MSSQL 2000 Standard Edition not utilizing Maximum Memory!

Hi All
Can anybody tell me why Memory is not utilized by MSSQL Service. The Environment as follows..
It is an Critical Web based Application with SQL 2000 Standard Edition + SP3 as backend
OS: Win 2000 Advanced Server + 3GB Memory + 2 CP
MSSQL Memory Configured as Dynamic with Maximum Memory has been set as "2 GB". This Server has Replication
Configuration also. During peak time or non-peak time, it always use 1 GB Memory only. Why MSSQL is not taking more than 1 GB, even though server has got 3 GB and database's max. memory configured as 2 GB
In SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition, to utilize more than 2 GB for database, we will give /3GB in boot.ini. Similarly anything should be given for SQL 2000 Standard Edition. Right now, boot.ini doesn't contain this option
Appreciate your help on this
tks in advance
vasuAre you running other applications on the server besides SQL Server? SQL
Server will manage memory based on amount of free memory available.
Consequently, if other apps running on the same box (e.g. IIS) consume
significant amounts of memory, SQL Server won't acquire additional memory
because this would negatively impact performance.
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"vasum" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E2239F3D-53B5-4DA7-B7AC-280DC8B54ED7@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> Can anybody tell me why Memory is not utilized by MSSQL Service. The
Environment as follows...
> It is an Critical Web based Application with SQL 2000 Standard Edition +
SP3 as backend .
> OS: Win 2000 Advanced Server + 3GB Memory + 2 CPU
> MSSQL Memory Configured as Dynamic with Maximum Memory has been set as "2
GB". This Server has Replication
> Configuration also. During peak time or non-peak time, it always use 1 GB
Memory only. Why MSSQL is not taking more than 1 GB, even though server has
got 3 GB and database's max. memory configured as 2 GB.
> In SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition, to utilize more than 2 GB for database, we
will give /3GB in boot.ini. Similarly anything should be given for SQL 2000
Standard Edition. Right now, boot.ini doesn't contain this option.
> Appreciate your help on this.
> tks in advance,
> vasum
>|||Verify if your application is I/O bound or Memory Bound '
If your cpu utilization is fixed at 100%, then you should worry about
Memory.
Most of the performance problems in databases usually come from locks,
blocking, lot of IO read/writes, etc.
Check http://www.sql-server-performance.com/ for various ways to measure SQL
Server Performance.
Amol.
"vasum" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E2239F3D-53B5-4DA7-B7AC-280DC8B54ED7@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> Can anybody tell me why Memory is not utilized by MSSQL Service. The
Environment as follows...
> It is an Critical Web based Application with SQL 2000 Standard Edition +
SP3 as backend .
> OS: Win 2000 Advanced Server + 3GB Memory + 2 CPU
> MSSQL Memory Configured as Dynamic with Maximum Memory has been set as "2
GB". This Server has Replication
> Configuration also. During peak time or non-peak time, it always use 1 GB
Memory only. Why MSSQL is not taking more than 1 GB, even though server has
got 3 GB and database's max. memory configured as 2 GB.
> In SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition, to utilize more than 2 GB for database, we
will give /3GB in boot.ini. Similarly anything should be given for SQL 2000
Standard Edition. Right now, boot.ini doesn't contain this option.
> Appreciate your help on this.
> tks in advance,
> vasum
>

MSSQL 2000 Standard Edition not utilizing Maximum Memory!

