Showing posts with label sql2005. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sql2005. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

[Transfer SQL Server Objects Task] Error: Table does not exist at the source.

Hello,

I am running a package that used to transfers data from one SQL2005 to another SQL2005. There are multiple schemas associated with the database. Until recently, this pacakage would work. Now I am getting the following error for all the tables not owned by dbo:

Any help on this would be appreciated.

Thanks, sck10

[Transfer SQL Server Objects Task] Error: Table "tblAudiocast" does not exist at the source.

Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio 9.00.3042.00
Microsoft Analysis Services Client Tools 2005.090.3042.00
Microsoft Data Access Components (MDAC) 2000.085.1117.00 (xpsp_sp2_rtm.040803-2158)
Microsoft MSXML 2.6 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Microsoft Internet Explorer 7.0.5730.11
Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0.50727.832
Operating System 5.1.2600

May be it;s a direct error that in the source "tblAudiocast" table may not be exisiting or renamed!!!

Or check the connection strings if it's pointing to the correct data base!!

Dev

|||

Thanks Dev, but all the tables exist. We copy the schema from the production database to the local database, so they are duplicates. And it works for tables that belong to dbo only, but fails for all other tables.

sck10

|||

This thread describes the same problem - it's a known bug. It may have been fixed in SP2, but I'm not positive.

http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=207812&SiteID=1

|||

Thanks jwelch,

My SSIS package was working until recently.

sck10

sql

[Transfer SQL Server Objects Task] Error: Table does not exist at the source.

Hello,

I am running a package that used to transfers data from one SQL2005 to another SQL2005. There are multiple schemas associated with the database. Until recently, this pacakage would work. Now I am getting the following error for all the tables not owned by dbo:

Any help on this would be appreciated.

Thanks, sck10

[Transfer SQL Server Objects Task] Error: Table "tblAudiocast" does not exist at the source.

Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio 9.00.3042.00
Microsoft Analysis Services Client Tools 2005.090.3042.00
Microsoft Data Access Components (MDAC) 2000.085.1117.00 (xpsp_sp2_rtm.040803-2158)
Microsoft MSXML 2.6 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Microsoft Internet Explorer 7.0.5730.11
Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0.50727.832
Operating System 5.1.2600

May be it;s a direct error that in the source "tblAudiocast" table may not be exisiting or renamed!!!

Or check the connection strings if it's pointing to the correct data base!!

Dev

|||

Thanks Dev, but all the tables exist. We copy the schema from the production database to the local database, so they are duplicates. And it works for tables that belong to dbo only, but fails for all other tables.

sck10

|||

This thread describes the same problem - it's a known bug. It may have been fixed in SP2, but I'm not positive.

http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=207812&SiteID=1

|||

Thanks jwelch,

My SSIS package was working until recently.

sck10

Monday, March 19, 2012

[SQL2005] Profiler Trace Security Issue

With SQL Server 2005 there is an option to grant a person access to Profiler for tracing SQL. This is done with the "GRANT ALTER TRACE" statement. The statement has to be executed at server level i.e. the master database.

The user in question only has access to certain databases on that server. The security problem that arises is that with the Profiler rights active, he can see the sql commands that are executed on the databases he has no rights for. Those SQL commands are executed by others users.

How do I configure security rules so that the person in question can use Profiler, but can only see the SQL statements that are executed on the databases he has the rights for? TIA!

Unfortunately there is no such level of granularity in SQL Server 2005 permission model, and ALTER TRACE is considered an elevated permission because of the reasons you mentioned.

Hopefully somebody may be able to reply back with a good workaround.

-Raul Garcia

SDE/T

SQL Server Engine

[SQL2005] equivalent to the SQL 2000 taskpad view in Management St

Hello,
I just installed SQL 2005, and I am looking for the information about my
file usage, as I was able to see in the taskpad view with SQL 2000.
Could you help me on this please ?
Thanks in advance,
Regards,
Vincent
Hello Vincent,
There is no Taskpad in SQL Server 2005. There are Reports instead.
Go to a database and right click on it. You'll see Reports\Standard
Reports\Disk Usage.
I know this looks slower and do not have other stuff (tasks) in it, however
this is the new thing instead of Taskpad in SQL Server 2005.
Ekrem ?nsoy
"Vincent D." <VincentD@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:313F2B87-34F4-4A2F-9DB4-E268DC4B4424@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> I just installed SQL 2005, and I am looking for the information about my
> file usage, as I was able to see in the taskpad view with SQL 2000.
> Could you help me on this please ?
> Thanks in advance,
> Regards,
> Vincent
|||Hello Ekrem,
Thanks for your help.
My problem is that I have a Siebel database, and I cannot use the 9.0 mode,
I must stay in 8.0 mode. And in 8, I can't see the Disk Usage Report
Do you know any workarround ?
Thanks in advance,
Regards,
Vincent
"Ekrem ?nsoy" wrote:

> Hello Vincent,
> There is no Taskpad in SQL Server 2005. There are Reports instead.
> Go to a database and right click on it. You'll see Reports\Standard
> Reports\Disk Usage.
> I know this looks slower and do not have other stuff (tasks) in it, however
> this is the new thing instead of Taskpad in SQL Server 2005.
> --
> Ekrem ?nsoy
>
> "Vincent D." <VincentD@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:313F2B87-34F4-4A2F-9DB4-E268DC4B4424@.microsoft.com...
>
|||Well, nope for the Reports, sorry. However you can use sp_spaceused sp to
see space info about your db.
Also, you can see the space info from the database properties.
Ekrem ?nsoy
"Vincent D." <VincentD@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3E011161-4597-4F78-94A6-15FBA9E7A9CC@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hello Ekrem,
> Thanks for your help.
> My problem is that I have a Siebel database, and I cannot use the 9.0
> mode,
> I must stay in 8.0 mode. And in 8, I can't see the Disk Usage Report
> Do you know any workarround ?
> Thanks in advance,
> Regards,
> Vincent
> "Ekrem ?nsoy" wrote:
|||Hello Ekrem,
I have SQL Server 2005 sp2 and my database is in 9.0 mode. On right
click I don't see Reports. I do see reports on Summary window. What is
a difference between standard reports and performance dashboards. I
now that for performance dashboards you need to have a SP2 on your
server and I sow that some servers without sp2 have reports on the
Summary window.
Ognjen
Ekrem nsoy wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hello Vincent,
> There is no Taskpad in SQL Server 2005. There are Reports instead.
> Go to a database and right click on it. You'll see Reports\Standard
> Reports\Disk Usage.
> I know this looks slower and do not have other stuff (tasks) in it, however
> this is the new thing instead of Taskpad in SQL Server 2005.
> --
> Ekrem nsoy
>
> "Vincent D." <VincentD@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:313F2B87-34F4-4A2F-9DB4-E268DC4B4424@.microsoft.com...
|||Hello!
There is no Reports in SQL Server Management Studio Express.
You must be using SSMSE to connect to your SQL Server instances so you can't
see Reports when you right click on your databases. You need SSMS to see
Reports menu when you right click on a database.
I encourage you to see the following link to learn more about Performance
Dashboard Reports:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=1d3a4a0d-7e0c-4730-8204-e419218c1efc&displaylang=en
Ekrem nsoy
"OgnjenT" <OgnjenT@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e6c35d61-2ee9-4b76-9286-dbb9e5f83ac2@.i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Hello Ekrem,
I have SQL Server 2005 sp2 and my database is in 9.0 mode. On right
click I don't see Reports. I do see reports on Summary window. What is
a difference between standard reports and performance dashboards. I
now that for performance dashboards you need to have a SP2 on your
server and I sow that some servers without sp2 have reports on the
Summary window.
Ognjen
Ekrem nsoy wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hello Vincent,
> There is no Taskpad in SQL Server 2005. There are Reports instead.
> Go to a database and right click on it. You'll see Reports\Standard
> Reports\Disk Usage.
> I know this looks slower and do not have other stuff (tasks) in it,
> however
> this is the new thing instead of Taskpad in SQL Server 2005.
> --
> Ekrem nsoy
>
> "Vincent D." <VincentD@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:313F2B87-34F4-4A2F-9DB4-E268DC4B4424@.microsoft.com...
|||Hopefully, Siebel finally validated the usage of the 9.0 mode ! I'm saved
;-)
"Ekrem ?nsoy" wrote:

> Well, nope for the Reports, sorry. However you can use sp_spaceused sp to
> see space info about your db.
> Also, you can see the space info from the database properties.
> --
> Ekrem ?nsoy
>
> "Vincent D." <VincentD@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:3E011161-4597-4F78-94A6-15FBA9E7A9CC@.microsoft.com...
>
|||Hello,
I am using Sql Server 2005 developer edition and I am not using SSMSE
but SSMS.
Ekrem ?nsoy wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hello!
> There is no Reports in SQL Server Management Studio Express.
> You must be using SSMSE to connect to your SQL Server instances so you can't
> see Reports when you right click on your databases. You need SSMS to see
> Reports menu when you right click on a database.
> I encourage you to see the following link to learn more about Performance
> Dashboard Reports:
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=1d3a4a0d-7e0c-4730-8204-e419218c1efc&displaylang=en
> --
> Ekrem ?nsoy
>
> "OgnjenT" <OgnjenT@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e6c35d61-2ee9-4b76-9286-dbb9e5f83ac2@.i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> Hello Ekrem,
> I have SQL Server 2005 sp2 and my database is in 9.0 mode. On right
> click I don't see Reports. I do see reports on Summary window. What is
> a difference between standard reports and performance dashboards. I
> now that for performance dashboards you need to have a SP2 on your
> server and I sow that some servers without sp2 have reports on the
> Summary window.
> Ognjen
> Ekrem ?nsoy wrote:
|||I don't have the RTM version of SSMS on my test machines so I can't be sure
of that... Did you apply SP2 to your Client Tools (which includes SSMS)?
Ekrem ?nsoy
"OgnjenT" <OgnjenT@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9957500e-940d-46fb-8d2a-f549e243aa51@.r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Hello,
I am using Sql Server 2005 developer edition and I am not using SSMSE
but SSMS.
Ekrem ?nsoy wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hello!
> There is no Reports in SQL Server Management Studio Express.
> You must be using SSMSE to connect to your SQL Server instances so you
> can't
> see Reports when you right click on your databases. You need SSMS to see
> Reports menu when you right click on a database.
> I encourage you to see the following link to learn more about Performance
> Dashboard Reports:
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=1d3a4a0d-7e0c-4730-8204-e419218c1efc&displaylang=en
> --
> Ekrem ?nsoy
>
> "OgnjenT" <OgnjenT@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e6c35d61-2ee9-4b76-9286-dbb9e5f83ac2@.i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> Hello Ekrem,
> I have SQL Server 2005 sp2 and my database is in 9.0 mode. On right
> click I don't see Reports. I do see reports on Summary window. What is
> a difference between standard reports and performance dashboards. I
> now that for performance dashboards you need to have a SP2 on your
> server and I sow that some servers without sp2 have reports on the
> Summary window.
> Ognjen
> Ekrem ?nsoy wrote:

[SQL2005] Binding defaults without using sp_bindefault

The SQL2005 documentation states the sp_bindefault will be gone in the next
version and the DEFAULT keyword should be used with CREATE TABLE or ALTER
TABLE statements. But I seem to have run into a situation where that only th
e
stored procedure approach works.
script 1:
CREATE DEFAULT abc AS 1
script 2:
CREATE TABLE xyz(
id int IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL,
thingy int DEFAULT abc)
This will result in the following error: "The name "abc" is not permitted in
this context. Valid expressions are constants, constant expressions, and (in
some contexts) variables. Column names are not permitted."
It works perfectly when I use the sp_bindefault procedure instead, so I do
have a solution, but can it be done without? I am probably missing something
very simple, so any help is welcome. TIA!Check documentation for CREATE DEFAULT and you will see that this will also
disappear. What BOL is
trying to say is that default objects will disappear, while default constrai
nts is the way to go.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"PaulSand" <PaulSand@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F6F545C2-D304-46BA-A5D4-DC07660BAECE@.microsoft.com...
> The SQL2005 documentation states the sp_bindefault will be gone in the nex
t
> version and the DEFAULT keyword should be used with CREATE TABLE or ALTER
> TABLE statements. But I seem to have run into a situation where that only
the
> stored procedure approach works.
> script 1:
> CREATE DEFAULT abc AS 1
> script 2:
> CREATE TABLE xyz(
> id int IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL,
> thingy int DEFAULT abc)
> This will result in the following error: "The name "abc" is not permitted
in
> this context. Valid expressions are constants, constant expressions, and (
in
> some contexts) variables. Column names are not permitted."
> It works perfectly when I use the sp_bindefault procedure instead, so I do
> have a solution, but can it be done without? I am probably missing somethi
ng
> very simple, so any help is welcome. TIA!
>
>
>|||Don't bind defaults, ADD them:
alter table <table name>
add constraint abc
default (1)
for <column name>
ML
http://milambda.blogspot.com/|||I could do that, but the whole idea for me was to define a centralized
default, so when I change that, the changes will be reflected in every colum
n
binded to that default.
"ML" wrote:

> Don't bind defaults, ADD them:
> alter table <table name>
> add constraint abc
> default (1)
> for <column name>
>
> ML
> --
> http://milambda.blogspot.com/|||Is it possible to bind a single default constraint to multiple columns in
multiple tables? I.e. I have a date column in every table which should be
filled with a default value if none is provided.
At the moment I made a default for it and linked the name of the default to
the date column. In my database design tool, I only have to change the
default value in one place if I ever decide the current one is not right
anymore. Let the tool create a script for me and it is changed.
With constraints I have to change the default value in every single table
(200+), while I could do it with just one simple change when using
sp_bindefault was allowed. Or can it be done more easily?
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:

> Check documentation for CREATE DEFAULT and you will see that this will als
o disappear. What BOL is
> trying to say is that default objects will disappear, while default constr
aints is the way to go.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "PaulSand" <PaulSand@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:F6F545C2-D304-46BA-A5D4-DC07660BAECE@.microsoft.com...
>|||As Tibor states in his post the default as a SQL object is on its last breat
h
(so to speak), as for the default as a constraint it cannot be reused as if
it were an object.
A constraint is a declaration, and if your requirement really is
object-oriented (rather than declarative) then maybe you could get what you
need by using a user-defined CLR type. But only for a default? I wouldn't go
down that road.
While being aware of the benefits a default provides as an object (e.g.
reusability), I still think a default is merely an attribute of the
individual column, and should be treated as such - kept in the meta world.
ML
http://milambda.blogspot.com/|||Ah hold on, I know what to do ;-)
Currently I have a UDDT for a mandatory date column and bind a default to it
when I need to. The solution is to create two UDDTs, one with and one withou
t
the constraint. It's gonna be some work to convert 200+ tables, but it's a
solution ...
"PaulSand" wrote:
> Is it possible to bind a single default constraint to multiple columns in
> multiple tables? I.e. I have a date column in every table which should be
> filled with a default value if none is provided.
> At the moment I made a default for it and linked the name of the default t
o
> the date column. In my database design tool, I only have to change the
> default value in one place if I ever decide the current one is not right
> anymore. Let the tool create a script for me and it is changed.
> With constraints I have to change the default value in every single table
> (200+), while I could do it with just one simple change when using
> sp_bindefault was allowed. Or can it be done more easily?
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>|||Oops, sorry for making a mess here, but that isn't a solution either ...
"PaulSand" wrote:
> Ah hold on, I know what to do ;-)
> Currently I have a UDDT for a mandatory date column and bind a default to
it
> when I need to. The solution is to create two UDDTs, one with and one with
out
> the constraint. It's gonna be some work to convert 200+ tables, but it's a
> solution ...
> "PaulSand" wrote:
>|||Mess? Aren't we learning anymore? :)
ML
http://milambda.blogspot.com/|||> Is it possible to bind a single default constraint to multiple columns in
> multiple tables?
No. In short:
Default objects are deprecated. Those does what you want to do.
Default constraints are supported and recommended way in the future. But you
create them at the
column level, so they cannot be defined-one-used-many.
You might want to post a wish to [url]http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/productfeedback/.[/
url] The ANSI SQL
feature you are looking for is the "DOMAIN" (CREATE/ALTER DOMAIN), but that
is not implemented in
SQL Server.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"PaulSand" <PaulSand@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6D87E279-5C8F-4BB6-9394-28454BD4B89D@.microsoft.com...
> Is it possible to bind a single default constraint to multiple columns in
> multiple tables? I.e. I have a date column in every table which should be
> filled with a default value if none is provided.
> At the moment I made a default for it and linked the name of the default t
o
> the date column. In my database design tool, I only have to change the
> default value in one place if I ever decide the current one is not right
> anymore. Let the tool create a script for me and it is changed.
> With constraints I have to change the default value in every single table
> (200+), while I could do it with just one simple change when using
> sp_bindefault was allowed. Or can it be done more easily?
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>

