We are getting the following error on our production machine when we run
DBCC CHECKDB
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
I searched Google and found the following article,
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/Forums/messageview.cfm?catid=1664&threadid=117814
However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns no
errors.
If add the index back, I get the errors again.
Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be appreciated.
Thanks.
PrasadUsing SQL 2K, SP3a, with MS03-031.
Using RAID5 for data.
RAM: 2GB
"Prasad Koukuntla" <prasad.koukuntla@.scapromo.com> wrote in message
news:ew6EAWkIEHA.3664@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> We are getting the following error on our production machine when we run
> DBCC CHECKDB
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
> CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
> 'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
> repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
> CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
> I searched Google and found the following article,
>
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/Forums/messageview.cfm?catid=1664&threadid=117814
> However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
> with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns
no
> errors.
> If add the index back, I get the errors again.
> Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be
appreciated.
> Thanks.
> Prasad
>|||I ran dbcc checktable(int_aux_activity, REPAIR_REBUILD) with no_infomsgs
as suggested in the error. However, the errors still showed up, when I ran
the DBCC CHECKTABLE without the repair option.
"Prasad Koukuntla" <prasad.koukuntla@.scapromo.com> wrote in message
news:ew6EAWkIEHA.3664@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> We are getting the following error on our production machine when we run
> DBCC CHECKDB
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
> CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
> 'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
> repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
> CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
> I searched Google and found the following article,
>
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/Forums/messageview.cfm?catid=1664&threadid=117814
> However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
> with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns
no
> errors.
> If add the index back, I get the errors again.
> Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be
appreciated.
> Thanks.
> Prasad
>
Showing posts with label production. Show all posts
Showing posts with label production. Show all posts
Monday, March 12, 2012
Msg 2511
We are getting the following error on our production machine when we run
DBCC CHECKDB
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
I searched Google and found the following article,
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/F...hreadid=117814
However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns no
errors.
If add the index back, I get the errors again.
Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Prasad
Using SQL 2K, SP3a, with MS03-031.
Using RAID5 for data.
RAM: 2GB
"Prasad Koukuntla" <prasad.koukuntla@.scapromo.com> wrote in message
news:ew6EAWkIEHA.3664@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> We are getting the following error on our production machine when we run
> DBCC CHECKDB
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
> CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
> 'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
> repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
> CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
> I searched Google and found the following article,
>
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/F...hreadid=117814
> However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
> with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns
no
> errors.
> If add the index back, I get the errors again.
> Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be
appreciated.
> Thanks.
> Prasad
>
|||I ran dbcc checktable(int_aux_activity, REPAIR_REBUILD) with no_infomsgs
as suggested in the error. However, the errors still showed up, when I ran
the DBCC CHECKTABLE without the repair option.
"Prasad Koukuntla" <prasad.koukuntla@.scapromo.com> wrote in message
news:ew6EAWkIEHA.3664@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> We are getting the following error on our production machine when we run
> DBCC CHECKDB
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
> CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
> 'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
> repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
> CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
> I searched Google and found the following article,
>
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/F...hreadid=117814
> However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
> with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns
no
> errors.
> If add the index back, I get the errors again.
> Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be
appreciated.
> Thanks.
> Prasad
>
DBCC CHECKDB
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
I searched Google and found the following article,
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/F...hreadid=117814
However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns no
errors.
If add the index back, I get the errors again.
Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Prasad
Using SQL 2K, SP3a, with MS03-031.
Using RAID5 for data.
RAM: 2GB
"Prasad Koukuntla" <prasad.koukuntla@.scapromo.com> wrote in message
news:ew6EAWkIEHA.3664@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> We are getting the following error on our production machine when we run
> DBCC CHECKDB
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
> CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
> 'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
> repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
> CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
> I searched Google and found the following article,
>
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/F...hreadid=117814
> However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
> with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns
no
> errors.
> If add the index back, I get the errors again.
> Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be
appreciated.
> Thanks.
