MS-SQL 2000 Tape/Hardware Support

Hi,
Where can I find a list of supported tape drives by MS-SQL?
For example: DDS, DLT etc.
Thanks
Shiri Tzuk
Shiri Tzuk wrote:
> Hi,
> Where can I find a list of supported tape drives by MS-SQL?
> For example: DDS, DLT etc.
> Thanks
I don't know if such a list exists, but why don't you just backup your
databases to disk? You can then let your backup program backup the files
to tape because now it's just a regular file backup.
Regards
Steen
|||Hello Steen,
Thanks for your reply.
We would like to backup to tape since our customers (that using our product)
request for that feature. We also provide of course the ability to backup to
the network.
The customers also can decide which tape drive and this is why I need to
know if there is a limitation in that area.
Shiri
Shiri Tzuk
"Steen Persson (DK)" wrote:

> Shiri Tzuk wrote:
> I don't know if such a list exists, but why don't you just backup your
> databases to disk? You can then let your backup program backup the files
> to tape because now it's just a regular file backup.
> Regards
> Steen
>

MS-SQL 2000 Tape/Hardware Support

Hi,
Where can I find a list of supported tape drives by MS-SQL?
For example: DDS, DLT etc.
Thanks
--
Shiri TzukShiri Tzuk wrote:
> Hi,
> Where can I find a list of supported tape drives by MS-SQL?
> For example: DDS, DLT etc.
> Thanks
I don't know if such a list exists, but why don't you just backup your
databases to disk? You can then let your backup program backup the files
to tape because now it's just a regular file backup.
Regards
Steen|||Hello Steen,
Thanks for your reply.
We would like to backup to tape since our customers (that using our product)
request for that feature. We also provide of course the ability to backup to
the network.
The customers also can decide which tape drive and this is why I need to
know if there is a limitation in that area.
Shiri
--
Shiri Tzuk
"Steen Persson (DK)" wrote:

> Shiri Tzuk wrote:
> I don't know if such a list exists, but why don't you just backup your
> databases to disk? You can then let your backup program backup the files
> to tape because now it's just a regular file backup.
> Regards
> Steen
>sql

MS-SQL 2000 Tape/Hardware Support

Hi,
Where can I find a list of supported tape drives by MS-SQL?
For example: DDS, DLT etc.
Thanks
--
Shiri TzukShiri Tzuk wrote:
> Hi,
> Where can I find a list of supported tape drives by MS-SQL?
> For example: DDS, DLT etc.
> Thanks
I don't know if such a list exists, but why don't you just backup your
databases to disk? You can then let your backup program backup the files
to tape because now it's just a regular file backup.
Regards
Steen|||Hello Steen,
Thanks for your reply.
We would like to backup to tape since our customers (that using our product)
request for that feature. We also provide of course the ability to backup to
the network.
The customers also can decide which tape drive and this is why I need to
know if there is a limitation in that area.
Shiri
--
Shiri Tzuk
"Steen Persson (DK)" wrote:
> Shiri Tzuk wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Where can I find a list of supported tape drives by MS-SQL?
> > For example: DDS, DLT etc.
> > Thanks
> I don't know if such a list exists, but why don't you just backup your
> databases to disk? You can then let your backup program backup the files
> to tape because now it's just a regular file backup.
> Regards
> Steen
>

