Basic question

hello,
I am not an administrator, please if I want to know the name of my sql
server, how can i find it?
I have sql server 2000 which I installed long time ago, I forgot what I
named it during the installation, i think it is the default name.
Is it local or (local) or something else?
Thank you.
Hi,
Login to Query analyzer and execute the below command
select @.@.SERVERNAME
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Philip Germanos" <PhilipGermanos@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:D659E5D9-F809-4C0E-8DE4-F6DCD98BFC66@.microsoft.com...
> hello,
> I am not an administrator, please if I want to know the name of my sql
> server, how can i find it?
> I have sql server 2000 which I installed long time ago, I forgot what I
> named it during the installation, i think it is the default name.
> Is it local or (local) or something else?
> Thank you.

Basic question

hello,
I am not an administrator, please if I want to know the name of my sql
server, how can i find it?
I have sql server 2000 which I installed long time ago, I forgot what I
named it during the installation, i think it is the default name.
Is it local or (local) or something else?
Thank you.Hi,
Login to Query analyzer and execute the below command
select @.@.SERVERNAME
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Philip Germanos" <PhilipGermanos@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:D659E5D9-F809-4C0E-8DE4-F6DCD98BFC66@.microsoft.com...
> hello,
> I am not an administrator, please if I want to know the name of my sql
> server, how can i find it?
> I have sql server 2000 which I installed long time ago, I forgot what I
> named it during the installation, i think it is the default name.
> Is it local or (local) or something else?
> Thank you.

Basic question

hello,
I am not an administrator, please if I want to know the name of my sql
server, how can i find it?
I have sql server 2000 which I installed long time ago, I forgot what I
named it during the installation, i think it is the default name.
Is it local or (local) or something else?
Thank you.Hi,
Login to Query analyzer and execute the below command
select @.@.SERVERNAME
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Philip Germanos" <PhilipGermanos@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:D659E5D9-F809-4C0E-8DE4-F6DCD98BFC66@.microsoft.com...
> hello,
> I am not an administrator, please if I want to know the name of my sql
> server, how can i find it?
> I have sql server 2000 which I installed long time ago, I forgot what I
> named it during the installation, i think it is the default name.
> Is it local or (local) or something else?
> Thank you.sql

Basic problems with replication

Hi
I've just installed Sql Server 7 and wanted to see how replication works.
With DTS i copied Northwind database so now i have two db Northwind and
Northwind_copy on my server.
Using wizards (default values) I've tried snapshot replication from
Northwind (publication) to Northwind_copy (pull subscription, I used sa
login without password ? is it correct ? ).
It seems easy but doesn't work ;(
Snapshot agent session details:
7) The process could not bulk copy out of table
'[dbo].[syncobj_0x3044324641344544]'
6) Bulk copied snapshot data for article 'Categories' (0 rows)
5) Bulk copying snapshot data for article 'Categories'
4) Locking published tables while generating the snapshot
3) Generating Schema script for article 'Categories'
2) Connecting to Publisher 'MyServer'
1) Initializing
In Pull Substraction window:
Could not get license information correctly. The step failed
Thanks
urga
Hi,
For Snapshot replication , no need to copy the objects to Northwind_copy
database. Automatically snapshot replication will copy the selected
articles to destination database.
Licensing:-
- check the licensing in control panel and see how many license you have for
sql 7
- check this registry key as well for previlages..
hklm\system\currentcontrolset\services\licenseinfo \mssql7.0
-- Apply SP4 for SQL 7 snd check.
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"urga" <urga@.go2.pl> wrote in message
news:cbtu2h$r0f$1@.nemesis.news.tpi.pl...
> Hi
> I've just installed Sql Server 7 and wanted to see how replication works.
> With DTS i copied Northwind database so now i have two db Northwind and
> Northwind_copy on my server.
> Using wizards (default values) I've tried snapshot replication from
> Northwind (publication) to Northwind_copy (pull subscription, I used sa
> login without password ? is it correct ? ).
> It seems easy but doesn't work ;(
> Snapshot agent session details:
> 7) The process could not bulk copy out of table
> '[dbo].[syncobj_0x3044324641344544]'
> 6) Bulk copied snapshot data for article 'Categories' (0 rows)
> 5) Bulk copying snapshot data for article 'Categories'
> 4) Locking published tables while generating the snapshot
> 3) Generating Schema script for article 'Categories'
> 2) Connecting to Publisher 'MyServer'
> 1) Initializing
> In Pull Substraction window:
> Could not get license information correctly. The step failed
> Thanks
> urga
>
>
sql