> Prasad
>
|||I ran dbcc checktable(int_aux_activity, REPAIR_REBUILD) with no_infomsgs
as suggested in the error. However, the errors still showed up, when I ran
the DBCC CHECKTABLE without the repair option.
"Prasad Koukuntla" <prasad.koukuntla@.scapromo.com> wrote in message
news:ew6EAWkIEHA.3664@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> We are getting the following error on our production machine when we run
> DBCC CHECKDB
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
> CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
> 'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
> repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
> CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
> I searched Google and found the following article,
>
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/F...hreadid=117814
> However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
> with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns
no
> errors.
> If add the index back, I get the errors again.
> Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be
appreciated.
> Thanks.
> Prasad
>
Msg 2511
We are getting the following error on our production machine when we run
DBCC CHECKDB
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
I searched Google and found the following article,
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/...=1178
14
However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns no
errors.
If add the index back, I get the errors again.
Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be appreciated.
Thanks.
PrasadUsing SQL 2K, SP3a, with MS03-031.
Using RAID5 for data.
RAM: 2GB
"Prasad Koukuntla" <prasad.koukuntla@.scapromo.com> wrote in message
news:ew6EAWkIEHA.3664@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> We are getting the following error on our production machine when we run
> DBCC CHECKDB
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
> CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
> 'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
> repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
> CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
> I searched Google and found the following article,
>
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/...threadid=117814darkred">
> However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
> with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns
no
> errors.
> If add the index back, I get the errors again.
> Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be
appreciated.
> Thanks.
> Prasad
>|||I ran dbcc checktable(int_aux_activity, REPAIR_REBUILD) with no_infomsgs
as suggested in the error. However, the errors still showed up, when I ran
the DBCC CHECKTABLE without the repair option.
"Prasad Koukuntla" <prasad.koukuntla@.scapromo.com> wrote in message
news:ew6EAWkIEHA.3664@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> We are getting the following error on our production machine when we run
> DBCC CHECKDB
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
> CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
> 'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
> repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
> CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
> I searched Google and found the following article,
>
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/...threadid=117814darkred">
> However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
> with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns
no
> errors.
> If add the index back, I get the errors again.
> Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be
appreciated.
> Thanks.
> Prasad
>
DBCC CHECKDB
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
(1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
I searched Google and found the following article,
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/...=1178
14
However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns no
errors.
If add the index back, I get the errors again.
Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be appreciated.
Thanks.
PrasadUsing SQL 2K, SP3a, with MS03-031.
Using RAID5 for data.
RAM: 2GB
"Prasad Koukuntla" <prasad.koukuntla@.scapromo.com> wrote in message
news:ew6EAWkIEHA.3664@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> We are getting the following error on our production machine when we run
> DBCC CHECKDB
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
> CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
> 'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
> repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
> CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
> I searched Google and found the following article,
>
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/...threadid=117814darkred">
> However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
> with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns
no
> errors.
> If add the index back, I get the errors again.
> Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be
appreciated.
> Thanks.
> Prasad
>|||I ran dbcc checktable(int_aux_activity, REPAIR_REBUILD) with no_infomsgs
as suggested in the error. However, the errors still showed up, when I ran
the DBCC CHECKTABLE without the repair option.
"Prasad Koukuntla" <prasad.koukuntla@.scapromo.com> wrote in message
news:ew6EAWkIEHA.3664@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> We are getting the following error on our production machine when we run
> DBCC CHECKDB
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41060), slots 264 and 265.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41085), slots 75 and 76.
> Server: Msg 2511, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1488776411, Index ID 3. Keys out of order on page
> (1:41125), slots 15 and 16.
> CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
> 'INT_AUX_ACTIVITY' (object ID 1488776411).
> repair_rebuild is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC
> CHECKTABLE (sca_master.dbo.INT_AUX_ACTIVITY ).
> I searched Google and found the following article,
>
http://www.winnetmag.com/SQLServer/...threadid=117814darkred">
> However, my network admin tells me that he could not find anything wrong
> with the server. If drop the index pointed out in the error, dbcc returns
no
> errors.
