases and the database enginge itself.
>
My problem is now, that ISQLW.exe, i.e Query Analayzer won't start. The
taskmanager shows a process isqlw.exe but nothing happens. MSSQL Log
files give no hints, neither does the Windows 2000 event log.
>
I assume a problem with the previously installed MSSQL7 version, but
walked through the registry as well.
>
Are there any hints why isqlw doesn't want to speak to me?

Tried rebooting? More importantly, have you installed any service pack
for SQL 2000? You should install at least SP3, but there is an SP4 as
well. There is a serious security threat in SQL 2000 RTM which is fixed
in SP3. (The Slammer worm.)

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodin...ions/books.mspx