Help with update forms: running

Showing posts with label running. Show all posts

Friday, March 30, 2012

HELP!!! Can not restore database from only back up I have

I had to transfer my database from one server to another. Both are running SQL 2000. I backed the database up and moved it to the new server however when I try to do a restore I get the following message:

The media set for database "xxx' has 2 family members but only 1 are provided. RESTORE DATABASE is terminating abnormally.

I did some searching and found a couple of posts that mentioned something about the back up including 2 files.

My problem is that the machine I backed this up from crashed when it was shut down and would not reboot so all of the data and the original database do not exist. Is there any hope of restoring this database. It is pretty critical.

Thanks,

Melissa :-)

Do "restore filelistonly from <backup_device>" to see what is in the backup device. Also, please post the "restore" command here so we can see what's going on.|||When you say "My problem is that the machine I backed this up from crashed when it was shut down and would not reboot so all of the data and the original database do not exist" - can you pull the drive that contained the original databases out of the machine and add it to the new one? (I'm assuming from your description that the database is on a DAS drive rather than a SAN)|||

I wish. The administrator who was trying to get the machine to boot determined it was beyond help and reformatted the drive and installed a new operating system on it. So all is lost.

Melissa : -(

|||

Ok here is the results from the restore filelistonly we ran:

LiveStats.XSP

C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data\LiveStats.XSP.mdf D PRIMARY 1188560896 35184372080640 LiveStats.XSP_log

C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data\LiveStats.XSP_log.LDF L NULL 13623296 35184372080640

I just did the restore from the menu.

|||Can you post the restore command you're using please?|||

I am using the restore wizard. Right clicking on the blank database (I also tried restoring without creating a blank database) Selecting Restore. Then I select From Device>>>browse to the location the back up file is>>>Restore backup set...database complete and I am not changing anything under the options tab.

Melissa :-)

|||

Please! Please! Please! tell me there is a way to restore this database. It is the only copy I have of webstats for almost 100 clients for the past year. The raw files were on the same hard drive that got wiped out.

Melissa :-)

|||

What happens when you run this (directly through a client connection, not from any wizard):

restore database LiveStats.XSP from <backupdevice>

|||Server: Msg 3132, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
The media set for database 'LiveStatsXSP' has 2 family members but only 1 are provided. All members must be provided.
Server: Msg 3013, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
RESTORE DATABASE is terminating abnormally.|||

Greetings.

It looks as if there is more to the backup than the one file which you are specifying.

Is there a chance that your backup produced more than one file, and that you still have access to both?

The command RESTORE LABELONLY FROM <backup_device> will tell us more about the mackup media.

|||

Here are the results from the Restore Label Only

NULL {525AA069-12A6-4E37-92CF-737C4FD9E4E2} 2 2 {F9E38D61-0000-0000-0000-000000000000} 1 0 NULL Microsoft SQL Server 4608 2006-06-30 16:42:25.000

Unfortunately that is the only file that was zipped up and moved to the new server. :-(

|||

That error tells us that when the backup was done, it was a striped backup, so the data was written to two different files in alternating stripes similar to the way a striped disk works. That means that we have to find that other file for us to have any chance of restoring the database.

The good news is that it is highly likely to be in the same location as the first backup file that you're using to restore.

The bad news is that without that other file, we cannot restore the database. Do you have ANY other copies of the backup anywhere? Even a system backup might be helpful.

|||Wow. Allowing the user to stripe across two devices is so risky. I was hoping to use a dummy striped member but it looks like you have the GUID set for each mediaset. Thus, the restore still fails. Another suggestion

, make it like RAID-5. Only allow striping across 3 or more devices.|||

I had a feeling the news was not going to be good. It sounds like I am pretty much out of luck.I can not find a back up of that data anywhere.

I guess some lessons are just more painful to learn than others. If there is anything else I can try please let me know.

Melissa

sql

HELP!!! Can not restore database from only back up I have

The media set for database "xxx' has 2 family members but only 1 are provided. RESTORE DATABASE is terminating abnormally.

I did some searching and found a couple of posts that mentioned something about the back up including 2 files.

Thanks,

Melissa :-)

I wish. The administrator who was trying to get the machine to boot determined it was beyond help and reformatted the drive and installed a new operating system on it. So all is lost.

Melissa : -(

|||

Ok here is the results from the restore filelistonly we ran:

LiveStats.XSP

C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data\LiveStats.XSP.mdf D PRIMARY 1188560896 35184372080640 LiveStats.XSP_log

C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data\LiveStats.XSP_log.LDF L NULL 13623296 35184372080640

I just did the restore from the menu.

|||Can you post the restore command you're using please?|||

Melissa :-)

|||

Melissa :-)

|||

What happens when you run this (directly through a client connection, not from any wizard):

restore database LiveStats.XSP from <backupdevice>

Greetings.

It looks as if there is more to the backup than the one file which you are specifying.

Is there a chance that your backup produced more than one file, and that you still have access to both?

The command RESTORE LABELONLY FROM <backup_device> will tell us more about the mackup media.

|||

Here are the results from the Restore Label Only

NULL {525AA069-12A6-4E37-92CF-737C4FD9E4E2} 2 2 {F9E38D61-0000-0000-0000-000000000000} 1 0 NULL Microsoft SQL Server 4608 2006-06-30 16:42:25.000

Unfortunately that is the only file that was zipped up and moved to the new server. :-(

|||

The good news is that it is highly likely to be in the same location as the first backup file that you're using to restore.

The bad news is that without that other file, we cannot restore the database. Do you have ANY other copies of the backup anywhere? Even a system backup might be helpful.

, make it like RAID-5. Only allow striping across 3 or more devices.|||

I had a feeling the news was not going to be good. It sounds like I am pretty much out of luck.I can not find a back up of that data anywhere.

I guess some lessons are just more painful to learn than others. If there is anything else I can try please let me know.

Melissa

Help!! Need to get the MSDASQL provider in SQL 2005 EE 64 bit

I understand that the MSDASQL.dll is not available in 64 bit (unless you are running 2008 beta 3). I also understand that you can setup 32 bit ODBC without issues (using ODBCAD32.exe in WOW directory). My issue is how does SQL 2005 64 bit see these ODBC links? What is everyone doing to get around this? I want to be able to use openquery. Any advice would be much appreciated.

Carlton

I have also tried using the IBMDADB2 provider but im getting an interesting message of access denied.

sp_addlinkedserver @.server = N'name', @.srvproduct=N'sourcename', @.provider=N'IBMDADB2', @.provstr=N'DSN=sourcename'

Error using a select statement

SELECT *

FROM OPENQUERY (Name,'SELECT * FROM Database.table')

Msg 7399, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

The OLE DB provider "IBMDADB2" for linked server "sourcename" reported an error. Access denied.

Msg 7350, Level 16, State 2, Line 1

Cannot get the column information from OLE DB provider "IBMDADB2" for linked server "sourcename".

Help!! Need to get the MSDASQL provider in SQL 2005 EE 64 bit

Carlton

I have also tried using the IBMDADB2 provider but im getting an interesting message of access denied.

sp_addlinkedserver @.server = N'name', @.srvproduct=N'sourcename', @.provider=N'IBMDADB2', @.provstr=N'DSN=sourcename'

Error using a select statement

SELECT *

FROM OPENQUERY (Name,'SELECT * FROM Database.table')

Msg 7399, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

The OLE DB provider "IBMDADB2" for linked server "sourcename" reported an error. Access denied.

Msg 7350, Level 16, State 2, Line 1

Cannot get the column information from OLE DB provider "IBMDADB2" for linked server "sourcename".

