mssql 2000 update from select

I am trying to update a table from a select statement, any suggestions?

update (select column1 from table1)
set column2 = 'value'

The data in column1 contains the name of the table I want to update column2 with the 'value'.

I'm am pretty sure the syntax is in correct along with the structure. The error...

Server: Msg 170, Level 15, State 1, Line 2
Line 2: Incorrect syntax near '('.
Server: Msg 170, Level 15, State 1, Line 3
Line 3: Incorrect syntax near '='.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdority

I am trying to update a table from a select statement, any suggestions?

update (select column1 from table1)
set column2 = 'value'

The data in column1 contains the name of the table I want to update column2 with the 'value'.

I'm am pretty sure the syntax is in correct along with the structure. The error...

Server: Msg 170, Level 15, State 1, Line 2
Line 2: Incorrect syntax near '('.
Server: Msg 170, Level 15, State 1, Line 3
Line 3: Incorrect syntax near '='.

nope, the syntax is not correct. in this case you have to build the string for the entire update command..

set @.sqlcmd = 'update ..."

exec (@.sqlcmd)|||Please explain how to build.

MSSQL 2000 & two nics

Hello,
How can I select IP address(es) for listening of MSSQL on server with two
(or more) nics?
Thank you for ideas.
Pavel Balus
Hi
I think this previous post may do what you require:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...66eddde9709aae
John
"Pavel Balus" <pavel.balus@.kovotour.cz> wrote in message
news:OfOXXBVLFHA.3628@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> How can I select IP address(es) for listening of MSSQL on server with two
> (or more) nics?
> Thank you for ideas.
> Pavel Balus
>
|||Hello,
thank you for your reply but this isn't solution for me. Somewhere inside
registry is setting for this. By using of this is possible to set MSSQL for
listening on selected IPs or NICs, but I don't know how:o(
Pavel Balus
"John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> pe v diskusnm pspvku
news:e1YpwNWLFHA.2120@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> I think this previous post may do what you require:
>
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...66eddde9709aae[vbcol=seagreen]
> John
> "Pavel Balus" <pavel.balus@.kovotour.cz> wrote in message
> news:OfOXXBVLFHA.3628@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
two
>

MSSQL 2000 & two nics

Hello,
How can I select IP address(es) for listening of MSSQL on server with two
(or more) nics?
Thank you for ideas.
Pavel BalusHi
I think this previous post may do what you require:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group...r />
de9709aae
John
"Pavel Balus" <pavel.balus@.kovotour.cz> wrote in message
news:OfOXXBVLFHA.3628@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> How can I select IP address(es) for listening of MSSQL on server with two
> (or more) nics?
> Thank you for ideas.
> Pavel Balus
>|||Hello,
thank you for your reply but this isn't solution for me. Somewhere inside
registry is setting for this. By using of this is possible to set MSSQL for
listening on selected IPs or NICs, but I don't know how:o(
Pavel Balus
"John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> pe v diskusnm pspvku
news:e1YpwNWLFHA.2120@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> I think this previous post may do what you require:
>
http://groups-beta.google.com/group...066eddde9709aae[
vbcol=seagreen]
> John
> "Pavel Balus" <pavel.balus@.kovotour.cz> wrote in message
> news:OfOXXBVLFHA.3628@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
two
>

Msg 8127 problem.