> If add the index back, I get the errors again.
> Did anybody expericence a similar issue. Any pointers would be
appreciated.
> Thanks.
> Prasad
>
Msg 15600, Level 15, State 1, Procedure sp_change_users_login, Line 207
I restored a database to my test server from a production server. I ran "sp_change_users_login 'report' " and found 1 orphan id. Then I ran "sp_change_users_login 'auto_fix', 'orphan_id' ". It gets the error. I have run it before with success. Any idea why this time is different?
Once scenario where this may exist is if there is no login to fix the mappings with, then the procedure tries to create the login but you haven't specified a password. In that case, you have to use:
exec sp_change_users_login 'Auto_Fix', 'YourLogin', null, 'YourPassword'
I would guess that when it worked before, the login existed so it just remapped the database user to the existing login.
-Sue
|||If you are using SQL Server 2005 SP2, you can also try ALTER USER ... WITH LOGIN syntax.
Please, let us know if you were able to solve the problem or if you have any additional questions .
Thanks a lot,
-Raul Garcia
SDE/T
SQL Server Engine
Saturday, February 25, 2012
MSDTC name resolution - two servers same bios name
Is there any way to set up name resolution for DTC when there are two servers with the same name? I have three servers - two production systems named "SQL" and an archive system "DMART". I want to run DTC procedures to archive data from both SQL's to the DMART. Is there any way to set up the DMART so it can properly resolve the names from each of the SQL's? They are on separate networks, but unfortunately have the same NetBIOS name.When two computers that are not running in the same domain use MSDTC for communication and for distributed transactions, the mutual authentication may fail.
And I don't think its possible to set name resolution if the BIOS is similar.|||Can the #DOM: option in the lmhosts file be used to specify different networks for hosts with the same BIOS name? Will DTC recognize the #DOM: option during name resolution?|||Added after an entry to associate that entry with the domain specified by domain. This keyword affects how the Browser and Logon services behave in routed TCP/IP environments.
Still I'm bit unsure about the approach, may try and take help of network admin.
And I don't think its possible to set name resolution if the BIOS is similar.|||Can the #DOM: option in the lmhosts file be used to specify different networks for hosts with the same BIOS name? Will DTC recognize the #DOM: option during name resolution?|||Added after an entry to associate that entry with the domain specified by domain. This keyword affects how the Browser and Logon services behave in routed TCP/IP environments.
Still I'm bit unsure about the approach, may try and take help of network admin.
Monday, February 20, 2012
MSDTC - confused
Reading some previous threads, I am a little confused.
We have 2 Windows 2003/SQL 2000 clusters.
One has been in production for months now, without problems.
We did not follow KB 817064 (how to enable network DTC access) or KB 301600
(configuring MSDTC on 2003), yet our install went fine and SQL fails over
and works. I see in the services applet of both nodes that the DTC is
installed, set to automatic, but not started. It is not setup according to
the above mentioned article and neither is Network DTC access in the
Add/Remove Windows Compents of our servers.
So, now I am confused. How is it that our install went fine, seems to work,
but yet it would seem we didn't do it correctly?
Thank you,
Jeff
You do not need DTC to install SQL Server 2000 on a cluster. You only need
to install Network DTCand /or configure DTC if you plan to use distributed
transactions.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
|||Thank you Rand, that clears things up quite a bit.
Jeff
"Rand Boyd [MSFT]" <rboyd@.onlinemicrosoft.com> wrote in message
news:6vffNsmWEHA.2920@.cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl...
> You do not need DTC to install SQL Server 2000 on a cluster. You only need
> to install Network DTCand /or configure DTC if you plan to use distributed
> transactions.
> Rand
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
>
|||you can install DTC later also and it shoudl work fine
"JJP" wrote:
> Thank you Rand, that clears things up quite a bit.
> Jeff
>
> "Rand Boyd [MSFT]" <rboyd@.onlinemicrosoft.com> wrote in message
> news:6vffNsmWEHA.2920@.cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl...