Hi All,
Can anybody tell me why Memory is not utilized by MSSQL Service. The Environment as follows...
It is an Critical Web based Application with SQL 2000 Standard Edition + SP3 as backend .
OS: Win 2000 Advanced Server + 3GB Memory + 2 CPU
MSSQL Memory Configured as Dynamic with Maximum Memory has been set as "2 GB". This Server has Replication
Configuration also. During peak time or non-peak time, it always use 1 GB Memory only. Why MSSQL is not taking more than 1 GB, even though server has got 3 GB and database's max. memory configured as 2 GB.
In SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition, to utilize more than 2 GB for database, we will give /3GB in boot.ini. Similarly anything should be given for SQL 2000 Standard Edition. Right now, boot.ini doesn't contain this option.
Appreciate your help on this.
tks in advance,
vasum
Are you running other applications on the server besides SQL Server? SQL
Server will manage memory based on amount of free memory available.
Consequently, if other apps running on the same box (e.g. IIS) consume
significant amounts of memory, SQL Server won't acquire additional memory
because this would negatively impact performance.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"vasum" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E2239F3D-53B5-4DA7-B7AC-280DC8B54ED7@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> Can anybody tell me why Memory is not utilized by MSSQL Service. The
Environment as follows...
> It is an Critical Web based Application with SQL 2000 Standard Edition +
SP3 as backend .
> OS: Win 2000 Advanced Server + 3GB Memory + 2 CPU
> MSSQL Memory Configured as Dynamic with Maximum Memory has been set as "2
GB". This Server has Replication
> Configuration also. During peak time or non-peak time, it always use 1 GB
Memory only. Why MSSQL is not taking more than 1 GB, even though server has
got 3 GB and database's max. memory configured as 2 GB.
> In SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition, to utilize more than 2 GB for database, we
will give /3GB in boot.ini. Similarly anything should be given for SQL 2000
Standard Edition. Right now, boot.ini doesn't contain this option.
> Appreciate your help on this.
> tks in advance,
> vasum
>
|||Verify if your application is I/O bound or Memory Bound ?
If your cpu utilization is fixed at 100%, then you should worry about
Memory.
Most of the performance problems in databases usually come from locks,
blocking, lot of IO read/writes, etc.
Check http://www.sql-server-performance.com/ for various ways to measure SQL
Server Performance.
Amol.
"vasum" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E2239F3D-53B5-4DA7-B7AC-280DC8B54ED7@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> Can anybody tell me why Memory is not utilized by MSSQL Service. The
Environment as follows...
> It is an Critical Web based Application with SQL 2000 Standard Edition +
SP3 as backend .
> OS: Win 2000 Advanced Server + 3GB Memory + 2 CPU
> MSSQL Memory Configured as Dynamic with Maximum Memory has been set as "2
GB". This Server has Replication
> Configuration also. During peak time or non-peak time, it always use 1 GB
Memory only. Why MSSQL is not taking more than 1 GB, even though server has
got 3 GB and database's max. memory configured as 2 GB.
> In SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition, to utilize more than 2 GB for database, we
will give /3GB in boot.ini. Similarly anything should be given for SQL 2000
Standard Edition. Right now, boot.ini doesn't contain this option.
> Appreciate your help on this.
> tks in advance,
> vasum
>

MSSQL 2000 Standard Edition not utilizing Maximum Memory!

Hi All,
Can anybody tell me why Memory is not utilized by MSSQL Service. The Environ
ment as follows...
It is an Critical Web based Application with SQL 2000 Standard Edition + SP3
as backend .
OS: Win 2000 Advanced Server + 3GB Memory + 2 CPU
MSSQL Memory Configured as Dynamic with Maximum Memory has been set as "2 GB
". This Server has Replication
Configuration also. During peak time or non-peak time, it always use 1 GB Me
mory only. Why MSSQL is not taking more than 1 GB, even though server has go
t 3 GB and database's max. memory configured as 2 GB.
In SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition, to utilize more than 2 GB for database, we w
ill give /3GB in boot.ini. Similarly anything should be given for SQL 2000 S
tandard Edition. Right now, boot.ini doesn't contain this option.
Appreciate your help on this.
tks in advance,
vasumAre you running other applications on the server besides SQL Server? SQL
Server will manage memory based on amount of free memory available.
Consequently, if other apps running on the same box (e.g. IIS) consume
significant amounts of memory, SQL Server won't acquire additional memory
because this would negatively impact performance.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"vasum" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E2239F3D-53B5-4DA7-B7AC-280DC8B54ED7@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> Can anybody tell me why Memory is not utilized by MSSQL Service. The
Environment as follows...
> It is an Critical Web based Application with SQL 2000 Standard Edition +
SP3 as backend .
> OS: Win 2000 Advanced Server + 3GB Memory + 2 CPU
> MSSQL Memory Configured as Dynamic with Maximum Memory has been set as "2
GB". This Server has Replication
> Configuration also. During peak time or non-peak time, it always use 1 GB
Memory only. Why MSSQL is not taking more than 1 GB, even though server has
got 3 GB and database's max. memory configured as 2 GB.
> In SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition, to utilize more than 2 GB for database, we
will give /3GB in boot.ini. Similarly anything should be given for SQL 2000
Standard Edition. Right now, boot.ini doesn't contain this option.
> Appreciate your help on this.
> tks in advance,
> vasum
>|||Verify if your application is I/O bound or Memory Bound '
If your cpu utilization is fixed at 100%, then you should worry about
Memory.
Most of the performance problems in databases usually come from locks,
blocking, lot of IO read/writes, etc.
Check http://www.sql-server-performance.com/ for various ways to measure SQL
Server Performance.
Amol.
"vasum" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E2239F3D-53B5-4DA7-B7AC-280DC8B54ED7@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> Can anybody tell me why Memory is not utilized by MSSQL Service. The
Environment as follows...
> It is an Critical Web based Application with SQL 2000 Standard Edition +
SP3 as backend .
> OS: Win 2000 Advanced Server + 3GB Memory + 2 CPU
> MSSQL Memory Configured as Dynamic with Maximum Memory has been set as "2
GB". This Server has Replication
> Configuration also. During peak time or non-peak time, it always use 1 GB
Memory only. Why MSSQL is not taking more than 1 GB, even though server has
got 3 GB and database's max. memory configured as 2 GB.
> In SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition, to utilize more than 2 GB for database, we
will give /3GB in boot.ini. Similarly anything should be given for SQL 2000
Standard Edition. Right now, boot.ini doesn't contain this option.
> Appreciate your help on this.
> tks in advance,
> vasum
>