MS-SQL 2000 SP2

I have a client that has noticed a "slowness in reads" during a performance
benchmark. They mentioned something about a MS-SQL "fix" to improve read
performance. Is there such a fix or patch? I know this is real vague but
it's all the information I have.All publicly available "fixes" are available through the service packs.
Microsoft Support may issue individual patches for specific problems to
resolve support cases, however these are only available after opening a case
with tech support or by specific reference in certain knowledgebase
articles. Without knowing exactly what "fix" your client is referencing,
its hard to provide additional information. I'd double check with them to
get some additional details.
--
--Brian
(Please reply to the newsgroups only.)
"Jo Ratner" <jo_ratner@.NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:riURb.466$jH6.359@.newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>I have a client that has noticed a "slowness in reads" during a performance
> benchmark. They mentioned something about a MS-SQL "fix" to improve read
> performance. Is there such a fix or patch? I know this is real vague but
> it's all the information I have.
>|||Hi
Although I dont know of any "fix" there are alot of things you can do to
improve reads.. ranging from changing SQL, adding/updating
indexes/statistics to additional hardware or a change of O/S. Windows 2003
has a improved file system that in turn improves SQL Server performance. It
could even be the way the tests are being run.
Without analysing the problem you may not know exacly where the problem(s)
may occur.
The latest service pack is 3a, and, as this contains several security fixes
it would be sensible to use this. It would be reasonable to assume any
system being implemented would be atleast at this level, a system on Service
pack 2 may not be representative.
John
"Jo Ratner" <jo_ratner@.NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:riURb.466$jH6.359@.newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> I have a client that has noticed a "slowness in reads" during a
performance
> benchmark. They mentioned something about a MS-SQL "fix" to improve read
> performance. Is there such a fix or patch? I know this is real vague but
> it's all the information I have.
>|||It was an invalid benchmark test...
Thanks!
"John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bvft13$cal$1@.sparta.btinternet.com...
> Hi
> Although I dont know of any "fix" there are alot of things you can do to
> improve reads.. ranging from changing SQL, adding/updating
> indexes/statistics to additional hardware or a change of O/S. Windows 2003
> has a improved file system that in turn improves SQL Server performance.
It
> could even be the way the tests are being run.
> Without analysing the problem you may not know exacly where the problem(s)
> may occur.
> The latest service pack is 3a, and, as this contains several security
fixes
> it would be sensible to use this. It would be reasonable to assume any
> system being implemented would be atleast at this level, a system on
Service
> pack 2 may not be representative.
> John
> "Jo Ratner" <jo_ratner@.NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:riURb.466$jH6.359@.newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > I have a client that has noticed a "slowness in reads" during a
> performance
> > benchmark. They mentioned something about a MS-SQL "fix" to improve
read
> > performance. Is there such a fix or patch? I know this is real vague
but
> > it's all the information I have.
> >
> >
>

MS-SQL 2000 SP2

I have a client that has noticed a "slowness in reads" during a performance
benchmark. They mentioned something about a MS-SQL "fix" to improve read
performance. Is there such a fix or patch? I know this is real vague but
it's all the information I have.All publicly available "fixes" are available through the service packs.
Microsoft Support may issue individual patches for specific problems to
resolve support cases, however these are only available after opening a case
with tech support or by specific reference in certain knowledgebase
articles. Without knowing exactly what "fix" your client is referencing,
its hard to provide additional information. I'd double check with them to
get some additional details.
--Brian
(Please reply to the newsgroups only.)
"Jo Ratner" <jo_ratner@.NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:riURb.466$jH6.359@.newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...

quote:

---

>I have a client that has noticed a "slowness in reads" during a performance
> benchmark. They mentioned something about a MS-SQL "fix" to improve read
> performance. Is there such a fix or patch? I know this is real vague but
> it's all the information I have.
>

---

|||Hi
Although I dont know of any "fix" there are alot of things you can do to
improve reads.. ranging from changing SQL, adding/updating
indexes/statistics to additional hardware or a change of O/S. Windows 2003
has a improved file system that in turn improves SQL Server performance. It
could even be the way the tests are being run.
Without analysing the problem you may not know exacly where the problem(s)
may occur.
The latest service pack is 3a, and, as this contains several security fixes
it would be sensible to use this. It would be reasonable to assume any
system being implemented would be atleast at this level, a system on Service
pack 2 may not be representative.
John
"Jo Ratner" <jo_ratner@.NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:riURb.466$jH6.359@.newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...

quote:

---

> I have a client that has noticed a "slowness in reads" during a

---

performance

quote:

---

> benchmark. They mentioned something about a MS-SQL "fix" to improve read
> performance. Is there such a fix or patch? I know this is real vague but
> it's all the information I have.
>

---

|||It was an invalid benchmark test...
Thanks!
"John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bvft13$cal$1@.sparta.btinternet.com...

quote:

---

> Hi
> Although I dont know of any "fix" there are alot of things you can do to
> improve reads.. ranging from changing SQL, adding/updating
> indexes/statistics to additional hardware or a change of O/S. Windows 2003
> has a improved file system that in turn improves SQL Server performance.