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

HELP! Transaction Log is huge

Hi all,
I have an SQL2000 running on a W2K server. The mdf file is about 140MB but
the ldf shows over 11GB. I ran backups. The full DB backup is 138MB and the
Transaction log backup right after is 126MB. I tried shrinking and
everything else I could think of. I even deleted the DB and restored it from
a full DB backup. The ldf still comes up with 11GB. I have another
installation of the same database on another server where the ldf shows a
normal size (40MB).
Can anybody tell me what is going on? During the restore I moved the data
files to another disk that has lots of space but there is something wrong
here and I would like to get to the bottom of it.
Thanks for your help,
ClausHi, what is your recovery set too. If it is set to "Full" you need to do a
translog backup, and truncate after.
If you set it to simple, it will checkpoint and keep the log resonable.
Try backup log (database) with truncate_only
Then shrink the log file.
"cjobes" wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have an SQL2000 running on a W2K server. The mdf file is about 140MB but
> the ldf shows over 11GB. I ran backups. The full DB backup is 138MB and the
> Transaction log backup right after is 126MB. I tried shrinking and
> everything else I could think of. I even deleted the DB and restored it from
> a full DB backup. The ldf still comes up with 11GB. I have another
> installation of the same database on another server where the ldf shows a
> normal size (40MB).
> Can anybody tell me what is going on? During the restore I moved the data
> files to another disk that has lots of space but there is something wrong
> here and I would like to get to the bottom of it.
> Thanks for your help,
> Claus
>
>|||I have it set to full because we do a daily backup and then hourly
transaction log backups. The one instance works as expected but the other
one has this 11GB ldf and I don't seem to be able to get it down.
Now after reading your advice I switched the db to simple, run a backup and
then shrank the log file. Now it's down to 0.5MB. My question is, shouldn't
it do that automatically when the full db backup runs with the option to
remove inactive entries from the transaction log?
Thanks for your help,
Claus
"robert_at_cbb" <robertatcbb@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CE6A255E-1443-41C5-BFEA-D366A848E3F9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi, what is your recovery set too. If it is set to "Full" you need to do a
> translog backup, and truncate after.
> If you set it to simple, it will checkpoint and keep the log resonable.
> Try backup log (database) with truncate_only
> Then shrink the log file.
>
> "cjobes" wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have an SQL2000 running on a W2K server. The mdf file is about 140MB
but
> > the ldf shows over 11GB. I ran backups. The full DB backup is 138MB and
the
> > Transaction log backup right after is 126MB. I tried shrinking and
> > everything else I could think of. I even deleted the DB and restored it
from
> > a full DB backup. The ldf still comes up with 11GB. I have another
> > installation of the same database on another server where the ldf shows
a
> > normal size (40MB).
> >
> > Can anybody tell me what is going on? During the restore I moved the
data
> > files to another disk that has lots of space but there is something
wrong
> > here and I would like to get to the bottom of it.
> >
> > Thanks for your help,
> >
> > Claus
> >
> >
> >|||Hi,
As soon as you run the trasnaction log backup the inactive entries of
transaction log will be cleared. But the physcal file will not get shrink
automatically until or unless you enable to database option "AUTO_SHRINK".
Turning on this option in a production server is not recommended.
Because auto shrinking will reduce the performance.
To avoid this after the transaction log backup you could do a DBCC
SHRINKFILE (refer books online) on the LDF file frequently
(Daily or weekly once.. based on the LDF growth) to reduce the LDF file
size.
DBCC SQLPERF(LOGSPACE)
will give you the exact file size and usage
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"cjobes" <cjobes@.nova-tech.org> wrote in message
news:uReKjIYhEHA.3992@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> I have it set to full because we do a daily backup and then hourly
> transaction log backups. The one instance works as expected but the other
> one has this 11GB ldf and I don't seem to be able to get it down.
> Now after reading your advice I switched the db to simple, run a backup
and
> then shrank the log file. Now it's down to 0.5MB. My question is,
shouldn't
> it do that automatically when the full db backup runs with the option to
> remove inactive entries from the transaction log?
> Thanks for your help,
> Claus
>
> "robert_at_cbb" <robertatcbb@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:CE6A255E-1443-41C5-BFEA-D366A848E3F9@.microsoft.com...
> > Hi, what is your recovery set too. If it is set to "Full" you need to do
a
> > translog backup, and truncate after.
> >
> > If you set it to simple, it will checkpoint and keep the log resonable.
> >
> > Try backup log (database) with truncate_only
> >
> > Then shrink the log file.
> >
> >
> > "cjobes" wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I have an SQL2000 running on a W2K server. The mdf file is about 140MB
> but
> > > the ldf shows over 11GB. I ran backups. The full DB backup is 138MB
and
> the
> > > Transaction log backup right after is 126MB. I tried shrinking and
> > > everything else I could think of. I even deleted the DB and restored
it
> from
> > > a full DB backup. The ldf still comes up with 11GB. I have another
> > > installation of the same database on another server where the ldf
shows
> a
> > > normal size (40MB).
> > >
> > > Can anybody tell me what is going on? During the restore I moved the
> data
> > > files to another disk that has lots of space but there is something
> wrong
> > > here and I would like to get to the bottom of it.
> > >
> > > Thanks for your help,
> > >
> > > Claus
> > >
> > >
> > >
>|||Thanks for the helpful advice. I will keep an eye on this.
Claus
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eWRTv$ZhEHA.2624@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> As soon as you run the trasnaction log backup the inactive entries of
> transaction log will be cleared. But the physcal file will not get shrink
> automatically until or unless you enable to database option "AUTO_SHRINK".
> Turning on this option in a production server is not recommended.
> Because auto shrinking will reduce the performance.
> To avoid this after the transaction log backup you could do a DBCC
> SHRINKFILE (refer books online) on the LDF file frequently
> (Daily or weekly once.. based on the LDF growth) to reduce the LDF file
> size.
> DBCC SQLPERF(LOGSPACE)
> will give you the exact file size and usage
> Thanks
> Hari
> MCDBA
>
> "cjobes" <cjobes@.nova-tech.org> wrote in message
> news:uReKjIYhEHA.3992@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > I have it set to full because we do a daily backup and then hourly
> > transaction log backups. The one instance works as expected but the
other
> > one has this 11GB ldf and I don't seem to be able to get it down.
> >
> > Now after reading your advice I switched the db to simple, run a backup
> and
> > then shrank the log file. Now it's down to 0.5MB. My question is,
> shouldn't
> > it do that automatically when the full db backup runs with the option to
> > remove inactive entries from the transaction log?
> >
> > Thanks for your help,
> >
> > Claus
> >
> >
> > "robert_at_cbb" <robertatcbb@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:CE6A255E-1443-41C5-BFEA-D366A848E3F9@.microsoft.com...
> > > Hi, what is your recovery set too. If it is set to "Full" you need to
do
> a
> > > translog backup, and truncate after.
> > >
> > > If you set it to simple, it will checkpoint and keep the log
resonable.
> > >
> > > Try backup log (database) with truncate_only
> > >
> > > Then shrink the log file.
> > >
> > >
> > > "cjobes" wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I have an SQL2000 running on a W2K server. The mdf file is about
140MB
> > but
> > > > the ldf shows over 11GB. I ran backups. The full DB backup is 138MB
> and
> > the
> > > > Transaction log backup right after is 126MB. I tried shrinking and
> > > > everything else I could think of. I even deleted the DB and restored
> it
> > from
> > > > a full DB backup. The ldf still comes up with 11GB. I have another
> > > > installation of the same database on another server where the ldf
> shows
> > a
> > > > normal size (40MB).
> > > >
> > > > Can anybody tell me what is going on? During the restore I moved the
> > data
> > > > files to another disk that has lots of space but there is something
> > wrong
> > > > here and I would like to get to the bottom of it.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your help,
> > > >
> > > > Claus
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
>|||I have the same problem with a client as you do. I did the backup and
shrink but the log file is still at 23gigs!
Where do I find the option to 'truncate' in the SQL Server Enterprise
Manager?
"robert_at_cbb" <robertatcbb@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CE6A255E-1443-41C5-BFEA-D366A848E3F9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi, what is your recovery set too. If it is set to "Full" you need to do a
> translog backup, and truncate after.
> If you set it to simple, it will checkpoint and keep the log resonable.
> Try backup log (database) with truncate_only
> Then shrink the log file.
>
> "cjobes" wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have an SQL2000 running on a W2K server. The mdf file is about 140MB
but
> > the ldf shows over 11GB. I ran backups. The full DB backup is 138MB and
the
> > Transaction log backup right after is 126MB. I tried shrinking and
> > everything else I could think of. I even deleted the DB and restored it
from
> > a full DB backup. The ldf still comes up with 11GB. I have another
> > installation of the same database on another server where the ldf shows
a
> > normal size (40MB).
> >
> > Can anybody tell me what is going on? During the restore I moved the
data
> > files to another disk that has lots of space but there is something
wrong
> > here and I would like to get to the bottom of it.
> >
> > Thanks for your help,
> >
> > Claus
> >
> >
> >|||You have to do it in the analyzer
backup log "database" with truncate_only
You can also add it as a task in a job.
"Dean Penderghast" wrote:
> I have the same problem with a client as you do. I did the backup and
> shrink but the log file is still at 23gigs!
> Where do I find the option to 'truncate' in the SQL Server Enterprise
> Manager?
> "robert_at_cbb" <robertatcbb@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:CE6A255E-1443-41C5-BFEA-D366A848E3F9@.microsoft.com...
> > Hi, what is your recovery set too. If it is set to "Full" you need to do a
> > translog backup, and truncate after.
> >
> > If you set it to simple, it will checkpoint and keep the log resonable.
> >
> > Try backup log (database) with truncate_only
> >
> > Then shrink the log file.
> >
> >
> > "cjobes" wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I have an SQL2000 running on a W2K server. The mdf file is about 140MB
> but
> > > the ldf shows over 11GB. I ran backups. The full DB backup is 138MB and
> the
> > > Transaction log backup right after is 126MB. I tried shrinking and
> > > everything else I could think of. I even deleted the DB and restored it
> from
> > > a full DB backup. The ldf still comes up with 11GB. I have another
> > > installation of the same database on another server where the ldf shows
> a
> > > normal size (40MB).
> > >
> > > Can anybody tell me what is going on? During the restore I moved the
> data
> > > files to another disk that has lots of space but there is something
> wrong
> > > here and I would like to get to the bottom of it.
> > >
> > > Thanks for your help,
> > >
> > > Claus
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>|||I did that and the log file is still 23 gigs in size. I've done a full
transaction backup and tried to resize the file and still can't get it to
shrink. Am I missing something simple here?
Dean Penderghast
"robert_at_cbb" <robertatcbb@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DF200740-7079-472C-8D0B-563ECC3FBBFD@.microsoft.com...
> You have to do it in the analyzer
> backup log "database" with truncate_only
> You can also add it as a task in a job.
> "Dean Penderghast" wrote:
> > I have the same problem with a client as you do. I did the backup and
> > shrink but the log file is still at 23gigs!
> >
> > Where do I find the option to 'truncate' in the SQL Server Enterprise
> > Manager?
> >
> > "robert_at_cbb" <robertatcbb@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:CE6A255E-1443-41C5-BFEA-D366A848E3F9@.microsoft.com...
> > > Hi, what is your recovery set too. If it is set to "Full" you need to
do a
> > > translog backup, and truncate after.
> > >
> > > If you set it to simple, it will checkpoint and keep the log
resonable.
> > >
> > > Try backup log (database) with truncate_only
> > >
> > > Then shrink the log file.
> > >
> > >
> > > "cjobes" wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I have an SQL2000 running on a W2K server. The mdf file is about
140MB
> > but
> > > > the ldf shows over 11GB. I ran backups. The full DB backup is 138MB
and
> > the
> > > > Transaction log backup right after is 126MB. I tried shrinking and
> > > > everything else I could think of. I even deleted the DB and restored
it
> > from
> > > > a full DB backup. The ldf still comes up with 11GB. I have another
> > > > installation of the same database on another server where the ldf
shows
> > a
> > > > normal size (40MB).
> > > >
> > > > Can anybody tell me what is going on? During the restore I moved the
> > data
> > > > files to another disk that has lots of space but there is something
> > wrong
> > > > here and I would like to get to the bottom of it.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your help,
> > > >
> > > > Claus
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >sql