[SQL2005] Backup Schedule

I understand most things concerning making a backup, but I cannot seem to
figure out what a sensible schedule is for making a backup. I would love to
figure this out before we go live in a few months.
The database will have a reasonable mutation rate, i.e. around 500 data
changes per day and work-loss must be kept to a minimum. We expect the size
to be around 2GB. The schedule I have made now is as follows:
Full Backup on Sunday at 02:00
Differential Backups on other weekdays at 02:00
Transaction Log Backups every 4 hours every day
Clean History 4 weeks old files every week on Sunday at 04:00
I do not know if this makes sense. I do not know if the log backup proces
will hinder the users or not. I do know there are many many variables that
play a role in making a good backup procedure, but I would greatly appreciate
any insight concerning correct scheduling. TIA!I would definitely change things a bit, considering "work-loss must be kept to a minimum".
How about database backup every day and log backup at least every hour. Or log backups every 10
minutes? The more frequent you do log backup, the less impact is will have each time it is executed
(even though the impact is low to begin with, especially if you have separated log/data/backup
disks). For a 2 GB database, I probably wouldn't do differential backups, unless you have compelling
advantages to do so.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"PaulSand" <PaulSand@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E2D4C305-A7A2-4651-A4DB-CE04E247F5FB@.microsoft.com...
>I understand most things concerning making a backup, but I cannot seem to
> figure out what a sensible schedule is for making a backup. I would love to
> figure this out before we go live in a few months.
> The database will have a reasonable mutation rate, i.e. around 500 data
> changes per day and work-loss must be kept to a minimum. We expect the size
> to be around 2GB. The schedule I have made now is as follows:
> Full Backup on Sunday at 02:00
> Differential Backups on other weekdays at 02:00
> Transaction Log Backups every 4 hours every day
> Clean History 4 weeks old files every week on Sunday at 04:00
> I do not know if this makes sense. I do not know if the log backup proces
> will hinder the users or not. I do know there are many many variables that
> play a role in making a good backup procedure, but I would greatly appreciate
> any insight concerning correct scheduling. TIA!|||I agree with Tibor. Although I'm sure useful in some scenarios, we
don't use differentials at all. Fulls once per day, and then logs
every hour to two hours, is what we do. It's easier to manage the
files, and we can keep track in our head which files exactly we need in
the case of restore. And we're in the same boat - "work-loss must be
kept to a minimum".
Tibor Karaszi wrote:
> I would definitely change things a bit, considering "work-loss must be kept to a minimum".
> How about database backup every day and log backup at least every hour. Or log backups every 10
> minutes? The more frequent you do log backup, the less impact is will have each time it is executed
> (even though the impact is low to begin with, especially if you have separated log/data/backup
> disks). For a 2 GB database, I probably wouldn't do differential backups, unless you have compelling
> advantages to do so.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "PaulSand" <PaulSand@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:E2D4C305-A7A2-4651-A4DB-CE04E247F5FB@.microsoft.com...
> >I understand most things concerning making a backup, but I cannot seem to
> > figure out what a sensible schedule is for making a backup. I would love to
> > figure this out before we go live in a few months.
> >
> > The database will have a reasonable mutation rate, i.e. around 500 data
> > changes per day and work-loss must be kept to a minimum. We expect the size
> > to be around 2GB. The schedule I have made now is as follows:
> >
> > Full Backup on Sunday at 02:00
> > Differential Backups on other weekdays at 02:00
> > Transaction Log Backups every 4 hours every day
> > Clean History 4 weeks old files every week on Sunday at 04:00
> >
> > I do not know if this makes sense. I do not know if the log backup proces
> > will hinder the users or not. I do know there are many many variables that
> > play a role in making a good backup procedure, but I would greatly appreciate
> > any insight concerning correct scheduling. TIA!