Hi,
I need help with this sql. It works for SQL Server 2000, SP3,
(8.00.760) but it fails in SQL Server 2005 (9.00.1399.06).
SELECT DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]) as 'YEARCOL', DATEPART(mm,
os.[CreateTS]) as 'MONTHCOL', DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) as 'DAYCOL
',
DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) as 'HOURCOL', min(os.[CreateTS]) as
'CreateTS',
SUM(os.[Lines]) as 'Lines'
FROM aTable os WITH (NOLOCK)
GROUP BY DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) ORDER BY
os.[CreateTS]
I am not good at sql, any help is greatly appreciated. The SQL is
dynamically generated by a .Net code and called using OleDb command
class.
Thanks, JoseYou must order by columns in the select list or group by list.
As you say it's not the best SQL as it is generated.
You could:
order by DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS])
or
order by min(os.[CreateTS])
or
order by 1,2,3,4
which means order by columns 1,2,3,4 in the select list.
The choice depends on the order you want and in the last case how lazy you
want to be
The syntax on SQL 2005 is generally tighter than 2000. Most people probably
had the odd issue with their code when they tested the upgrade.
Paul
"Cuellar" <cuellar1706@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1159915384.934558.170910@.i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> I need help with this sql. It works for SQL Server 2000, SP3,
> (8.00.760) but it fails in SQL Server 2005 (9.00.1399.06).
> SELECT DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]) as 'YEARCOL', DATEPART(mm,
> os.[CreateTS]) as 'MONTHCOL', DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) as 'DAYC
OL',
> DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) as 'HOURCOL', min(os.[CreateTS]) as
> 'CreateTS',
> SUM(os.[Lines]) as 'Lines'
> FROM aTable os WITH (NOLOCK)
> GROUP BY DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
> DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) ORDER B
Y
> os.[CreateTS]
> I am not good at sql, any help is greatly appreciated. The SQL is
> dynamically generated by a .Net code and called using OleDb command
> class.
> Thanks, Jose
>|||Fantastic, that explain the problem. It works.
I end up using the ALIAS:
order by 'CreateTS'
which it seems to work too, and I assume is equivalent to the:
order by min(os.[CreateTS])
one of the versions that you mentioned.
Thank so much,
Jose
Paul Cahill wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> You must order by columns in the select list or group by list.
> As you say it's not the best SQL as it is generated.
>
> You could:
> order by DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
> DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS])
> or
> order by min(os.[CreateTS])
> or
> order by 1,2,3,4
> which means order by columns 1,2,3,4 in the select list.
> The choice depends on the order you want and in the last case how lazy you
> want to be
> The syntax on SQL 2005 is generally tighter than 2000. Most people probabl
y
> had the odd issue with their code when they tested the upgrade.
> Paul
>
>
> "Cuellar" <cuellar1706@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1159915384.934558.170910@.i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...|||You are welcome.
Paul
"Cuellar" <cuellar1706@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1159977911.674457.60370@.m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> Fantastic, that explain the problem. It works.
> I end up using the ALIAS:
> order by 'CreateTS'
> which it seems to work too, and I assume is equivalent to the:
> order by min(os.[CreateTS])
> one of the versions that you mentioned.
> Thank so much,
> Jose
> Paul Cahill wrote:
>

Msg 8127 problem.

Hi,
I need help with this sql. It works for SQL Server 2000, SP3,
(8.00.760) but it fails in SQL Server 2005 (9.00.1399.06).
SELECT DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]) as 'YEARCOL', DATEPART(mm,
os.[CreateTS]) as 'MONTHCOL', DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) as 'DAYCOL',
DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) as 'HOURCOL', min(os.[CreateTS]) as
'CreateTS',
SUM(os.[Lines]) as 'Lines'
FROM aTable os WITH (NOLOCK)
GROUP BY DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) ORDER BY
os.[CreateTS]
I am not good at sql, any help is greatly appreciated. The SQL is
dynamically generated by a .Net code and called using OleDb command
class.
Thanks, Jose
You must order by columns in the select list or group by list.
As you say it's not the best SQL as it is generated.
You could:
order by DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS])
or
order by min(os.[CreateTS])
or
order by 1,2,3,4
which means order by columns 1,2,3,4 in the select list.
The choice depends on the order you want and in the last case how lazy you
want to be
The syntax on SQL 2005 is generally tighter than 2000. Most people probably
had the odd issue with their code when they tested the upgrade.
Paul
"Cuellar" <cuellar1706@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1159915384.934558.170910@.i42g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi,
> I need help with this sql. It works for SQL Server 2000, SP3,
> (8.00.760) but it fails in SQL Server 2005 (9.00.1399.06).
> SELECT DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]) as 'YEARCOL', DATEPART(mm,
> os.[CreateTS]) as 'MONTHCOL', DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) as 'DAYCOL',
> DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) as 'HOURCOL', min(os.[CreateTS]) as
> 'CreateTS',
> SUM(os.[Lines]) as 'Lines'
> FROM aTable os WITH (NOLOCK)
> GROUP BY DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
> DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) ORDER BY
> os.[CreateTS]
> I am not good at sql, any help is greatly appreciated. The SQL is
> dynamically generated by a .Net code and called using OleDb command
> class.
> Thanks, Jose
>
|||Fantastic, that explain the problem. It works.
I end up using the ALIAS:
order by 'CreateTS'
which it seems to work too, and I assume is equivalent to the:
order by min(os.[CreateTS])
one of the versions that you mentioned.
Thank so much,
Jose
Paul Cahill wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> You must order by columns in the select list or group by list.
> As you say it's not the best SQL as it is generated.
>
> You could:
> order by DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
> DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS])
> or
> order by min(os.[CreateTS])
> or
> order by 1,2,3,4
> which means order by columns 1,2,3,4 in the select list.
> The choice depends on the order you want and in the last case how lazy you
> want to be
> The syntax on SQL 2005 is generally tighter than 2000. Most people probably
> had the odd issue with their code when they tested the upgrade.
> Paul
>
>
> "Cuellar" <cuellar1706@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1159915384.934558.170910@.i42g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
|||You are welcome.
Paul
"Cuellar" <cuellar1706@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1159977911.674457.60370@.m7g2000cwm.googlegrou ps.com...
> Fantastic, that explain the problem. It works.
> I end up using the ALIAS:
> order by 'CreateTS'
> which it seems to work too, and I assume is equivalent to the:
> order by min(os.[CreateTS])
> one of the versions that you mentioned.
> Thank so much,
> Jose
> Paul Cahill wrote:
>