Barcode Font can not be converted into PDF format

Hi All,
I installed one truetype fonts "Bar Code 39" in my PC under folder
c:\windows\fonts. I used this font for bar code print purpose. It can work
perfect if I print the report direct to printer, or export it into
TIFF/EXCEL format. However, if i want to convert the report into PDF file,
then I could not find the bar code in the PDF file.
Any idea?
Thanks in advance.
LukeTry installing the font on the server as well.
"news.microsoft.com" wrote:
> Hi All,
> I installed one truetype fonts "Bar Code 39" in my PC under folder
> c:\windows\fonts. I used this font for bar code print purpose. It can work
> perfect if I print the report direct to printer, or export it into
> TIFF/EXCEL format. However, if i want to convert the report into PDF file,
> then I could not find the bar code in the PDF file.
> Any idea?
> Thanks in advance.
> Luke
>
>|||Yes, I did. But it doesn't work. I have already put the font under
c:\windows\fonts in the reporting server side.
"FredG" <FredG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1F071C4C-B8F8-44D7-AF1C-17A70F6B4514@.microsoft.com...
> Try installing the font on the server as well.
> "news.microsoft.com" wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> I installed one truetype fonts "Bar Code 39" in my PC under folder
>> c:\windows\fonts. I used this font for bar code print purpose. It can
>> work
>> perfect if I print the report direct to printer, or export it into
>> TIFF/EXCEL format. However, if i want to convert the report into PDF
>> file,
>> then I could not find the bar code in the PDF file.
>> Any idea?
>> Thanks in advance.
>> Luke
>>|||You must have the font on the server to support rendering the
report correctly - sometimes, after you put a new font on a server,
you need to both:
= OPEN the font from the fonts control panel AND
= REBOOT the server before it 'knows' about the new font.
Reporting Services does not embed fonts in PDF files (which is a
great
lack).
Anyone viewing the report must have the same fonts you designed it
with, or you will see some font substitution.|||Reporting service does not embed fonts. So you need fonts on every
computer that the PDF is going to open.
For a decent barcode font, visit http://www.morovia.com/font/

Bad Login/Password...how to correct it?

How do I change the login/password Reporting Services uses to connect to
SQL Server?
How do I reconfigure the options I chose when I installed SQL Server
Reporting Services in the first place?
Help!?!?rsconfig.exe -c
--
Tudor Trufinescu
Dev Lead
Sql Server Reporting Services
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"JC Ford" <johncford@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eSa0kGvfEHA.592@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> How do I change the login/password Reporting Services uses to connect to
> SQL Server?
> How do I reconfigure the options I chose when I installed SQL Server
> Reporting Services in the first place?
> Help!?!?|||Thanks!
Tudor Trufinescu (MSFT) wrote:
> rsconfig.exe -c
>