[SQL2005] Backup Schedule

I understand most things concerning making a backup, but I cannot seem to
figure out what a sensible schedule is for making a backup. I would love to
figure this out before we go live in a few months.
The database will have a reasonable mutation rate, i.e. around 500 data
changes per day and work-loss must be kept to a minimum. We expect the size
to be around 2GB. The schedule I have made now is as follows:
Full Backup on Sunday at 02:00
Differential Backups on other weekdays at 02:00
Transaction Log Backups every 4 hours every day
Clean History 4 weeks old files every week on Sunday at 04:00
I do not know if this makes sense. I do not know if the log backup proces
will hinder the users or not. I do know there are many many variables that
play a role in making a good backup procedure, but I would greatly appreciat
e
any insight concerning correct scheduling. TIA!I would definitely change things a bit, considering "work-loss must be kept
to a minimum".
How about database backup every day and log backup at least every hour. Or l
og backups every 10
minutes? The more frequent you do log backup, the less impact is will have e
ach time it is executed
(even though the impact is low to begin with, especially if you have separat
ed log/data/backup
disks). For a 2 GB database, I probably wouldn't do differential backups, un
less you have compelling
advantages to do so.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"PaulSand" <PaulSand@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E2D4C305-A7A2-4651-A4DB-CE04E247F5FB@.microsoft.com...
>I understand most things concerning making a backup, but I cannot seem to
> figure out what a sensible schedule is for making a backup. I would love t
o
> figure this out before we go live in a few months.
> The database will have a reasonable mutation rate, i.e. around 500 data
> changes per day and work-loss must be kept to a minimum. We expect the siz
e
> to be around 2GB. The schedule I have made now is as follows:
> Full Backup on Sunday at 02:00
> Differential Backups on other weekdays at 02:00
> Transaction Log Backups every 4 hours every day
> Clean History 4 weeks old files every week on Sunday at 04:00
> I do not know if this makes sense. I do not know if the log backup proces
> will hinder the users or not. I do know there are many many variables that
> play a role in making a good backup procedure, but I would greatly appreci
ate
> any insight concerning correct scheduling. TIA!|||I agree with Tibor. Although I'm sure useful in some scenarios, we
don't use differentials at all. Fulls once per day, and then logs
every hour to two hours, is what we do. It's easier to manage the
files, and we can keep track in our head which files exactly we need in
the case of restore. And we're in the same boat - "work-loss must be
kept to a minimum".
Tibor Karaszi wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> I would definitely change things a bit, considering "work-loss must be kep
t to a minimum".
> How about database backup every day and log backup at least every hour. Or
log backups every 10
> minutes? The more frequent you do log backup, the less impact is will have
each time it is executed
> (even though the impact is low to begin with, especially if you have separ
ated log/data/backup
> disks). For a 2 GB database, I probably wouldn't do differential backups,
unless you have compelling
> advantages to do so.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "PaulSand" <PaulSand@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:E2D4C305-A7A2-4651-A4DB-CE04E247F5FB@.microsoft.com...