Msg 8127 problem.

Hi,
I need help with this sql. It works for SQL Server 2000, SP3,
(8.00.760) but it fails in SQL Server 2005 (9.00.1399.06).
SELECT DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]) as 'YEARCOL', DATEPART(mm,
os.[CreateTS]) as 'MONTHCOL', DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) as 'DAYCOL',
DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) as 'HOURCOL', min(os.[CreateTS]) as
'CreateTS',
SUM(os.[Lines]) as 'Lines'
FROM aTable os WITH (NOLOCK)
GROUP BY DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) ORDER BY
os.[CreateTS]
I am not good at sql, any help is greatly appreciated. The SQL is
dynamically generated by a .Net code and called using OleDb command
class.
Thanks, JoseYou must order by columns in the select list or group by list.
As you say it's not the best SQL as it is generated.
You could:
order by DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS])
or
order by min(os.[CreateTS])
or
order by 1,2,3,4
which means order by columns 1,2,3,4 in the select list.
The choice depends on the order you want and in the last case how lazy you
want to be :)
The syntax on SQL 2005 is generally tighter than 2000. Most people probably
had the odd issue with their code when they tested the upgrade.
Paul
"Cuellar" <cuellar1706@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1159915384.934558.170910@.i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> I need help with this sql. It works for SQL Server 2000, SP3,
> (8.00.760) but it fails in SQL Server 2005 (9.00.1399.06).
> SELECT DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]) as 'YEARCOL', DATEPART(mm,
> os.[CreateTS]) as 'MONTHCOL', DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) as 'DAYCOL',
> DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) as 'HOURCOL', min(os.[CreateTS]) as
> 'CreateTS',
> SUM(os.[Lines]) as 'Lines'
> FROM aTable os WITH (NOLOCK)
> GROUP BY DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
> DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) ORDER BY
> os.[CreateTS]
> I am not good at sql, any help is greatly appreciated. The SQL is
> dynamically generated by a .Net code and called using OleDb command
> class.
> Thanks, Jose
>|||Fantastic, that explain the problem. It works.
I end up using the ALIAS:
order by 'CreateTS'
which it seems to work too, and I assume is equivalent to the:
order by min(os.[CreateTS])
one of the versions that you mentioned.
Thank so much,
Jose
Paul Cahill wrote:
> You must order by columns in the select list or group by list.
> As you say it's not the best SQL as it is generated.
>
> You could:
> order by DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
> DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS])
> or
> order by min(os.[CreateTS])
> or
> order by 1,2,3,4
> which means order by columns 1,2,3,4 in the select list.
> The choice depends on the order you want and in the last case how lazy you
> want to be :)
> The syntax on SQL 2005 is generally tighter than 2000. Most people probably
> had the odd issue with their code when they tested the upgrade.
> Paul
>
>
> "Cuellar" <cuellar1706@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1159915384.934558.170910@.i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Hi,
> > I need help with this sql. It works for SQL Server 2000, SP3,
> > (8.00.760) but it fails in SQL Server 2005 (9.00.1399.06).
> >
> > SELECT DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]) as 'YEARCOL', DATEPART(mm,