Bacon in the fire

I have installed MSDE sp3 with the SAPWD and DISABLENETWORKPROTOCOLS=0
switches set. The server works fine on the local machine but attempts to
access it respond with a 'server does not exist or access denied' message.
How do I verify (via osql) that the NetLib is installed correctly for
TCP/IP? If it is not how do I configure it?
Semper Fi,
Red
Please post to newsgroup only
hi Stephen,
"Stephen J Bement" <spam@.null.net> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:%23RtoNK$nEHA.708@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl
> I have installed MSDE sp3 with the SAPWD and DISABLENETWORKPROTOCOLS=0
> switches set. The server works fine on the local machine but attempts
> to access it respond with a 'server does not exist or access denied'
> message.
> How do I verify (via osql) that the NetLib is installed correctly for
> TCP/IP? If it is not how do I configure it?
if you are running Windows XP service pack 2, perhaps
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=841249 is worth reading
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.9.1 - DbaMgr ver 0.55.1
(my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
interface)
-- remove DMO to reply
|||the system is running XP sp1 not sp2. It does not have any firewall software
running. It can connect to the Server system (i.e. connect drives copy files
and PCAnywhere) but cannot communicate with the SQL Server.
TIA
Semper Fi,
Red
"Andrea Montanari" <andrea.sqlDMO@.virgilio.it> wrote in message
news:2rb1i1F17ftttU1@.uni-berlin.de...
> hi Stephen,
> "Stephen J Bement" <spam@.null.net> ha scritto nel messaggio
> news:%23RtoNK$nEHA.708@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl
> if you are running Windows XP service pack 2, perhaps
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=841249 is worth reading
> --
> Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
> http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
> DbaMgr2k ver 0.9.1 - DbaMgr ver 0.55.1
> (my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
> interface)
> -- remove DMO to reply
>
|||You might want to check out following article.
BUG: You may not be able to connect to an instance of Microsoft SQL Server
2000 Desktop Engine SP3a or to an instance of Microsoft SQL Server 2000
Desktop Engine (Windows) after you enable the server network libraries
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=827204
To checkout if network libraries are enabled, you can just see errorlog and
see if SQL Server is listening on named pipe and tcp/ip libraries.

backups through EM on remote registration

I have installed Sql Server 2000 evaluation copy on Windows XP, which I use to monitor other sql server 2000 installations (on Windows 2000) through Enterprise manager version 8.

What has been noticed is that if you try and set up a backup job through enterprise manager you do not get the option to remove inactive transaction log entries (yes the database's use full recovery models). Also if you select the verify backup option, it is not included within the job.

This is the same if you try the above on the local instance. This is not a problem as you can use the server installations, but what I am wondering is:

1. Has anyone come across this before?
2. Is it sql server 2000 on XP?
3. Is it the evaluation copy that is causing the problem?
4. Is it none of the above but indeed a far more complex reason which will mess with my head?

As always your help / knowledge is very much appreciated.As to verify, take a look at Database Maintanace Plans - there you can make it a part of your scheduled job. As to Inactive entries, actually it gets into your scheduled job, it is a default option when backing up transaction log - so you cannot see it in script that was generated by EM. Test for yourself - set up job without checking Remove inactive entries option and you can see that NO_TRUNCATE option is included in your command. Hope that it clears matters up a bit. Regards mojza|||Thanks for the reply mojza. I have no problems setting them up on the actual server, just on my PC through EM.

The verify problem is still an issue (i.e. You select it on your PC through EM but it is not part of the TSQL in the job).

However, the remove inactive transactions has got slightly stranger. On the server itself through EM, it is an option when creating a job and not touching the backup option (i.e. Database - complete is ticked by default). If you reselect it (click on it again or select another option and go back to complete) the option dissappears (which it should). Odd!!

As I said this is not really an issue but if anyone knows why I would appreciate the knowledge.|||I believe that Verify option in EM simply runs RESTORE VERIFYONLY command against backup set just completed so you can include this command plus some logic if you choose backup by T-SQL, otherwise you can set up Backup job in Database Maintanance Plan Wizard (it uses sqlmaint utility to perform its tasks which has -VrfyBackup switch to achieve backup set validation).

If 'remove inactive transactions' option is enabled in other backup type than transaction log, it's strange behavior and I've never seen that or heard about it. Evaluation edition or SQL on XP shouldn't be the cause. mojza|||The actual command it uses to berify if created on the server is:

select @.i = position from msdb..backupset where database_name='??' and type!='F' and backup_set_id=(select max(backup_set_id) from msdb..backupset where database_name='??')
RESTORE VERIFYONLY FROM [??] WITH FILE = @.i

I would be interested to know if anyone else can reproduce the 'remove inactive transactions' with a complete backup problem. Essentially all I did was right-click on the database, select backup database and under the options tab the option is there.

BackupIoRequest::WaitForIoCompletion failure when restoring database

I have MS SQL 200 Server Developer Edition Installed from MSDN collection. (New installation with service pack 2). When I try to restore 7GB or bigger database, following error occurs in eventlog:

Source: MSSQLSERVER
Category: (6)
ID: 18210
Date: 11.9.2007
Time: 14:50:09
Description:
BackupIoRequest::WaitForIoCompletion: write failure on backup device ''. Operating system error 1450(here is message in local language like "here is no resources to complete requested service").