[SQL2005] Backup Schedule

I understand most things concerning making a backup, but I cannot seem to
figure out what a sensible schedule is for making a backup. I would love to
figure this out before we go live in a few months.
The database will have a reasonable mutation rate, i.e. around 500 data
changes per day and work-loss must be kept to a minimum. We expect the size
to be around 2GB. The schedule I have made now is as follows:
Full Backup on Sunday at 02:00
Differential Backups on other weekdays at 02:00
Transaction Log Backups every 4 hours every day
Clean History 4 weeks old files every week on Sunday at 04:00
I do not know if this makes sense. I do not know if the log backup proces
will hinder the users or not. I do know there are many many variables that
play a role in making a good backup procedure, but I would greatly appreciate
any insight concerning correct scheduling. TIA!
I would definitely change things a bit, considering "work-loss must be kept to a minimum".
How about database backup every day and log backup at least every hour. Or log backups every 10
minutes? The more frequent you do log backup, the less impact is will have each time it is executed
(even though the impact is low to begin with, especially if you have separated log/data/backup
disks). For a 2 GB database, I probably wouldn't do differential backups, unless you have compelling
advantages to do so.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"PaulSand" <PaulSand@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E2D4C305-A7A2-4651-A4DB-CE04E247F5FB@.microsoft.com...
>I understand most things concerning making a backup, but I cannot seem to
> figure out what a sensible schedule is for making a backup. I would love to
> figure this out before we go live in a few months.
> The database will have a reasonable mutation rate, i.e. around 500 data
> changes per day and work-loss must be kept to a minimum. We expect the size
> to be around 2GB. The schedule I have made now is as follows:
> Full Backup on Sunday at 02:00
> Differential Backups on other weekdays at 02:00
> Transaction Log Backups every 4 hours every day
> Clean History 4 weeks old files every week on Sunday at 04:00
> I do not know if this makes sense. I do not know if the log backup proces
> will hinder the users or not. I do know there are many many variables that
> play a role in making a good backup procedure, but I would greatly appreciate
> any insight concerning correct scheduling. TIA!
|||I agree with Tibor. Although I'm sure useful in some scenarios, we
don't use differentials at all. Fulls once per day, and then logs
every hour to two hours, is what we do. It's easier to manage the
files, and we can keep track in our head which files exactly we need in
the case of restore. And we're in the same boat - "work-loss must be
kept to a minimum".
Tibor Karaszi wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> I would definitely change things a bit, considering "work-loss must be kept to a minimum".
> How about database backup every day and log backup at least every hour. Or log backups every 10
> minutes? The more frequent you do log backup, the less impact is will have each time it is executed
> (even though the impact is low to begin with, especially if you have separated log/data/backup
> disks). For a 2 GB database, I probably wouldn't do differential backups, unless you have compelling
> advantages to do so.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "PaulSand" <PaulSand@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:E2D4C305-A7A2-4651-A4DB-CE04E247F5FB@.microsoft.com...

Sunday, February 19, 2012

[DBNETLIB][ConnectionWrite (send()).] errors

We have a Dell 2950 running Windows 2003 connecting to SQL2005 Database.

Users accessing their SQL application are getting this error message after leaving the application open for a period when they are not accessing the system. We have run the application on two different servers and cannot re-create the errors, which might suggest a hardware problem with our server, but as yet we haven't identified the problem.

Does anyone have any ideas ?

Hi Brian,

I'm having similar issues with my system (new HP server running Win 2003 & SQL 2005 with VB App running on XP Clients, MDAC 2.81). Seems to affect certain PC's, doesn't affect a version of the VB 6 App running locally on the server, or one of the Clients that continually polls the server once per minute, 24/7.

The error handling in the VB App actually writes a log of the error to a SQL Table, which suggests that the connection error occurs, and by the time the user confirms the msgbox prompt the connection comes back up, allowing the log to be written...

I've tried disabling connection pooling in the ADO connection string & the SynAttackProtect REG setting change as discussed at http://www.eggheadcafe.com/ng/microsoft.public.sqlserver.connect/post22689813.asp

Both to no avail....

Was wondering if you'd found a resolution yet?

Best regards

Keith
|||

For your issue, I would try to follow the article http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;899599 to add the registry key. Maybe that will fix your problem. If not, please provide more information on the infrastructure to help us narrow the issue.

HTH

|||umm - our problem appeared to hardware - Dell announced urgent driver updates for the cards in our server, but that didn't entirley solve the problem although it is better. The the support desk for hte application we are using then recomended switching the server to use both TCP/IP and Named Pipes and then adjusting the client config appropriatly. this seems to have resolved our issue

[DBNETLIB][ConnectionWrite (send()).] errors

We have a Dell 2950 running Windows 2003 connecting to SQL2005 Database.

Users accessing their SQL application are getting this error message after leaving the application open for a period when they are not accessing the system. We have run the application on two different servers and cannot re-create the errors, which might suggest a hardware problem with our server, but as yet we haven't identified the problem.

Does anyone have any ideas ?

Hi Brian,

I'm having similar issues with my system (new HP server running Win 2003 & SQL 2005 with VB App running on XP Clients, MDAC 2.81). Seems to affect certain PC's, doesn't affect a version of the VB 6 App running locally on the server, or one of the Clients that continually polls the server once per minute, 24/7.

The error handling in the VB App actually writes a log of the error to a SQL Table, which suggests that the connection error occurs, and by the time the user confirms the msgbox prompt the connection comes back up, allowing the log to be written...

I've tried disabling connection pooling in the ADO connection string & the SynAttackProtect REG setting change as discussed at http://www.eggheadcafe.com/ng/microsoft.public.sqlserver.connect/post22689813.asp

Both to no avail....