> > os.[CreateTS]) as 'MONTHCOL', DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) as 'DAYCOL',
> > DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) as 'HOURCOL', min(os.[CreateTS]) as
> > 'CreateTS',
> > SUM(os.[Lines]) as 'Lines'
> > FROM aTable os WITH (NOLOCK)
> > GROUP BY DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
> > DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) ORDER BY
> > os.[CreateTS]
> >
> > I am not good at sql, any help is greatly appreciated. The SQL is
> > dynamically generated by a .Net code and called using OleDb command
> > class.
> >
> > Thanks, Jose
> >|||You are welcome.
Paul
"Cuellar" <cuellar1706@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1159977911.674457.60370@.m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> Fantastic, that explain the problem. It works.
> I end up using the ALIAS:
> order by 'CreateTS'
> which it seems to work too, and I assume is equivalent to the:
> order by min(os.[CreateTS])
> one of the versions that you mentioned.
> Thank so much,
> Jose
> Paul Cahill wrote:
>> You must order by columns in the select list or group by list.
>> As you say it's not the best SQL as it is generated.
>>
>> You could:
>> order by DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
>> DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS])
>> or
>> order by min(os.[CreateTS])
>> or
>> order by 1,2,3,4
>> which means order by columns 1,2,3,4 in the select list.
>> The choice depends on the order you want and in the last case how lazy
>> you
>> want to be :)
>> The syntax on SQL 2005 is generally tighter than 2000. Most people
>> probably
>> had the odd issue with their code when they tested the upgrade.
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> "Cuellar" <cuellar1706@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1159915384.934558.170910@.i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> > Hi,
>> > I need help with this sql. It works for SQL Server 2000, SP3,
>> > (8.00.760) but it fails in SQL Server 2005 (9.00.1399.06).
>> >
>> > SELECT DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]) as 'YEARCOL', DATEPART(mm,
>> > os.[CreateTS]) as 'MONTHCOL', DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) as 'DAYCOL',
>> > DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) as 'HOURCOL', min(os.[CreateTS]) as
>> > 'CreateTS',
>> > SUM(os.[Lines]) as 'Lines'
>> > FROM aTable os WITH (NOLOCK)
>> > GROUP BY DATEPART(yy, os.[CreateTS]), DATEPART(mm, os.[CreateTS]),
>> > DATEPART(dd, os.[CreateTS]) , DATEPART(hh, os.[CreateTS]) ORDER BY
>> > os.[CreateTS]
>> >
>> > I am not good at sql, any help is greatly appreciated. The SQL is
>> > dynamically generated by a .Net code and called using OleDb command
>> > class.
>> >
>> > Thanks, Jose
>> >
>

Msg 242 when converting date from string (date in 'YYYY-MM-DD hh:mm:ss.ms' format)

MS SQL Server 2000 SP4 Spanish

It doesn't accept such values into query, although it shows them in this format.

select * from values where Dt > '2006-06-26 00:00:00.000'

returns with Msg 242,...

What am I doing wrong?

You have me baffled, because it seems to convert fine for me; however, try this in case it is a locale issue:

Code Snippet

select convert (datetime, '2006-06-26 00:00:00.000' , 121)
as explicitConversion

/*

explicitConversion
-

2006-06-26 00:00:00.000

*/

|||Explicit conversion works, but I need to get MS SQL Server to accept dates in this format (ODBC) |||

Ok, found problem. My fault.

Actually ODBC format requires {ts 'YYYY-MM-DD hh:mms'}, not just time string.