---

It

quote:

---

> could even be the way the tests are being run.
> Without analysing the problem you may not know exacly where the problem(s)
> may occur.
> The latest service pack is 3a, and, as this contains several security

---

fixes

quote:

---

> it would be sensible to use this. It would be reasonable to assume any
> system being implemented would be atleast at this level, a system on

---

Service

quote:

---

> pack 2 may not be representative.
> John
> "Jo Ratner" <jo_ratner@.NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:riURb.466$jH6.359@.newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> performance
read[QUOTE]
but[QUOTE]
>

---

MS-SQL 2000 Enterprise clustered installation fails

Hi everyone,
I have problem installing MS-SQL 2000 enterprise on Windows Server 2003 Ent.
cluster. The message I'm getting is "Setup failed to perform required
operations on the cluster nodes." The only thing "cluster.log" says in
regards of the MS-SQL is that "the virtual SQL server name can't be found.
Now, that's not the first time I'm doing this installation. Often I got in
the same problem, but by relaxing the local Policy (we are running very
restrictive GPO) usually resolved the problem. Therefore, I thing the problem
comes from the GPO restrictions. Also, I'm using the same domain account
used to install MSCS and I had no issues there.
My question is, what's the best way to approach this problem and what are
the MS-SQL requirements (in terms account permissions)?
The install account must be an admin on all nodes.
The MS task scheduler must be enabled on all nodes. <-- this is likely the
problem.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"kkantchev@.hotmail.com" <kkantchevhotmailcom@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message news:370B4F33-07E5-43A2-B4F3-4D0F485809AC@.microsoft.com...
> Hi everyone,
> I have problem installing MS-SQL 2000 enterprise on Windows Server 2003
> Ent.
> cluster. The message I'm getting is "Setup failed to perform required
> operations on the cluster nodes." The only thing "cluster.log" says in
> regards of the MS-SQL is that "the virtual SQL server name can't be found.
> Now, that's not the first time I'm doing this installation. Often I got in
> the same problem, but by relaxing the local Policy (we are running very
> restrictive GPO) usually resolved the problem. Therefore, I thing the
> problem
> comes from the GPO restrictions. Also, I'm using the same domain account
> used to install MSCS and I had no issues there.
> My question is, what's the best way to approach this problem and what are
> the MS-SQL requirements (in terms account permissions)?
|||Are you, or the cluster service account, also a Domain Admin? If not, then
you will need to have your Domain Admins create Domain Local Groups before
the installation.
Check out the installation logs; they contain the point of failure and
specifics about why it failed.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/910228/en-us
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143702.aspx
Good luck.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas

"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OsZVE65SHHA.2256@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> The install account must be an admin on all nodes.
> The MS task scheduler must be enabled on all nodes. <-- this is likely
the
> problem.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
> "kkantchev@.hotmail.com" <kkantchevhotmailcom@.discussions.microsoft.com>
> wrote in message
news:370B4F33-07E5-43A2-B4F3-4D0F485809AC@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
found.[vbcol=seagreen]
in[vbcol=seagreen]
account[vbcol=seagreen]
are
>
sql