Monday, March 26, 2012

HELP! SQL Server Agent not working.

I was wondering if someone would be so kind as to tell me if i'm
missing something or just plain dumb:
I am running a 2000 Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Enterprise SP3. I
changed the SQL SERVER SERVICE account to use a Local NT User account
with no enhanced privileges standard user and another account with the
same level of permissions for the SQL SERVER AGENT.
Both services start fine and I configured the SQL server to start using
the service account thru enterprise manager. As well as the
configuration for SQL SERVER AGENT was also done in Enterprise Manager.
The file system and Program files directories are configured with the
default ACL's. There is no GPO dictating who has the "log on as service
right" and both accounts (SERVER & AGENT) have the sysadmin role in
SQL.
HOWEVER: whenever I try to run a job thru SQL SERVER AGENT it does not
run and i get a message stating that the service is not running. This
message dissapears as soon as i make the accounts members of the local
administrators group.
Would there be any way to run these 2 services under the local USER
permissions and have the jobs execute sucessfully?
ANY HELP would be appreciated. I have been doing research for more than
5 days now and can't seem to find an answer.
THANks!
Miguel A. Escalante, MCSEIs the error actually:
Error 22022: SQLServerAgent is not currently running so it
cannot be notified of this action.
Some things to check - Are you running SQL Server in fiber
mode (lightweight pooling)? Have you ensured that SQL Agent
is truly running and not hung up in a starting status? Have
you checked your sqlagent.out file?
In addition to lightweight pooling being enabled, Agent can
also get hung up due to a bad mail profile.
-Sue
On 2 Nov 2005 20:13:15 -0800, miguel.a.escalante@.gmail.com
wrote:

>I was wondering if someone would be so kind as to tell me if i'm
>missing something or just plain dumb:
>I am running a 2000 Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Enterprise SP3. I
>changed the SQL SERVER SERVICE account to use a Local NT User account
>with no enhanced privileges standard user and another account with the
>same level of permissions for the SQL SERVER AGENT.
>Both services start fine and I configured the SQL server to start using
>the service account thru enterprise manager. As well as the
>configuration for SQL SERVER AGENT was also done in Enterprise Manager.
>
>The file system and Program files directories are configured with the
>default ACL's. There is no GPO dictating who has the "log on as service
>right" and both accounts (SERVER & AGENT) have the sysadmin role in
>SQL.
>HOWEVER: whenever I try to run a job thru SQL SERVER AGENT it does not
>run and i get a message stating that the service is not running. This
>message dissapears as soon as i make the accounts members of the local
>administrators group.
>Would there be any way to run these 2 services under the local USER
>permissions and have the jobs execute sucessfully?
>ANY HELP would be appreciated. I have been doing research for more than
>5 days now and can't seem to find an answer.
>THANks!
>Miguel A. Escalante, MCSEsql

Help! SQL Server 2000 extended stored procedure hangs in Windows 98

I am trying to run xp_cmdshell from the Query Analyzer using SQL
Server 2000 running on Windows 98.

It seems like it should be simple - I'm typing

xp_cmdshell 'dir *.exe'

in the Query Analyzer in the Master db. I'm logged in as sa.

The timer starts running and never stops. No error message.

Can anyone PLEASE help me with this? Any suggestions would be
appreciated. Are SQL Server 2000 extended stored procedures not
supported in Windows 98? I've tried searching the Knowledge Base but
can't find anything.

Thanks!sylmart7 (sylmart7@.aol.com) writes:
> I am trying to run xp_cmdshell from the Query Analyzer using SQL
> Server 2000 running on Windows 98.
> It seems like it should be simple - I'm typing
> xp_cmdshell 'dir *.exe'
> in the Query Analyzer in the Master db. I'm logged in as sa.
> The timer starts running and never stops. No error message.
> Can anyone PLEASE help me with this? Any suggestions would be
> appreciated. Are SQL Server 2000 extended stored procedures not
> supported in Windows 98? I've tried searching the Knowledge Base but
> can't find anything.