Msg 3910 Transaction context in use by another session.

We are testing SQL 2005 SP1 in a multi-server environment. Stored Procedure 'A' is executed on server.database 'A'. It calls SP 'B' on server.database 'B'. SP 'B' in turn calls SP 'C' which is back on server.database 'A'. So in essence A calls an SP on B, which calls an SP back on A. Linked servers are present on both servers to enable these cross-server calls. This scenario works in our SQL 2000 environment.

In the SQL 2005 environment, we get the Msg 3910 message stated in the subject. Is this truly a 'loopback server' situation and if so, why does it work in SQL 2000? Did this functionality change in SQL 2005? In SQL 2005 SP1? This may seem to be a klugy way to do things but unfortunately, it is a core part of our application security system and won't be easily undone. Any ideas would be appreciated. Thanks.

The problem was not introduced in SQL 2005 SP1. The error still occurs when run using two servers with the base SQL 2005 install.|||

We have an application that uses link servers and is running into the same error.

Looks like an undocumented feature in SS2005 or a BUG.

Anyone have any ideas on how to get around it?

Eric

|||

We worked the issue through with Microsoft support and I've included their comments and resolution below. The problem with their answer is that if a consistent data view is their goal, then this should also fail when all the databases are on a single server. Perhaps they'll make this consistent in a future service pack. Anyway, such as it is, here's the answer.

Beginning of Microsoft response:

Yes, this is a known problem and we change the behavior for good reason in Yukon. We’d like you to work around this issue.

The reason we change to current SQL Server 2005 behavior is that it can guarantee consistent data view, while SQL Server 2000 behavior may expose inconsistent data if the loopback tries to access the table that is been changed.

other ways to avoid this error:

1. Change the application logic to not use loopback.

2. Separate the INSERT EXEC into two steps -- Run remote EXEC first(which will succeed for loopback) and put it into a remote table and then run a SELECT from the remote table

But in general, SQL Server doesn’t support loopback server, so you are still at risk that you might get impacted in future release. So the best way is to avoid using the loopback.

End of Microsoft response.

Hope this helps.

|||I was facing a similar problem wherein I was using loopback linked servers for synchronizing multiple databases on same server as well as remote servers. The code was generically handling this. Will have to look for alternate way as support for loopback server is not guaranteed.

Thanks

Chandrakant Karale.

Msg 3910 Transaction context in use by another session.

We are testing SQL 2005 SP1 in a multi-server environment. Stored Procedure 'A' is executed on server.database 'A'. It calls SP 'B' on server.database 'B'. SP 'B' in turn calls SP 'C' which is back on server.database 'A'. So in essence A calls an SP on B, which calls an SP back on A. Linked servers are present on both servers to enable these cross-server calls. This scenario works in our SQL 2000 environment.

In the SQL 2005 environment, we get the Msg 3910 message stated in the subject. Is this truly a 'loopback server' situation and if so, why does it work in SQL 2000? Did this functionality change in SQL 2005? In SQL 2005 SP1? This may seem to be a klugy way to do things but unfortunately, it is a core part of our application security system and won't be easily undone. Any ideas would be appreciated. Thanks.