Msg 208 / Temp Tables

I'm Using SQL 2000.
I issue the following commands in the Query Analyzer:
Select * from Prod into #Temp1
Insert into #Temp1 Select * from OldProd
I Get the following error:
Server: Msg 208, Level 16, State 1, Line 121
Invalid object name '#Temp1'.
Any ideas?
Thanks,
KFTo create the table using SELECT...INTO the syntax should be:
Select * into #Temp1 from Prod
Then run
Insert into #Temp1 Select * from OldProd
- Vishal|||Below executes OK on my machine...
Select * into #Temp1 from authors
Insert into #Temp1 Select * from authors
If you post a repro which we can execute, we might be able to help...
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"Kflash" <kflash@.ameriflashtech.com> wrote in message
news:1f36401c389c5$9b9bfdc0$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> I know. I got the syntax wrong on the original post but
> its right in the Query analyzer.
> When I run these commands:
> Select * into #Temp1 from Prod
> Insert into #Temp1 Select * from OldProd
> I get this Result:
> Server: Msg 208, Level 16, State 1, Line 121
> Invalid object name '#Temp1'.
> If I highlight the above commands and run them by
> themselves, it returns the correct result.
> It seems that Microsoft has issues with Temp tables. I'm
> hoping that there is a work around.
> Keith
>
> >--Original Message--
> >To create the table using SELECT...INTO the syntax
> should be:
> >
> >Select * into #Temp1 from Prod
> >
> >Then run
> >
> >Insert into #Temp1 Select * from OldProd
> >
> >
> >--
> >- Vishal
> >
> >
> >.
> >

MSDTC is unavailable.

The following code:

DECLARE @.tsql varchar(1000)
CREATE TABLE #Test (...)
SET @.tsql = 'SELECT * FROM OPENQUERY(MyDataSource, ...)'
INSERT INTO #Test EXEC(@.tsql)

generates the following error message at the insert statement:

Server: Msg 8501, Level 16, State 3, Line 4
MSDTC on server 'MyComputer' is unavailable.

Why?

Thanks,
Tony Perovic
Compumation, Inc.Starting the DTC service caused the problem to go away but why does it need
it?

"tperovic" <tonyperovic@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:_bfLc.5403$iK.4645@.newsread2.news.atl.earthli nk.net...
> The following code:
> DECLARE @.tsql varchar(1000)
> CREATE TABLE #Test (...)
> SET @.tsql = 'SELECT * FROM OPENQUERY(MyDataSource, ...)'
> INSERT INTO #Test EXEC(@.tsql)
> generates the following error message at the insert statement:
> Server: Msg 8501, Level 16, State 3, Line 4
> MSDTC on server 'MyComputer' is unavailable.
> Why?
> Thanks,
> Tony Perovic
> Compumation, Inc.|||tperovic (tonyperovic@.yahoo.com) writes:
> Starting the DTC service caused the problem to go away but why does it
> need it?
>> DECLARE @.tsql varchar(1000)
>> CREATE TABLE #Test (...)
>> SET @.tsql = 'SELECT * FROM OPENQUERY(MyDataSource, ...)'
>> INSERT INTO #Test EXEC(@.tsql)

Because you call the other server in the context of a transaction,
defined by the INSERT statement.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se

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

MSDN Version of SQLServer 2000 and SQLServer 2005

All,
From a SQLServer installation (both 2000 & 2005), is there a way to find out
if the installation is a MSDN installation. Select @.@.Version does not seem to
indicate anything to that effect.
The previous DBA did a SQLServer installation (2000 & 2005) and I could not
find the 32-bit version of the media. That leads me to believe that he might
have installed it from a MSDN CD/DVD.
Thanks,
rgnNo. You can only tell what edition you have installed.
Jonathan
rgn wrote:
> All,
> From a SQLServer installation (both 2000 & 2005), is there a way to find out
> if the installation is a MSDN installation. Select @.@.Version does not seem to
> indicate anything to that effect.
> The previous DBA did a SQLServer installation (2000 & 2005) and I could not
> find the 32-bit version of the media. That leads me to believe that he might
> have installed it from a MSDN CD/DVD.
> Thanks,
> rgn
>