As I have no experience at all of Windows 98, I cannot really help. What
I can say, though, after having read the topic on xp_cmdshell in Books
Online is: yes, xp_cmdshell is supported on Win98. The article mentions
several restrictions with regards to security context and return value
on Win 98, so obviously you should be able to use it.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, sommar@.algonet.se

Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp

Help! SQL Mail

We have SQL mail set up and running for a while, recently we upgrade our
exchange from 2000 to 2003 (in same domain but different servers), and mail
client software is still Outlook 2000 in SQL Server box. I update the mail
profile to using new mail server. No we experience a problem when we tried to
send email from SQL server. Following is error message
xp_sendmail :failed with mail error 0x8004011d. SQL mail session started.
I tested sent email from outlook, it worked fine, and also tested in SQL
mail configuration page, it stopped and started email session fine. I also
tried re-boot server, still get that error. Does anyone know how to solve of
this issue?
ThanksZou,
Have you updated the SQL Mail profile in SQL Agent as well?
May be you have to cofigure sql mail and test it out there
"Yong Zou" wrote:
> We have SQL mail set up and running for a while, recently we upgrade our
> exchange from 2000 to 2003 (in same domain but different servers), and mail
> client software is still Outlook 2000 in SQL Server box. I update the mail
> profile to using new mail server. No we experience a problem when we tried to
> send email from SQL server. Following is error message
> xp_sendmail :failed with mail error 0x8004011d. SQL mail session started.
> I tested sent email from outlook, it worked fine, and also tested in SQL
> mail configuration page, it stopped and started email session fine. I also
> tried re-boot server, still get that error. Does anyone know how to solve of
> this issue?
> Thanks|||I tried to update SQL Mail profile in SQL Agent, and I got following error
when I click test
Error 22022: SQLServerAgent Error: Unable to get the default MAPI Message
Store due to MAPI error 285: The attempt to log on to the Microsoft Exchange
Server Computer has failed.
Again, I can send and receive emails using outlook 2000 in that box. Any
idea about this error
Thanks
Yong
"Rashmi Jagadish" <RashmiJagadish@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:77449052-536C-4A72-8A76-027A0842BE02@.microsoft.com...
> Zou,
> Have you updated the SQL Mail profile in SQL Agent as well?
> May be you have to cofigure sql mail and test it out there
>
> "Yong Zou" wrote:
> > We have SQL mail set up and running for a while, recently we upgrade our
> > exchange from 2000 to 2003 (in same domain but different servers), and
mail
> > client software is still Outlook 2000 in SQL Server box. I update the
mail
> > profile to using new mail server. No we experience a problem when we
tried to
> > send email from SQL server. Following is error message
> >
> > xp_sendmail :failed with mail error 0x8004011d. SQL mail session
started.
> >
> > I tested sent email from outlook, it worked fine, and also tested in SQL
> > mail configuration page, it stopped and started email session fine. I
also
> > tried re-boot server, still get that error. Does anyone know how to
solve of
> > this issue?
> >
> > Thanks|||The first error indicates that SQL Mail cannot logon to your
mail server with the information you have provided in your
mail profile. The second error on the test is the same
issue. The mail profiles aren't configured properly. You can
find information on configuring mail in the following
article:
INF: How to Configure SQL Mail
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=263556
-Sue
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 10:39:00 -0500, "Yong Zou
$SearchIgnite$" <yz@.yz.com> wrote:
>I tried to update SQL Mail profile in SQL Agent, and I got following error
>when I click test
>Error 22022: SQLServerAgent Error: Unable to get the default MAPI Message
>Store due to MAPI error 285: The attempt to log on to the Microsoft Exchange
>Server Computer has failed.
>Again, I can send and receive emails using outlook 2000 in that box. Any
>idea about this error
>Thanks
>Yong
>"Rashmi Jagadish" <RashmiJagadish@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>message news:77449052-536C-4A72-8A76-027A0842BE02@.microsoft.com...
>> Zou,
>> Have you updated the SQL Mail profile in SQL Agent as well?
>> May be you have to cofigure sql mail and test it out there
>>
>> "Yong Zou" wrote:
>> > We have SQL mail set up and running for a while, recently we upgrade our
>> > exchange from 2000 to 2003 (in same domain but different servers), and
>mail
>> > client software is still Outlook 2000 in SQL Server box. I update the
>mail
>> > profile to using new mail server. No we experience a problem when we
>tried to
>> > send email from SQL server. Following is error message
>> >
>> > xp_sendmail :failed with mail error 0x8004011d. SQL mail session
>started.
>> >
>> > I tested sent email from outlook, it worked fine, and also tested in SQL
>> > mail configuration page, it stopped and started email session fine. I
>also
>> > tried re-boot server, still get that error. Does anyone know how to
>solve of
>> > this issue?
>> >
>> > Thanks
>

Help! SQL Mail

We have SQL mail set up and running for a while, recently we upgrade our
exchange from 2000 to 2003 (in same domain but different servers), and mail
client software is still Outlook 2000 in SQL Server box. I update the mail
profile to using new mail server. No we experience a problem when we tried t
o
send email from SQL server. Following is error message
xp_sendmail :failed with mail error 0x8004011d. SQL mail session started.
I tested sent email from outlook, it worked fine, and also tested in SQL
mail configuration page, it stopped and started email session fine. I also
tried re-boot server, still get that error. Does anyone know how to solve of
this issue?
ThanksZou,
Have you updated the SQL Mail profile in SQL Agent as well?
May be you have to cofigure sql mail and test it out there
"Yong Zou" wrote:

> We have SQL mail set up and running for a while, recently we upgrade our
> exchange from 2000 to 2003 (in same domain but different servers), and mai
l
> client software is still Outlook 2000 in SQL Server box. I update the mail
> profile to using new mail server. No we experience a problem when we tried
to
> send email from SQL server. Following is error message
> xp_sendmail :failed with mail error 0x8004011d. SQL mail session started.
> I tested sent email from outlook, it worked fine, and also tested in SQL
> mail configuration page, it stopped and started email session fine. I also
> tried re-boot server, still get that error. Does anyone know how to solve
of
> this issue?
> Thanks|||I tried to update SQL Mail profile in SQL Agent, and I got following error
when I click test
Error 22022: SQLServerAgent Error: Unable to get the default MAPI Message
Store due to MAPI error 285: The attempt to log on to the Microsoft Exchange
Server Computer has failed.
Again, I can send and receive emails using outlook 2000 in that box. Any
idea about this error
Thanks
Yong
"Rashmi Jagadish" <RashmiJagadish@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:77449052-536C-4A72-8A76-027A0842BE02@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Zou,
> Have you updated the SQL Mail profile in SQL Agent as well?
> May be you have to cofigure sql mail and test it out there
>
> "Yong Zou" wrote:
>
mail[vbcol=seagreen]
mail[vbcol=seagreen]
tried to[vbcol=seagreen]
started.[vbcol=seagreen]
also[vbcol=seagreen]
solve of[vbcol=seagreen]|||The first error indicates that SQL Mail cannot logon to your
mail server with the information you have provided in your
mail profile. The second error on the test is the same
issue. The mail profiles aren't configured properly. You can
find information on configuring mail in the following
article:
INF: How to Configure SQL Mail
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=263556
-Sue
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 10:39:00 -0500, "Yong Zou
$SearchIgnite$" <yz@.yz.com> wrote:

>I tried to update SQL Mail profile in SQL Agent, and I got following error
>when I click test
>Error 22022: SQLServerAgent Error: Unable to get the default MAPI Message
>Store due to MAPI error 285: The attempt to log on to the Microsoft Exchang
e
>Server Computer has failed.
>Again, I can send and receive emails using outlook 2000 in that box. Any
>idea about this error
>Thanks
>Yong
>"Rashmi Jagadish" <RashmiJagadish@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>message news:77449052-536C-4A72-8A76-027A0842BE02@.microsoft.com...
>mail
>mail
>tried to
>started.
>also
>solve of
>

Help! SQL Mail

We have SQL mail set up and running for a while, recently we upgrade our
exchange from 2000 to 2003 (in same domain but different servers), and mail
client software is still Outlook 2000 in SQL Server box. I update the mail
profile to using new mail server. No we experience a problem when we tried to
send email from SQL server. Following is error message
xp_sendmail :failed with mail error 0x8004011d. SQL mail session started.
I tested sent email from outlook, it worked fine, and also tested in SQL
mail configuration page, it stopped and started email session fine. I also
tried re-boot server, still get that error. Does anyone know how to solve of
this issue?
Thanks
Zou,
Have you updated the SQL Mail profile in SQL Agent as well?
May be you have to cofigure sql mail and test it out there
"Yong Zou" wrote:

> We have SQL mail set up and running for a while, recently we upgrade our
> exchange from 2000 to 2003 (in same domain but different servers), and mail
> client software is still Outlook 2000 in SQL Server box. I update the mail
> profile to using new mail server. No we experience a problem when we tried to
> send email from SQL server. Following is error message
> xp_sendmail :failed with mail error 0x8004011d. SQL mail session started.
> I tested sent email from outlook, it worked fine, and also tested in SQL
> mail configuration page, it stopped and started email session fine. I also
> tried re-boot server, still get that error. Does anyone know how to solve of
> this issue?
> Thanks
|||I tried to update SQL Mail profile in SQL Agent, and I got following error
when I click test
Error 22022: SQLServerAgent Error: Unable to get the default MAPI Message
Store due to MAPI error 285: The attempt to log on to the Microsoft Exchange
Server Computer has failed.
Again, I can send and receive emails using outlook 2000 in that box. Any
idea about this error
Thanks
Yong
"Rashmi Jagadish" <RashmiJagadish@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:77449052-536C-4A72-8A76-027A0842BE02@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Zou,
> Have you updated the SQL Mail profile in SQL Agent as well?
> May be you have to cofigure sql mail and test it out there
>
> "Yong Zou" wrote:
mail[vbcol=seagreen]
mail[vbcol=seagreen]
tried to[vbcol=seagreen]
started.[vbcol=seagreen]
also[vbcol=seagreen]
solve of[vbcol=seagreen]
|||The first error indicates that SQL Mail cannot logon to your
mail server with the information you have provided in your
mail profile. The second error on the test is the same
issue. The mail profiles aren't configured properly. You can
find information on configuring mail in the following
article:
INF: How to Configure SQL Mail
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=263556
-Sue
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 10:39:00 -0500, "Yong Zou
$SearchIgnite$" <yz@.yz.com> wrote:

>I tried to update SQL Mail profile in SQL Agent, and I got following error
>when I click test
>Error 22022: SQLServerAgent Error: Unable to get the default MAPI Message
>Store due to MAPI error 285: The attempt to log on to the Microsoft Exchange
>Server Computer has failed.
>Again, I can send and receive emails using outlook 2000 in that box. Any
>idea about this error
>Thanks
>Yong
>"Rashmi Jagadish" <RashmiJagadish@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>message news:77449052-536C-4A72-8A76-027A0842BE02@.microsoft.com...
>mail
>mail
>tried to
>started.
>also
>solve of
>
sql

HELP! sp or other tool to help diagnose recent record deletion?

I'm trying to trouble shoot an app that after two years of running
more or less fine has suddenly had a problem. An average user was
filling out a web form and clicked save, only to have their entire
multi page report form get obliterated. This user has no delete
rights, and even if they had pressed cancel the ASP page would simply
not write that page...but would not delete the entire series of
records.
I am stepping through ASP code and trying to recreate the problem but
I'm relatively new to SQL and not sure what sytem stored procedures or
functions might help me...records of recent deletes (within the last
few hours), userinfo (who really deleted the record)? Etc.
Coincidentally (perhaps) this server was nearly full (aprox 700 megs
left). I know...this is terrible. I've been harping my sysadmin to get
some non DB related stuff off my SQL server and we cleared a few Gigs
off this morning! Anyway, it's very likely the cause...again...could
someone point me to what logs or functions or documentation I should
be looking at that might help me verify this?
Many thanks!!This might help you -- these guys have some good tools. I recommend,
though, that you restore the database to another area on the server and
compare the data with some custom queries to see what's missing...
http://www.red-gate.com/products/SQL_Log_Rescue/index.htm?gclid=CK-roqn2mIoCFRyVFQodbFaonQ
mahalie@.gmail.com wrote:
> I'm trying to trouble shoot an app that after two years of running
> more or less fine has suddenly had a problem. An average user was
> filling out a web form and clicked save, only to have their entire
> multi page report form get obliterated. This user has no delete
> rights, and even if they had pressed cancel the ASP page would simply
> not write that page...but would not delete the entire series of
> records.
> I am stepping through ASP code and trying to recreate the problem but
> I'm relatively new to SQL and not sure what sytem stored procedures or
> functions might help me...records of recent deletes (within the last
> few hours), userinfo (who really deleted the record)? Etc.
> Coincidentally (perhaps) this server was nearly full (aprox 700 megs
> left). I know...this is terrible. I've been harping my sysadmin to get
> some non DB related stuff off my SQL server and we cleared a few Gigs
> off this morning! Anyway, it's very likely the cause...again...could
> someone point me to what logs or functions or documentation I should
> be looking at that might help me verify this?
> Many thanks!!
>
-Dave Markle
http://www.markleconsulting.com/blog

Help! Restore Log while users are logged in.

I have a standby server with log shipping running on it.
We would like to use this standby server, as an ad-hoc
reporting database. This would work great, except for not
being able to perform the restore log at hourly intervals
because users are logged in. Is there a way to restore a
log with users logged into the database. The database is
in read-only mode or warm stand-by because of the
restores. We would like to have somewhat current data to
report from, so restoring the log backups meets that need.
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciatd.No.
Restore requires exclusive access to the DB
--
Allan Mitchell (Microsoft SQL Server MVP)
MCSE,MCDBA
www.SQLDTS.com
I support PASS - the definitive, global community
for SQL Server professionals - http://www.sqlpass.org|||Mr. Mitchell is correct that you must have exclusive
access in order to do a restore. But there is a way to
get this to work. Basically you have to kick your users
out for the duration of the restore. The database should
already be in readonly mode, so there shouldn't be an
issue with updating data. Most people think you must
issue kill statements to accomplish this, but you can
alter the database with rollback immediate.
alter database db_name set SINGLE_USER with rollback
immediate
restore log.....
alter database db_name set MULTI_USER
(check BOL for more info)
I've found that this works very well in our situation. I
guess it would depend on how much the db is used for
reporting and what impact it has on users that are
reporting from the db.
>--Original Message--
>No.
>Restore requires exclusive access to the DB
>--
>
>Allan Mitchell (Microsoft SQL Server MVP)
>MCSE,MCDBA
>www.SQLDTS.com
>I support PASS - the definitive, global community
>for SQL Server professionals - http://www.sqlpass.org
>.
>|||Thank you both for your help. I was thinking of a similar
method if a solution was not available, where my restore
job checks to see if people are logged in and takes action
accordingly.
>--Original Message--
>Mr. Mitchell is correct that you must have exclusive
>access in order to do a restore. But there is a way to
>get this to work. Basically you have to kick your users
>out for the duration of the restore. The database should
>already be in readonly mode, so there shouldn't be an
>issue with updating data. Most people think you must
>issue kill statements to accomplish this, but you can
>alter the database with rollback immediate.
>alter database db_name set SINGLE_USER with rollback
>immediate
>restore log.....
>alter database db_name set MULTI_USER
>(check BOL for more info)
>I've found that this works very well in our situation. I
>guess it would depend on how much the db is used for
>reporting and what impact it has on users that are
>reporting from the db.
>>--Original Message--
>>No.
>>Restore requires exclusive access to the DB
>>--
>>
>>Allan Mitchell (Microsoft SQL Server MVP)
>>MCSE,MCDBA
>>www.SQLDTS.com
>>I support PASS - the definitive, global community
>>for SQL Server professionals - http://www.sqlpass.org
>>.
>.
>

Friday, March 23, 2012

Help! Restarting the MSSQLSERVER service.

Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi, if
restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this was
the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and running.
Am I totally wrong here?
No, restarting an SQL Server service shouldn't destroy databases. What made
you ask this?
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
SQL Server Articles and Code Samples @. http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
"Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi, if
restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this was
the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and running.
Am I totally wrong here?
|||SQL Server is designed to go through stop/start cycles without losing any
information. There may be issues within a database that a stop/start cycle
will catch, but the process itself should not cause any problems. If you
have a very long running transaction it may take a while for the recovery
process to complete. If you have underlying hardware issues, a stop/start
can fail.
Why do you find it necessary to stop and restart SQL Server so often? I
seldom restart the service, typically only when I have to reboot the host
computer for an OS patch. I suspect that with a bit of tuning, tewaking,
and monitoring, you can get much better reliability and availability than
you have right now.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
> Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi,
> if
> restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
> I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this
> was
> the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and
> running.
> Am I totally wrong here?
|||Hi
Stopping SQL Server using Control Panel or Tray Icon or EM results in an
orderly shutdown.
Starting it again then starts the process of recovery, with incomplete
transactions being rolled back. If a database is corrupt, it may detect it
during startup too and will result in the DB being marked as 'suspect'.
What do you understand as "running database". A Process runs, not a database.
If you are exeriencing intermittent problems like queries timing out, then
run sp_who2 to see what is happening, as restarting SQL Server will drop the
connections and you still do not find the casue of your blocking.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Anthony Horner" wrote:

> Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi, if
> restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
> I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this was
> the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and running.
> Am I totally wrong here?
|||My CTO told me that I almost destroyed several production databases by my
actions...
I thank you for your answer and thought anyways that I hadn't lost my mind.
"Narayana Vyas Kondreddi" wrote:

> No, restarting an SQL Server service shouldn't destroy databases. What made
> you ask this?
> --
> HTH,
> Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
> SQL Server Articles and Code Samples @. http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
>
> "Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
> Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi, if
> restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
> I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this was
> the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and running.
> Am I totally wrong here?
>
>
|||Thanks guys for all the super quick answers!
I'm "just" a systems admin and not a database admin. Therfore me,
adminstering a site office connecting to databases in the usa, I have
restarted the service a few times to get the situation working again. You
know, when the databases seem to hang on all of the users side. It's worked
in the past for my users here in Europe and a colleague of mine in Israel.
I was just so shocked about being accused of such a terrible thing. It
caused a lot of mistrust, which is still there.....
Thanks,
Anthony Horner
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:

> SQL Server is designed to go through stop/start cycles without losing any
> information. There may be issues within a database that a stop/start cycle
> will catch, but the process itself should not cause any problems. If you
> have a very long running transaction it may take a while for the recovery
> process to complete. If you have underlying hardware issues, a stop/start
> can fail.
> Why do you find it necessary to stop and restart SQL Server so often? I
> seldom restart the service, typically only when I have to reboot the host
> computer for an OS patch. I suspect that with a bit of tuning, tewaking,
> and monitoring, you can get much better reliability and availability than
> you have right now.
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Restart the service shouldn't be the solution. I know you are not the DBA,
but you should let your CTO know that the database needs tuning. I don't
restart SQL Server service for months, and when I do restart that'll be for
a software update or hardware maintenance etc.
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
SQL Server Articles and Code Samples @. http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
"Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A520E89D-833C-4E0F-BD63-663C2290755A@.microsoft.com...
Thanks guys for all the super quick answers!
I'm "just" a systems admin and not a database admin. Therfore me,
adminstering a site office connecting to databases in the usa, I have
restarted the service a few times to get the situation working again. You
know, when the databases seem to hang on all of the users side. It's worked
in the past for my users here in Europe and a colleague of mine in Israel.
I was just so shocked about being accused of such a terrible thing. It
caused a lot of mistrust, which is still there.....
Thanks,
Anthony Horner
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:

> SQL Server is designed to go through stop/start cycles without losing any
> information. There may be issues within a database that a stop/start
cycle
> will catch, but the process itself should not cause any problems. If you
> have a very long running transaction it may take a while for the recovery
> process to complete. If you have underlying hardware issues, a stop/start
> can fail.
> Why do you find it necessary to stop and restart SQL Server so often? I
> seldom restart the service, typically only when I have to reboot the host
> computer for an OS patch. I suspect that with a bit of tuning, tewaking,
> and monitoring, you can get much better reliability and availability than
> you have right now.
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
> news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
>
>

Help! Restarting the MSSQLSERVER service.

Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi, if
restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this was
the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and running.
Am I totally wrong here?No, restarting an SQL Server service shouldn't destroy databases. What made
you ask this?
--
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
SQL Server Articles and Code Samples @. http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
"Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi, if
restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this was
the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and running.
Am I totally wrong here?|||SQL Server is designed to go through stop/start cycles without losing any
information. There may be issues within a database that a stop/start cycle
will catch, but the process itself should not cause any problems. If you
have a very long running transaction it may take a while for the recovery
process to complete. If you have underlying hardware issues, a stop/start
can fail.
Why do you find it necessary to stop and restart SQL Server so often? I
seldom restart the service, typically only when I have to reboot the host
computer for an OS patch. I suspect that with a bit of tuning, tewaking,
and monitoring, you can get much better reliability and availability than
you have right now.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
> Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi,
> if
> restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
> I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this
> was
> the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and
> running.
> Am I totally wrong here?|||Hi
Stopping SQL Server using Control Panel or Tray Icon or EM results in an
orderly shutdown.
Starting it again then starts the process of recovery, with incomplete
transactions being rolled back. If a database is corrupt, it may detect it
during startup too and will result in the DB being marked as 'suspect'.
What do you understand as "running database". A Process runs, not a database
.
If you are exeriencing intermittent problems like queries timing out, then
run sp_who2 to see what is happening, as restarting SQL Server will drop the
connections and you still do not find the casue of your blocking.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Anthony Horner" wrote:

> Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi, i
f
> restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
> I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this wa
s
> the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and runnin
g.
> Am I totally wrong here?|||My CTO told me that I almost destroyed several production databases by my
actions...
I thank you for your answer and thought anyways that I hadn't lost my mind.
"Narayana Vyas Kondreddi" wrote:

> No, restarting an SQL Server service shouldn't destroy databases. What mad
e
> you ask this?
> --
> HTH,
> Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
> SQL Server Articles and Code Samples @. http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
>
> "Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
e
> news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
> Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi, i
f
> restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
> I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this wa
s
> the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and runnin
g.
> Am I totally wrong here?
>
>|||Thanks guys for all the super quick answers!
I'm "just" a systems admin and not a database admin. Therfore me,
adminstering a site office connecting to databases in the usa, I have
restarted the service a few times to get the situation working again. You
know, when the databases seem to hang on all of the users side. It's worked
in the past for my users here in Europe and a colleague of mine in Israel.
I was just so shocked about being accused of such a terrible thing. It
caused a lot of mistrust, which is still there.....
Thanks,
Anthony Horner
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:

> SQL Server is designed to go through stop/start cycles without losing any
> information. There may be issues within a database that a stop/start cycl
e
> will catch, but the process itself should not cause any problems. If you
> have a very long running transaction it may take a while for the recovery
> process to complete. If you have underlying hardware issues, a stop/start
> can fail.
> Why do you find it necessary to stop and restart SQL Server so often? I
> seldom restart the service, typically only when I have to reboot the host
> computer for an OS patch. I suspect that with a bit of tuning, tewaking,
> and monitoring, you can get much better reliability and availability than
> you have right now.
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
e
> news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||Restart the service shouldn't be the solution. I know you are not the DBA,
but you should let your CTO know that the database needs tuning. I don't
restart SQL Server service for months, and when I do restart that'll be for
a software update or hardware maintenance etc.
--
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
SQL Server Articles and Code Samples @. http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
"Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A520E89D-833C-4E0F-BD63-663C2290755A@.microsoft.com...
Thanks guys for all the super quick answers!
I'm "just" a systems admin and not a database admin. Therfore me,
adminstering a site office connecting to databases in the usa, I have
restarted the service a few times to get the situation working again. You
know, when the databases seem to hang on all of the users side. It's worked
in the past for my users here in Europe and a colleague of mine in Israel.
I was just so shocked about being accused of such a terrible thing. It
caused a lot of mistrust, which is still there.....
Thanks,
Anthony Horner
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:

> SQL Server is designed to go through stop/start cycles without losing any
> information. There may be issues within a database that a stop/start
cycle
> will catch, but the process itself should not cause any problems. If you
> have a very long running transaction it may take a while for the recovery
> process to complete. If you have underlying hardware issues, a stop/start
> can fail.
> Why do you find it necessary to stop and restart SQL Server so often? I
> seldom restart the service, typically only when I have to reboot the host
> computer for an OS patch. I suspect that with a bit of tuning, tewaking,
> and monitoring, you can get much better reliability and availability than
> you have right now.
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
> news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
>
>

Help! Restarting the MSSQLSERVER service.

Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi, if
restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this was
the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and running.
Am I totally wrong here?No, restarting an SQL Server service shouldn't destroy databases. What made
you ask this?
--
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
SQL Server Articles and Code Samples @. http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
"Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi, if
restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this was
the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and running.
Am I totally wrong here?|||SQL Server is designed to go through stop/start cycles without losing any
information. There may be issues within a database that a stop/start cycle
will catch, but the process itself should not cause any problems. If you
have a very long running transaction it may take a while for the recovery
process to complete. If you have underlying hardware issues, a stop/start
can fail.
Why do you find it necessary to stop and restart SQL Server so often? I
seldom restart the service, typically only when I have to reboot the host
computer for an OS patch. I suspect that with a bit of tuning, tewaking,
and monitoring, you can get much better reliability and availability than
you have right now.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
> Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi,
> if
> restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
> I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this
> was
> the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and
> running.
> Am I totally wrong here?|||Hi
Stopping SQL Server using Control Panel or Tray Icon or EM results in an
orderly shutdown.
Starting it again then starts the process of recovery, with incomplete
transactions being rolled back. If a database is corrupt, it may detect it
during startup too and will result in the DB being marked as 'suspect'.
What do you understand as "running database". A Process runs, not a database.
If you are exeriencing intermittent problems like queries timing out, then
run sp_who2 to see what is happening, as restarting SQL Server will drop the
connections and you still do not find the casue of your blocking.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Anthony Horner" wrote:
> Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi, if
> restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
> I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this was
> the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and running.
> Am I totally wrong here?|||My CTO told me that I almost destroyed several production databases by my
actions...
I thank you for your answer and thought anyways that I hadn't lost my mind.
"Narayana Vyas Kondreddi" wrote:
> No, restarting an SQL Server service shouldn't destroy databases. What made
> you ask this?
> --
> HTH,
> Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
> SQL Server Articles and Code Samples @. http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
>
> "Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
> Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi, if
> restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
> I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this was
> the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and running.
> Am I totally wrong here?
>
>|||Thanks guys for all the super quick answers!
I'm "just" a systems admin and not a database admin. Therfore me,
adminstering a site office connecting to databases in the usa, I have
restarted the service a few times to get the situation working again. You
know, when the databases seem to hang on all of the users side. It's worked
in the past for my users here in Europe and a colleague of mine in Israel.
I was just so shocked about being accused of such a terrible thing. It
caused a lot of mistrust, which is still there.....
Thanks,
Anthony Horner
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> SQL Server is designed to go through stop/start cycles without losing any
> information. There may be issues within a database that a stop/start cycle
> will catch, but the process itself should not cause any problems. If you
> have a very long running transaction it may take a while for the recovery
> process to complete. If you have underlying hardware issues, a stop/start
> can fail.
> Why do you find it necessary to stop and restart SQL Server so often? I
> seldom restart the service, typically only when I have to reboot the host
> computer for an OS patch. I suspect that with a bit of tuning, tewaking,
> and monitoring, you can get much better reliability and availability than
> you have right now.
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
> > Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi,
> > if
> > restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
> > I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this
> > was
> > the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and
> > running.
> > Am I totally wrong here?
>
>|||Restart the service shouldn't be the solution. I know you are not the DBA,
but you should let your CTO know that the database needs tuning. I don't
restart SQL Server service for months, and when I do restart that'll be for
a software update or hardware maintenance etc.
--
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
SQL Server Articles and Code Samples @. http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
"Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A520E89D-833C-4E0F-BD63-663C2290755A@.microsoft.com...
Thanks guys for all the super quick answers!
I'm "just" a systems admin and not a database admin. Therfore me,
adminstering a site office connecting to databases in the usa, I have
restarted the service a few times to get the situation working again. You
know, when the databases seem to hang on all of the users side. It's worked
in the past for my users here in Europe and a colleague of mine in Israel.
I was just so shocked about being accused of such a terrible thing. It
caused a lot of mistrust, which is still there.....
Thanks,
Anthony Horner
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> SQL Server is designed to go through stop/start cycles without losing any
> information. There may be issues within a database that a stop/start
cycle
> will catch, but the process itself should not cause any problems. If you
> have a very long running transaction it may take a while for the recovery
> process to complete. If you have underlying hardware issues, a stop/start
> can fail.
> Why do you find it necessary to stop and restart SQL Server so often? I
> seldom restart the service, typically only when I have to reboot the host
> computer for an OS patch. I suspect that with a bit of tuning, tewaking,
> and monitoring, you can get much better reliability and availability than
> you have right now.
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "Anthony Horner" <AnthonyHorner@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
> news:D46EF01C-2C08-4A89-9BE1-CB0F1E529E6D@.microsoft.com...
> > Can someone please tell me, perferrably an official Microsoft SQL profi,
> > if
> > restarting the mssqlserver service could destroy any running databases?
> > I thought that logically, this wouldn't be able to be restarted if this
> > was
> > the case. I restart sometimes to get the databases back online and
> > running.
> > Am I totally wrong here?
>
>

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Help! Maintainence paln fails

Hi I am running a plan that optimizes the database, it will run for 3 hours
and when it hits a paticular file it fails.
I have changed the file growth to a new max as well as the grow by size. I
have plenty of room to grow. The following is the message I get.
Error 1105:[Microsoft SQL-DMO (ODBC SQLState: 42000)] Error 1105:
[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]Could not allocate space for
object '(SYSTEM table id: -21614735)' in database 'itiserver' because the
'ITEMDATAI' filegroup is full.
Any suggestions are welcomed.If you need more space then don't rely on autogrow to get you there.
Manually increase the file(s) before hand. Chances are you are in this
situation because you specified in the plan to shrink the data files(removed
unused space). Turn this off and you should not have to worry about growing
the database due to reindexing each time.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"robert_at_cbb" <robertatcbb@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:FF152B97-3108-4D98-AE4C-84F0DE6D3ADC@.microsoft.com...
> Hi I am running a plan that optimizes the database, it will run for 3
hours
> and when it hits a paticular file it fails.
> I have changed the file growth to a new max as well as the grow by size. I
> have plenty of room to grow. The following is the message I get.
>
> Error 1105:[Microsoft SQL-DMO (ODBC SQLState: 42000)] Error 1105:
> [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]Could not allocate space
for
> object '(SYSTEM table id: -21614735)' in database 'itiserver' because the
> 'ITEMDATAI' filegroup is full.
> Any suggestions are welcomed.|||Thanks, I changed the plan, and unchecked "Remove unused space from database"
Hopefully it works. Could you briefly explain what this does?
"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> If you need more space then don't rely on autogrow to get you there.
> Manually increase the file(s) before hand. Chances are you are in this
> situation because you specified in the plan to shrink the data files(removed
> unused space). Turn this off and you should not have to worry about growing
> the database due to reindexing each time.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "robert_at_cbb" <robertatcbb@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:FF152B97-3108-4D98-AE4C-84F0DE6D3ADC@.microsoft.com...
> > Hi I am running a plan that optimizes the database, it will run for 3
> hours
> > and when it hits a paticular file it fails.
> >
> > I have changed the file growth to a new max as well as the grow by size. I
> > have plenty of room to grow. The following is the message I get.
> >
> >
> > Error 1105:[Microsoft SQL-DMO (ODBC SQLState: 42000)] Error 1105:
> > [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]Could not allocate space
> for
> > object '(SYSTEM table id: -21614735)' in database 'itiserver' because the
> > 'ITEMDATAI' filegroup is full.
> >
> > Any suggestions are welcomed.
>
>|||That checkbox will issue a DBCC SHRINKDATABASE which causes the data and log
files to shrink. But in the process it must move the data pages that are at
the end of the file to the beginning since it shrinks from the end. This
movement of pages will fragment the indexes and tables all over again. Then
the next time the maintenance plan goes to "Optimize" (reindex) the indexes
it will force the db to grow again since it requires about 1.2 times the
size of the table in free space to happen properly.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"robert_at_cbb" <robertatcbb@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:46D23E6F-F0C8-4DA9-9961-1EA3659FDEAC@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks, I changed the plan, and unchecked "Remove unused space from
database"
> Hopefully it works. Could you briefly explain what this does?
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> > If you need more space then don't rely on autogrow to get you there.
> > Manually increase the file(s) before hand. Chances are you are in this
> > situation because you specified in the plan to shrink the data
files(removed
> > unused space). Turn this off and you should not have to worry about
growing
> > the database due to reindexing each time.
> >
> > --
> > Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> >
> >
> > "robert_at_cbb" <robertatcbb@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:FF152B97-3108-4D98-AE4C-84F0DE6D3ADC@.microsoft.com...
> > > Hi I am running a plan that optimizes the database, it will run for 3
> > hours
> > > and when it hits a paticular file it fails.
> > >
> > > I have changed the file growth to a new max as well as the grow by
size. I
> > > have plenty of room to grow. The following is the message I get.
> > >
> > >
> > > Error 1105:[Microsoft SQL-DMO (ODBC SQLState: 42000)] Error 1105:
> > > [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]Could not allocate
space
> > for
> > > object '(SYSTEM table id: -21614735)' in database 'itiserver' because
the
> > > 'ITEMDATAI' filegroup is full.
> > >
> > > Any suggestions are welcomed.
> >
> >
> >

Help! Maintainence paln fails

Monday, March 19, 2012

help! H/W spec for SQL Server 2000

Hi,

I have a SQL server 2000 database running in Windows Server 2000. The database only consists of a handful of tables and is taking multiple inserts from @.40 client PCs.