The problem was not introduced in SQL 2005 SP1. The error still occurs when run using two servers with the base SQL 2005 install.|||

We have an application that uses link servers and is running into the same error.

Looks like an undocumented feature in SS2005 or a BUG.

Anyone have any ideas on how to get around it?

Eric

|||

We worked the issue through with Microsoft support and I've included their comments and resolution below. The problem with their answer is that if a consistent data view is their goal, then this should also fail when all the databases are on a single server. Perhaps they'll make this consistent in a future service pack. Anyway, such as it is, here's the answer.

Beginning of Microsoft response:

Yes, this is a known problem and we change the behavior for good reason in Yukon. We’d like you to work around this issue.

The reason we change to current SQL Server 2005 behavior is that it can guarantee consistent data view, while SQL Server 2000 behavior may expose inconsistent data if the loopback tries to access the table that is been changed.

other ways to avoid this error:

1. Change the application logic to not use loopback.

2. Separate the INSERT EXEC into two steps -- Run remote EXEC first(which will succeed for loopback) and put it into a remote table and then run a SELECT from the remote table

But in general, SQL Server doesn’t support loopback server, so you are still at risk that you might get impacted in future release. So the best way is to avoid using the loopback.

End of Microsoft response.

Hope this helps.

|||I was facing a similar problem wherein I was using loopback linked servers for synchronizing multiple databases on same server as well as remote servers. The code was generically handling this. Will have to look for alternate way as support for loopback server is not guaranteed.

Thanks

Chandrakant Karale.

Msg 3910 Transaction context in use by another session.

We are testing SQL 2005 SP1 in a multi-server environment. Stored Procedure 'A' is executed on server.database 'A'. It calls SP 'B' on server.database 'B'. SP 'B' in turn calls SP 'C' which is back on server.database 'A'. So in essence A calls an SP on B, which calls an SP back on A. Linked servers are present on both servers to enable these cross-server calls. This scenario works in our SQL 2000 environment.

In the SQL 2005 environment, we get the Msg 3910 message stated in the subject. Is this truly a 'loopback server' situation and if so, why does it work in SQL 2000? Did this functionality change in SQL 2005? In SQL 2005 SP1? This may seem to be a klugy way to do things but unfortunately, it is a core part of our application security system and won't be easily undone. Any ideas would be appreciated. Thanks.

The problem was not introduced in SQL 2005 SP1. The error still occurs when run using two servers with the base SQL 2005 install.|||

We have an application that uses link servers and is running into the same error.

Looks like an undocumented feature in SS2005 or a BUG.

Anyone have any ideas on how to get around it?

Eric

|||

We worked the issue through with Microsoft support and I've included their comments and resolution below. The problem with their answer is that if a consistent data view is their goal, then this should also fail when all the databases are on a single server. Perhaps they'll make this consistent in a future service pack. Anyway, such as it is, here's the answer.

Beginning of Microsoft response:

Yes, this is a known problem and we change the behavior for good reason in Yukon. We’d like you to work around this issue.

The reason we change to current SQL Server 2005 behavior is that it can guarantee consistent data view, while SQL Server 2000 behavior may expose inconsistent data if the loopback tries to access the table that is been changed.

other ways to avoid this error:

1. Change the application logic to not use loopback.

2. Separate the INSERT EXEC into two steps -- Run remote EXEC first(which will succeed for loopback) and put it into a remote table and then run a SELECT from the remote table

But in general, SQL Server doesn’t support loopback server, so you are still at risk that you might get impacted in future release. So the best way is to avoid using the loopback.

End of Microsoft response.

Hope this helps.

|||I was facing a similar problem wherein I was using loopback linked servers for synchronizing multiple databases on same server as well as remote servers. The code was generically handling this. Will have to look for alternate way as support for loopback server is not guaranteed.

Thanks

Chandrakant Karale.

MsDtsSrvr.exe memory leak?

In our current environment, we are running about 10,000 packages per day on a given 64 bit SSIS server.

The MSDtsSrvr.exe (SSIS service) process' memory working set size continues to grow until it consumes the memory on the machine.

Some of the packages do use a custom component. Could this be responsible for leaking memory in the MSDtsSrvr.exe process? Has a memory leak been confirmed in this process for the "first-party" components anyway?