Was wondering if you'd found a resolution yet?

Best regards

Keith
|||

For your issue, I would try to follow the article http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;899599 to add the registry key. Maybe that will fix your problem. If not, please provide more information on the infrastructure to help us narrow the issue.

HTH

|||umm - our problem appeared to hardware - Dell announced urgent driver updates for the cards in our server, but that didn't entirley solve the problem although it is better. The the support desk for hte application we are using then recomended switching the server to use both TCP/IP and Named Pipes and then adjusting the client config appropriatly. this seems to have resolved our issue

[DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen (PreLoginHandshake()).]General network error.

Hi,

I have a classic ASP application that has been running on Win2003,IIS6 and SQL2000 for 3 years without a single error.

We've just moved to SQL2005 enterprise and we're getting the following intermittent error.

Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server error '80004005'

[DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen (PreLoginHandshake()).]General network error. Check your network documentation.

Any ideas where to start?

this is a common connection problem and without details like your current sql server configuration and connection string, we just can write our guesses,

first, if you have not installed latest service pack for sql serer 2005, please install it before trying the following suggestions,

second, you can check if you have enabled remote connections on sql server, to check this setting go to sql server surface area configuration -> surface area configuration for services and connections -> remote connections and enable remote connections by selection "local and remote connections" and using tcp/ip only.

if the previous step did not solve your problem, you can check your connection string, please examine the following connection strings,
for odbc connections:
- Driver={SQL Native Client};Server=myServerAddress;Database=myDataBase;Uid=myUsername;Pwd=myPassword;
- Driver={SQL Native Client};Server=myServerAddress;Database=myDataBase;Trusted_Connection=yes;

for ole db connections
- Provider=SQLNCLI;Server=myServerAddress;Database=myDataBase;Uid=myUsername;Pwd=myPassword;
- Provider=SQLNCLI;Server=myServerAddress;Database=myDataBase;Trusted_Connection=yes;

for .net connections
- Data Source=myServerAddress;Initial Catalog=myDataBase;User Id=myUsername;Password=myPassword;
or
- Server=myServerAddress;Database=myDataBase;User ID=myUsername;Password=myPassword;Trusted_Connection=False;
- Data Source=myServerAddress;Initial Catalog=myDataBase;Integrated Security=SSPI;
or
- Server=myServerAddress;Database=myDataBase;Trusted_Connection=True;


also if you are connecting with an sql server account, please check if you have set authentication mode of sql server to mixed mode.

and finally if your sql server is on a seperate machine, please be sure that there is no firewall or router is locking the communication of iis and sql server.

if these won't help you to solve the problem, please give us some details like
- your connectionstring
- is your sql server is on another computer
- configuration details of your sql server (like active net libraries, authentication details)

|||hi kadir,

thank-you for the quick reply. i will check all your suggestions and report back.

in the meantime, sql and webserver are all on the same server and the connection string is:-

databaseServer = "PROVIDER=SQLOLEDB;DATA SOURCE=pretty.ucc.usyd.edu.au;UID=xxx;PWD=xxx;DATABASE=xxx"|||hi kadir,

i must confess i'm not an sql server expert.

1. latest service pack and mdac were already installed.

2. allow remote connections is enabled. i couldn't see where (see point 3) using tcp/ip was. i'm using the ms sql management studioto find this information.

3. using sql server configuration manager i could find the following.

sql server 2005 network config - protocols for msqlserver
shared memory enabled
named pipes disabled
tcp/ip enabled
via disabled

sql native client config - client protocols
shared memory enabled
tcp/ip enabled
names pipes enabled
via disabled

4. we are connecting using an sql account. however, i couldn't see the option to allow mixed. i could only choose between windows authentication and sql server authentication.

thanks|||ok, just found the sql server surface area configuration. will check and report back.
|||remote connections is set to "local and remote connections" and using tcp/ip only.|||sql server and windows authentication mode were selected. so it looks like everything was configured they way you wanted.|||

Hi peter, sorry for the delay,

sql server and iis is on same machine so can you please test the following connectionstrings:
Provider=SQLNCLI;Server=(local);Database=xxx;Uid=xxx;Pwd=xxx
or
Provider=SQLNCLI;Server=127.0.0.1;Database=xxx;Uid=xxx;Pwd=xxx

and please inform me about the result.