>
>
We have 2 Windows 2003/SQL 2000 clusters.
One has been in production for months now, without problems.
We did not follow KB 817064 (how to enable network DTC access) or KB 301600
(configuring MSDTC on 2003), yet our install went fine and SQL fails over
and works. I see in the services applet of both nodes that the DTC is
installed, set to automatic, but not started. It is not setup according to
the above mentioned article and neither is Network DTC access in the
Add/Remove Windows Compents of our servers.
So, now I am confused. How is it that our install went fine, seems to work,
but yet it would seem we didn't do it correctly?
Thank you,
Jeff
You do not need DTC to install SQL Server 2000 on a cluster. You only need
to install Network DTCand /or configure DTC if you plan to use distributed
transactions.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
|||Thank you Rand, that clears things up quite a bit.
Jeff
"Rand Boyd [MSFT]" <rboyd@.onlinemicrosoft.com> wrote in message
news:6vffNsmWEHA.2920@.cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl...
> You do not need DTC to install SQL Server 2000 on a cluster. You only need
> to install Network DTCand /or configure DTC if you plan to use distributed
> transactions.
> Rand
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
>
|||you can install DTC later also and it shoudl work fine
"JJP" wrote:
> Thank you Rand, that clears things up quite a bit.
> Jeff
>
> "Rand Boyd [MSFT]" <rboyd@.onlinemicrosoft.com> wrote in message
> news:6vffNsmWEHA.2920@.cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl...
>
>
MSDN Version of SQL Server
Hi,
I have SQL Server 2000 standard edition from MSDN installed on what will now
become a production server. I have since purchased a 1 processor licence. My
question is there any reason not to continue using the MSDN version in
production? Or should I uninstall it and use the purchased version.
Thanks
NIsnt there a limit to the number of CPUs and RAM that MSDN copy can handle.
We had this problem once in SQLServer 7 and we eventually had to Backup
DB/uninstall MSDN version/Install Licensed Version and
Restore the Databases.
Whatever reason, you should always install a Licensed version in a
Production Version. What if you have to call PSS for some
reason ?
Gopi
"NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4C998CC4-C4E9-41A2-BE48-197A5A4DDE8F@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I have SQL Server 2000 standard edition from MSDN installed on what will
> now
> become a production server. I have since purchased a 1 processor licence.
> My
> question is there any reason not to continue using the MSDN version in
> production? Or should I uninstall it and use the purchased version.
> Thanks
> N|||For SQL7, MSDN came with Desktop Edition (not to be
with what we no
w call Desktop Engine,
AKA MSDE). Desktop Edition has such restrictions.
For 2000, MSDN comes with Developer Edition which is identical to Enterprise
Edition, but you are
now allowed to run in production environment.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
"Gopinath Rajee" <gopinathr@.healthasyst.com> wrote in message
news:urNSfT2DFHA.1396@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Isnt there a limit to the number of CPUs and RAM that MSDN copy can handle
.
> We had this problem once in SQLServer 7 and we eventually had to Backup DB
/uninstall MSDN
> version/Install Licensed Version and
> Restore the Databases.
> Whatever reason, you should always install a Licensed version in a Product
ion Version. What if you
> have to call PSS for some
> reason ?
> Gopi
>
> "NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:4C998CC4-C4E9-41A2-BE48-197A5A4DDE8F@.microsoft.com...
>|||Also...
> Whatever reason, you should always install a Licensed version in a Product
ion Version. What if you
> have to call PSS for some
> reason ?
I couldn't agree more. :-)
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
"Gopinath Rajee" <gopinathr@.healthasyst.com> wrote in message
news:urNSfT2DFHA.1396@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Isnt there a limit to the number of CPUs and RAM that MSDN copy can handle
.
> We had this problem once in SQLServer 7 and we eventually had to Backup DB
/uninstall MSDN
> version/Install Licensed Version and
> Restore the Databases.