More information about the possible memory leak.

The packages are run in in a CLR process with calls Package.Execute(), rather than being executed via dtexec or dtexecui or the designer. The reason for this approach is the ability to write a custom event handler with access to the package pointer, which other log handlers cannot do. The process runs Package.Execute() and exits, so there are 10,000 short-lived processes, each of which call Package.Execute() once.

To be slightly more specific about what the packages are doing, each of the 10,000 packages generally correlates to 1 source file, loading in dummy (aka inferred) dimension records, and then populating a fact table via a surrogate key pipeline.

MSDTC doesn't work on SQL 2k in W2k3 cluster environment

Hi,
I have moved our cluster SQL 2k server from a W2k cluster to a new w2k3 SP1
cluster server recently. After the move, I found two applications that use
MSDTC didn't work. I realized that I made a mistake when I setup the MSDTC, I
didn't enable network DTC access on both nodes before I configured MSDTC and
then installed the SQL server. To remedy this problem, I deleted the MSDTC
resource in the cluster admin, and reconfigured it again after enable the
network DTC access on both nodes. However, the MSDTC on the cluster still
doesn't work. The installation sequence should configure MSDTC first, then
install SQL2K. Does this sequence matter? Do I have to reinstall the SQL
server to get MSDTC work?
I use DTCTester and get following error:
Initializing DTC
Beginning DTC Transaction
Enlisting Connection in Transaction
Error:
SQLSTATE=37000,Native error=8501,msg='[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server
Driver][SQL Se
rver]MSDTC on server 'AWIDB1' is unavailable.'
Error:
SQLSTATE=24000,Native error=0,msg=[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver]Invalid
cur
sor state
Typical Errors in DTC Output When
a. Firewall Has Ports Closed
-OR-
b. Bad WINS/DNS entries
-OR-
c. Misconfigured network
-OR-
d. Misconfigured SQL Server machine that has multiple netcards.
Aborting DTC Transaction
Releasing DTC Interface Pointers
Successfully Released pTransaction Pointer.
Thanks in advance.
Never mind. it worked. I should restart the SQL server after re-configured
the MSDTC resource. Since this server has been in production already, I just
wished that every changes would take effect dynamically.
"Jack Zhang" wrote:

> Hi,
> I have moved our cluster SQL 2k server from a W2k cluster to a new w2k3 SP1
> cluster server recently. After the move, I found two applications that use
> MSDTC didn't work. I realized that I made a mistake when I setup the MSDTC, I
> didn't enable network DTC access on both nodes before I configured MSDTC and
> then installed the SQL server. To remedy this problem, I deleted the MSDTC
> resource in the cluster admin, and reconfigured it again after enable the
> network DTC access on both nodes. However, the MSDTC on the cluster still
> doesn't work. The installation sequence should configure MSDTC first, then
> install SQL2K. Does this sequence matter? Do I have to reinstall the SQL
> server to get MSDTC work?
> I use DTCTester and get following error:
> Initializing DTC
> Beginning DTC Transaction
> Enlisting Connection in Transaction
> Error:
> SQLSTATE=37000,Native error=8501,msg='[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server
> Driver][SQL Se
> rver]MSDTC on server 'AWIDB1' is unavailable.'
> Error:
> SQLSTATE=24000,Native error=0,msg=[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver]Invalid
> cur
> sor state
> Typical Errors in DTC Output When
> a. Firewall Has Ports Closed
> -OR-
> b. Bad WINS/DNS entries
> -OR-
> c. Misconfigured network
> -OR-
> d. Misconfigured SQL Server machine that has multiple netcards.
> Aborting DTC Transaction
> Releasing DTC Interface Pointers
> Successfully Released pTransaction Pointer.
> Thanks in advance.
|||You are correct in that you should have followed the correct and documented
installation sequence; however, you should be able to do it after the fact.
Also know that there is a COM 1.5 bug in Windows 2003.
First, after reclustering the MSDTC, did you configure it within its own
dedicated Cluster Resource Group? It will require the creation of this
group, a dedicated SAN disk, IP, and Network Name cluster resources. Then,
you will need to fail that resource back and forth between the nodes to get
the resource registry entries to synchronize.
You will then need to take the SQL Server IP resource offline, which should
bring the resources in that group offline and then bring the group back
online.
In the SQL Server Error Log, you will see SQL Server attempting to connect
to the DTC resource; if it opens the connection, there will be no additional
messages. If it has a problem however, it will spit out a "Could not
generate resource context" type of error message. That will tell you if
this worked or not.
If this process fails, one other option would be to run through the ADVANCED
section of the SQL Server installation processes. This should
verify/generate the necessary registry key dependencies without having to
completely reinstall.
If this too does not solve the problem, then before you uninstall/reinstall,
I would seriously consider opening a Microsoft Product Support Services
case, MS PSS.
INFO: Availability of Windows Server 2003 COM+ 1.5 Rollup Package 1
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/821751/
You receive error messages when you perform a distributed transaction when
you have a SQL Server 2000 virtual server in a Windows Server 2003 clustered
environment
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;889706
How to rebuild or move MSDTC used with a SQL failover cluster
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;294209
How to configure Microsoft Distributed Transaction Coordinator on a Windows
Server 2003 cluster
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/301600/
How to enable network DTC access in Windows Server 2003
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/817064/
Good luck and be sure to let us know how it turns out.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas

"Jack Zhang" <JackZhang@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:46C965C9-5431-460C-92ED-DE5873B57E2F@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I have moved our cluster SQL 2k server from a W2k cluster to a new w2k3
SP1
> cluster server recently. After the move, I found two applications that use
> MSDTC didn't work. I realized that I made a mistake when I setup the
MSDTC, I
> didn't enable network DTC access on both nodes before I configured MSDTC
and
> then installed the SQL server. To remedy this problem, I deleted the MSDTC
> resource in the cluster admin, and reconfigured it again after enable the
> network DTC access on both nodes. However, the MSDTC on the cluster still
> doesn't work. The installation sequence should configure MSDTC first, then
> install SQL2K. Does this sequence matter? Do I have to reinstall the SQL
> server to get MSDTC work?
> I use DTCTester and get following error:
> Initializing DTC
> Beginning DTC Transaction
> Enlisting Connection in Transaction
> Error:
> SQLSTATE=37000,Native error=8501,msg='[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server
> Driver][SQL Se
> rver]MSDTC on server 'AWIDB1' is unavailable.'
> Error:
> SQLSTATE=24000,Native error=0,msg=[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server
Driver]Invalid
> cur
> sor state
> Typical Errors in DTC Output When
> a. Firewall Has Ports Closed
> -OR-
> b. Bad WINS/DNS entries
> -OR-
> c. Misconfigured network
> -OR-
> d. Misconfigured SQL Server machine that has multiple netcards.
> Aborting DTC Transaction
> Releasing DTC Interface Pointers
> Successfully Released pTransaction Pointer.
> Thanks in advance.
|||Did you set the security on MSDTC through the Component Services Applet?
That is a necessary step after all the steps you listed.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Jack Zhang" <JackZhang@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:46C965C9-5431-460C-92ED-DE5873B57E2F@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I have moved our cluster SQL 2k server from a W2k cluster to a new w2k3
> SP1
> cluster server recently. After the move, I found two applications that use
> MSDTC didn't work. I realized that I made a mistake when I setup the
> MSDTC, I
> didn't enable network DTC access on both nodes before I configured MSDTC
> and
> then installed the SQL server. To remedy this problem, I deleted the MSDTC
> resource in the cluster admin, and reconfigured it again after enable the
> network DTC access on both nodes. However, the MSDTC on the cluster still
> doesn't work. The installation sequence should configure MSDTC first, then
> install SQL2K. Does this sequence matter? Do I have to reinstall the SQL
> server to get MSDTC work?
> I use DTCTester and get following error:
> Initializing DTC
> Beginning DTC Transaction
> Enlisting Connection in Transaction
> Error:
> SQLSTATE=37000,Native error=8501,msg='[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server
> Driver][SQL Se
> rver]MSDTC on server 'AWIDB1' is unavailable.'
> Error:
> SQLSTATE=24000,Native error=0,msg=[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server
> Driver]Invalid
> cur
> sor state
> Typical Errors in DTC Output When
> a. Firewall Has Ports Closed
> -OR-
> b. Bad WINS/DNS entries
> -OR-
> c. Misconfigured network
> -OR-
> d. Misconfigured SQL Server machine that has multiple netcards.
> Aborting DTC Transaction
> Releasing DTC Interface Pointers
> Successfully Released pTransaction Pointer.
> Thanks in advance.