The server exists on two servers with half the clients talking to each. The databases use transactional replication to stay synchronised.

Each PC generates about 100 SQL transactions per busy hour, each being an insert.

The customer is expanding the number of client PCs from 40, through 300 to, ultimately, about 3000. They are asking me what hardware spec is required and want to be told it in a for each additional 50 client applications you need XYZ type of format to allow for gradual growth.

I have to say I am unsure how to go about scaling and configuring the servers!

So, is there such a thing as an automatic configurator which automatically produces a required spec for a given number of transactions and clients? Are there other criteria they/I need to take into account such as number of logins etc? For archiving I am guessing that a CD/RW drive is the way to go?

Also, in terms of design between the two servers they have. With clustering, mirroring, replication etc I am unsure as to which is most appropriate.

The thing I do know is that they are willing to spend serious $$$ for the right design and need 99.9% up time.

They also pull significant amount of reports which I think logically equates to a third server to keep this traffic away from the live database. So, is replication the best way to go? Say replication every 15 minutes to a reports server?

I am also of the opinion that they need to move from Windows 2000 Server to Advanced Server for added scalability but will pursue that elsewhere.

Any input MUCH appreciated.

Out of my depth! :confused:
PaulThe thing I do know is that they are willing to spend serious $$$ for the right design and need 99.9% up time.

Then they better be willing to spend some money. They'll need it.

I would try to get them to move to Advanced Server or wait for 2003 SP1 to come out. Enterprise Edition will be needed for many of the features you are talking about. It's impossible to answer your question without knowing the database. You need to figure out how many rows in the tables will be taken at different levels of users, what the average fill ratio will be on those tables, then how much size you'll need along the way. In addition, you need to figure out how many transactions, and how much those will cost you as the database grows do to increased size of the tables.

I would purchase the Microsoft Press book: Permformance Tuning Manual technical reference if I was you and have a look at the worksheets and formulas in the book.

Friday, March 9, 2012

Help! Are my DTS Packages gone for good?

Something was wrong with my local SQL Server environment. I was unable to
connect to my own SQL Server running on my own workstation. So I uninstalled
and reinstalled. I knew my database files would be safe and sure enough, I
just reattached them after reinstalling.
But where are my DTS Packages? Are these gone for good, or are these
still in some location from which they can be recovered?
Thanks for your advice,
Joe Geretz
depends. If you save the DTS packages as VB files, you still have a change
to find them in OS directory. Otherwise, they are gone after msdb is
uninstalled.
Don't you have a msdb backup?
"Joseph Geretz" <jgeretz@.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%23nGKAopwEHA.2172@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Something was wrong with my local SQL Server environment. I was unable to
> connect to my own SQL Server running on my own workstation. So I
> uninstalled and reinstalled. I knew my database files would be safe and
> sure enough, I just reattached them after reinstalling.
> But where are my DTS Packages? Are these gone for good, or are these
> still in some location from which they can be recovered?
> Thanks for your advice,
> Joe Geretz
>
|||do you have msdb backup? any DTS backup?
"Joseph Geretz" <jgeretz@.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%23nGKAopwEHA.2172@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Something was wrong with my local SQL Server environment. I was unable to
> connect to my own SQL Server running on my own workstation. So I
> uninstalled and reinstalled. I knew my database files would be safe and
> sure enough, I just reattached them after reinstalling.
> But where are my DTS Packages? Are these gone for good, or are these
> still in some location from which they can be recovered?
> Thanks for your advice,
> Joe Geretz
>
|||Point well taken. All source is saved to Visual Source Safe but database
procs and utilities - weak link! I guess I'd always assumed these to be
resident in one particular database or another, but obviously they're not.
How do you do a DTS Backup? We use DTS to backup our databases from one
server to another, but backing up the DTS packages themselves? I didn't know
you could do that.
Thanks,
- Joe Geretz -
"Patrick" <patriarck@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uEWLQtpwEHA.1452@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> do you have msdb backup? any DTS backup?
>
> "Joseph Geretz" <jgeretz@.nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:%23nGKAopwEHA.2172@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
|||You can save as VBscript or just save as .dts file
"Joseph Geretz" <jgeretz@.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OcFw21pwEHA.2172@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Point well taken. All source is saved to Visual Source Safe but database
> procs and utilities - weak link! I guess I'd always assumed these to be
> resident in one particular database or another, but obviously they're not.
> How do you do a DTS Backup? We use DTS to backup our databases from one
> server to another, but backing up the DTS packages themselves? I didn't
> know you could do that.
> Thanks,
> - Joe Geretz -
> "Patrick" <patriarck@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uEWLQtpwEHA.1452@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>
|||Patrick,
DTS saved as VB cannot be saved back to a server. Not as easy. You would
have to include it into a VB snippet and save it from VB. That would loose
you graphical layout and comments. Regular way would be backing up msdb or
saving DTS as structured files.
Ilya
"Patrick" <patriarck@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23xEVEIrwEHA.1392@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> You can save as VBscript or just save as .dts file
>
> "Joseph Geretz" <jgeretz@.nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:OcFw21pwEHA.2172@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
not.[vbcol=seagreen]
and[vbcol=seagreen]
these
>
|||Yes, very important, depending to whom you speak... BACK UP YOUR SYSTEM
DATABASES...ALWAYS!
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Ilya Margolin" wrote:

> Patrick,
> DTS saved as VB cannot be saved back to a server. Not as easy. You would
> have to include it into a VB snippet and save it from VB. That would loose
> you graphical layout and comments. Regular way would be backing up msdb or
> saving DTS as structured files.
> Ilya
> "Patrick" <patriarck@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23xEVEIrwEHA.1392@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> not.
> and
> these
>
>
|||If you didn't save them as files, just restore your backup of msdb.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Joseph Geretz" <jgeretz@.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%23nGKAopwEHA.2172@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Something was wrong with my local SQL Server environment. I was unable to
> connect to my own SQL Server running on my own workstation. So I uninstalled
> and reinstalled. I knew my database files would be safe and sure enough, I
> just reattached them after reinstalling.
> But where are my DTS Packages? Are these gone for good, or are these
> still in some location from which they can be recovered?
> Thanks for your advice,
> Joe Geretz
>
|||Guys you can get a realy good tool called DTSBackup from SQLDTS.com.
We back up 3000 scripts weekly. Just for peace of mind.
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:

> If you didn't save them as files, just restore your backup of msdb.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Joseph Geretz" <jgeretz@.nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:%23nGKAopwEHA.2172@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
>

Friday, March 30, 2012

HELP!!! Can not restore database from only back up I have

HELP!!! Can not restore database from only back up I have

Help!! Need to get the MSDASQL provider in SQL 2005 EE 64 bit

Help!! Need to get the MSDASQL provider in SQL 2005 EE 64 bit

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

HELP! Transaction Log is huge

Monday, March 26, 2012

HELP! SQL Server Agent not working.

Help! SQL Server 2000 extended stored procedure hangs in Windows 98

Help! SQL Mail

Help! SQL Mail

Help! SQL Mail

HELP! sp or other tool to help diagnose recent record deletion?

Help! Restore Log while users are logged in.

Friday, March 23, 2012

Help! Restarting the MSSQLSERVER service.

Help! Restarting the MSSQLSERVER service.

Help! Restarting the MSSQLSERVER service.

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Help! Maintainence paln fails

Help! Maintainence paln fails

Help! Maintainence paln fails

Monday, March 19, 2012

help! H/W spec for SQL Server 2000

Friday, March 9, 2012

Help! Are my DTS Packages gone for good?

Help with update forms

Blog Archive

About Me