> Whatever reason, you should always install a Licensed version in a Product
ion Version. What if you
> have to call PSS for some
> reason ?
> Gopi
>
> "NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:4C998CC4-C4E9-41A2-BE48-197A5A4DDE8F@.microsoft.com...
>|||Thanks for the replies.
However, do you know if the MSDN version of SQL Standard Edition differs
from the one you purchase?
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> Also...
>
> I couldn't agree more. :-)
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> http://www.sqlug.se/
>
> "Gopinath Rajee" <gopinathr@.healthasyst.com> wrote in message
> news:urNSfT2DFHA.1396@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
>|||MSDN doesn't come with production licenses. It might some with SE as well as
EE and Dev Ed. But you
are still not allowed to run in production environment. See
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscript...ng/default.aspx
A quote from above:
"MSDN Universal, MSDN Enterprise, MSDN Professional and MSDN Operating Syste
ms are licensed for
single users, and can only be used by licensed subscribers. All products tha
t ship in MSDN
Subscriptions are for development and test purposes only, and cannot be used
in a live production
environment."
You also might find something valuable at :
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscript...lt.aspx#support
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
"NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:19D4DE6A-4093-48EB-B900-7606C7F42A16@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks for the replies.
> However, do you know if the MSDN version of SQL Standard Edition differs
> from the one you purchase?
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>|||Hi,
I realise MSDN versions of SQL Standard are "not allowed to run in
production environment". But what I am asking is does MSDN version of SQL
Standard differ from the version you would buy (OEM type). Are there
restrictions on RAM, connections etc etc?
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> MSDN doesn't come with production licenses. It might some with SE as well
as EE and Dev Ed. But you
> are still not allowed to run in production environment. See
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscript...ng/default.aspx
> A quote from above:
> "MSDN Universal, MSDN Enterprise, MSDN Professional and MSDN Operating Sys
tems are licensed for
> single users, and can only be used by licensed subscribers. All products t
hat ship in MSDN
> Subscriptions are for development and test purposes only, and cannot be us
ed in a live production
> environment."
>
> You also might find something valuable at :
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscript...lt.aspx#support
>
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> http://www.sqlug.se/
>
> "NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:19D4DE6A-4093-48EB-B900-7606C7F42A16@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||> Are there
> restrictions on RAM, connections etc etc?
No.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
"NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D3D585A4-1C12-4203-9640-8ED39685B371@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I realise MSDN versions of SQL Standard are "not allowed to run in
> production environment". But what I am asking is does MSDN version of SQL
> Standard differ from the version you would buy (OEM type). Are there
> restrictions on RAM, connections etc etc?
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>|||Thanks for your help.
N
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> No.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> http://www.sqlug.se/
>
> "NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D3D585A4-1C12-4203-9640-8ED39685B371@.microsoft.com...
>
>
I have SQL Server 2000 standard edition from MSDN installed on what will now
become a production server. I have since purchased a 1 processor licence. My
question is there any reason not to continue using the MSDN version in
production? Or should I uninstall it and use the purchased version.
Thanks
NIsnt there a limit to the number of CPUs and RAM that MSDN copy can handle.
We had this problem once in SQLServer 7 and we eventually had to Backup
DB/uninstall MSDN version/Install Licensed Version and
Restore the Databases.
Whatever reason, you should always install a Licensed version in a
Production Version. What if you have to call PSS for some
reason ?
Gopi
"NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4C998CC4-C4E9-41A2-BE48-197A5A4DDE8F@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I have SQL Server 2000 standard edition from MSDN installed on what will
> now
> become a production server. I have since purchased a 1 processor licence.
> My
> question is there any reason not to continue using the MSDN version in
> production? Or should I uninstall it and use the purchased version.
> Thanks
> N|||For SQL7, MSDN came with Desktop Edition (not to be
with what we now call Desktop Engine,
AKA MSDE). Desktop Edition has such restrictions.