ms-sql 2000 configuration

Hello everybody !
I have dedicated server for database (ms-sql) with configuration"
- 8xCPU (Xeon MP)
- 8GB RAM
- 3 RAID 10 partitions for database, log and other files
- Windows 2003 Enterprise OS
So, How to set memory & CPUs in Enterprise Manager ?
Fixed size memory i.e. 7GB for SQL and the rest for system or should I use
"Dynamically configure SQL server memory" option ?
Is it necessary to use "Reserve physicial memory for SQL server" option ?
Is it good idea to use all of 8 CPUS for SQL ?
If anybody knows help me to do that...
Thanks in advance.Hi
"Greg" wrote:
> Hello everybody !
> I have dedicated server for database (ms-sql) with configuration"
> - 8xCPU (Xeon MP)
> - 8GB RAM
> - 3 RAID 10 partitions for database, log and other files
> - Windows 2003 Enterprise OS
> So, How to set memory & CPUs in Enterprise Manager ?
> Fixed size memory i.e. 7GB for SQL and the rest for system or should I use
> "Dynamically configure SQL server memory" option ?
> Is it necessary to use "Reserve physicial memory for SQL server" option ?
> Is it good idea to use all of 8 CPUS for SQL ?
> If anybody knows help me to do that...
> Thanks in advance.
If this box is dedicated to SQL Server then you should not need to set the
min/max memory values and all CPUs could be allocated to SQL Server. If you
are using the server for other processes (such as DTS packages) then you may
want to change the configuration, but you may want to monitor the system
performance first to find out if this is an issue.
You should make sure that you AWE configured correctly.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750 Also make sure that you have service
packed the system to SP4 then you have also applied the post SP4 hot fixes
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/899761
John

ms-sql 2000 configuration

Hello everybody !
I have dedicated server for database (ms-sql) with configuration"
- 8xCPU (Xeon MP)
- 8GB RAM
- 3 RAID 10 partitions for database, log and other files
- Windows 2003 Enterprise OS
So, How to set memory & CPUs in Enterprise Manager ?
Fixed size memory i.e. 7GB for SQL and the rest for system or should I use
"Dynamically configure SQL server memory" option ?
Is it necessary to use "Reserve physicial memory for SQL server" option ?
Is it good idea to use all of 8 CPUS for SQL ?
If anybody knows help me to do that...
Thanks in advance.Hi
"Greg" wrote:

> Hello everybody !
> I have dedicated server for database (ms-sql) with configuration"
> - 8xCPU (Xeon MP)
> - 8GB RAM
> - 3 RAID 10 partitions for database, log and other files
> - Windows 2003 Enterprise OS
> So, How to set memory & CPUs in Enterprise Manager ?
> Fixed size memory i.e. 7GB for SQL and the rest for system or should I us
e
> "Dynamically configure SQL server memory" option ?
> Is it necessary to use "Reserve physicial memory for SQL server" option ?
> Is it good idea to use all of 8 CPUS for SQL ?
> If anybody knows help me to do that...
> Thanks in advance.
If this box is dedicated to SQL Server then you should not need to set the
min/max memory values and all CPUs could be allocated to SQL Server. If you
are using the server for other processes (such as DTS packages) then you may
want to change the configuration, but you may want to monitor the system
performance first to find out if this is an issue.
You should make sure that you AWE configured correctly.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750 Also make sure that you have service
packed the system to SP4 then you have also applied the post SP4 hot fixes
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/899761
John

Ms-sql

Hi
We have a MS-SQL dB that is more than 300 gb and have some performance problems.
One of the problems is, that the system do not automatically update statistics.
In the test system, which is a copy of production we have run sp_updatestats and all the tables and index is updated but when we run sp_updatestats in production, it return normally after one hour but it do not update all tables and index ??
Regards
JohnAre you running this at a time frame that sql server is the least utilized (like between midnight and 4 a.m. - depending on your business model) ? Also, what is the output generated when you run sp_updatestats ? How do you know that it is not updating the statistics for all tables ?|||Hi
The sp_updatestats was running Saturday, while the system performance is low.
The output was statistics for all tables have been updated

The application (SAP), have some dB information reports and it is possible to get information on tables and index. In the test system SAP reports, that the statistics is updated but not in the production.

When I make the following sql in the production and in the test system:

select * from sysobjects so, sysindexes si where so.name = 'KNA1' and si.name like 'KNA1% Z'

I can see, that the number in the rows column is zero. I expect that the number is different from zero.

Ms-sql

I want to display all the items and its quantity.have same month and different year of purchase in a same column. if the item doesnot sold in a year on that place that item's quantity is zero.

Quote:

Originally Posted by srikanmani

I want to display all the items and its quantity.have same month and different year of purchase in a same column. if the item doesnot sold in a year on that place that item's quantity is zero.

Hi
Can you explain me your requirement clearly.
And send your code what you tried