For 2000, MSDN comes with Developer Edition which is identical to Enterprise
Edition, but you are
now allowed to run in production environment.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
"Gopinath Rajee" <gopinathr@.healthasyst.com> wrote in message
news:urNSfT2DFHA.1396@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Isnt there a limit to the number of CPUs and RAM that MSDN copy can handle
.
> We had this problem once in SQLServer 7 and we eventually had to Backup DB
/uninstall MSDN
> version/Install Licensed Version and
> Restore the Databases.
> Whatever reason, you should always install a Licensed version in a Product
ion Version. What if you
> have to call PSS for some
> reason ?
> Gopi
>
> "NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:4C998CC4-C4E9-41A2-BE48-197A5A4DDE8F@.microsoft.com...
>|||Also...
> Whatever reason, you should always install a Licensed version in a Product
ion Version. What if you
> have to call PSS for some
> reason ?
I couldn't agree more. :-)
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
"Gopinath Rajee" <gopinathr@.healthasyst.com> wrote in message
news:urNSfT2DFHA.1396@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Isnt there a limit to the number of CPUs and RAM that MSDN copy can handle
.
> We had this problem once in SQLServer 7 and we eventually had to Backup DB
/uninstall MSDN
> version/Install Licensed Version and
> Restore the Databases.
> Whatever reason, you should always install a Licensed version in a Product
ion Version. What if you
> have to call PSS for some
> reason ?
> Gopi
>
> "NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:4C998CC4-C4E9-41A2-BE48-197A5A4DDE8F@.microsoft.com...
>|||Thanks for the replies.
However, do you know if the MSDN version of SQL Standard Edition differs
from the one you purchase?
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> Also...
>
> I couldn't agree more. :-)
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> http://www.sqlug.se/
>
> "Gopinath Rajee" <gopinathr@.healthasyst.com> wrote in message
> news:urNSfT2DFHA.1396@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
>|||MSDN doesn't come with production licenses. It might some with SE as well as
EE and Dev Ed. But you
are still not allowed to run in production environment. See
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscript...ng/default.aspx
A quote from above:
"MSDN Universal, MSDN Enterprise, MSDN Professional and MSDN Operating Syste
ms are licensed for
single users, and can only be used by licensed subscribers. All products tha
t ship in MSDN
Subscriptions are for development and test purposes only, and cannot be used
in a live production
environment."
You also might find something valuable at :
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscript...lt.aspx#support
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
"NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:19D4DE6A-4093-48EB-B900-7606C7F42A16@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks for the replies.
> However, do you know if the MSDN version of SQL Standard Edition differs
> from the one you purchase?
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>|||Hi,
I realise MSDN versions of SQL Standard are "not allowed to run in
production environment". But what I am asking is does MSDN version of SQL
Standard differ from the version you would buy (OEM type). Are there
restrictions on RAM, connections etc etc?
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> MSDN doesn't come with production licenses. It might some with SE as well
as EE and Dev Ed. But you
> are still not allowed to run in production environment. See
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscript...ng/default.aspx
> A quote from above:
> "MSDN Universal, MSDN Enterprise, MSDN Professional and MSDN Operating Sys
tems are licensed for
> single users, and can only be used by licensed subscribers. All products t
hat ship in MSDN
> Subscriptions are for development and test purposes only, and cannot be us
ed in a live production
> environment."
>
> You also might find something valuable at :
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscript...lt.aspx#support
>
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> http://www.sqlug.se/
>
> "NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:19D4DE6A-4093-48EB-B900-7606C7F42A16@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||> Are there
> restrictions on RAM, connections etc etc?
No.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
"NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D3D585A4-1C12-4203-9640-8ED39685B371@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I realise MSDN versions of SQL Standard are "not allowed to run in
> production environment". But what I am asking is does MSDN version of SQL
> Standard differ from the version you would buy (OEM type). Are there
> restrictions on RAM, connections etc etc?
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>|||Thanks for your help.
N
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> No.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> http://www.sqlug.se/
>
> "NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D3D585A4-1C12-4203-9640-8ED39685B371@.microsoft.com...
>
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)