But I am not writting to backup device, I am restoring. Thank for any helpful answer.

Not sure about the cause of the error.. Check if its related to this KB : http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;304101

|||

Thank you, dinakar.

KB howto i tried, but with no success.

backup/restore vs attach/detach

Hi... I've recently had to pick up being an SQL Administrator again after
about 5 years without touching it.
I have just installed SQL Server 2005 on a new cluster and it is all up and
running and ready to test our CRM application against it.
I'm a bit non-plussed about backup/restore, vs attach/detach functionality.
I want to copy the data from our SQL Server 2000 instance to our SQL Server
2005 instance. I seem to be able to do this by detaching the database,
copying the mdf/ldf and then re-attaching the copy data to the test SQL2005
server and re-attaching the original data to the SQL2000 copy which will
remain live until we finish testing compatibility. At which point we would
then copy the live data again from the SQL2000 instance to the SQL2005
instance and the use the SQL2005 version from there on.
THe problem is that when I detach, users can't get at the data. I've got
200 some internal users and lord knows how many external users accessing this
data. It doesn't seem right that there is no way to do this without
detaching the database interrupting the users? Can't I use a
backup/restore? I've tried but can't seem to get the restore to work. Is
there compatibility difference between SQL2000 backup and SQL2005 backup? In
which case is there someway I an get a copy of all the data on the SQL2000
server to the SQL2005 Server without interrupting users on the SQL2000
server?
Sorry, might seem a basic question, but I've been out of the line of fire
for a long time on this sort of thing, so I appreciate your patience.
Thanks
Bill
A backup and restore should work just fine and be a totally on-line
operation for the 2000 db. When you say you can't get it to work what
exactly is happening? Is there an error message?
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"billd" <billd@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4CD409FA-7537-4967-A9CD-8813CF813DF9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi... I've recently had to pick up being an SQL Administrator again after
> about 5 years without touching it.
> I have just installed SQL Server 2005 on a new cluster and it is all up
> and
> running and ready to test our CRM application against it.
> I'm a bit non-plussed about backup/restore, vs attach/detach
> functionality.
> I want to copy the data from our SQL Server 2000 instance to our SQL
> Server
> 2005 instance. I seem to be able to do this by detaching the database,
> copying the mdf/ldf and then re-attaching the copy data to the test
> SQL2005
> server and re-attaching the original data to the SQL2000 copy which will
> remain live until we finish testing compatibility. At which point we
> would
> then copy the live data again from the SQL2000 instance to the SQL2005
> instance and the use the SQL2005 version from there on.
> THe problem is that when I detach, users can't get at the data. I've got
> 200 some internal users and lord knows how many external users accessing
> this
> data. It doesn't seem right that there is no way to do this without
> detaching the database interrupting the users? Can't I use a
> backup/restore? I've tried but can't seem to get the restore to work. Is
> there compatibility difference between SQL2000 backup and SQL2005 backup?
> In
> which case is there someway I an get a copy of all the data on the SQL2000
> server to the SQL2005 Server without interrupting users on the SQL2000
> server?
> Sorry, might seem a basic question, but I've been out of the line of fire
> for a long time on this sort of thing, so I appreciate your patience.
> Thanks
> Bill
>
|||billd wrote:
> Hi... I've recently had to pick up being an SQL Administrator again after
> about 5 years without touching it.
> I have just installed SQL Server 2005 on a new cluster and it is all up and
> running and ready to test our CRM application against it.
> I'm a bit non-plussed about backup/restore, vs attach/detach functionality.
> I want to copy the data from our SQL Server 2000 instance to our SQL Server
> 2005 instance. I seem to be able to do this by detaching the database,
> copying the mdf/ldf and then re-attaching the copy data to the test SQL2005
> server and re-attaching the original data to the SQL2000 copy which will
> remain live until we finish testing compatibility. At which point we would
> then copy the live data again from the SQL2000 instance to the SQL2005
> instance and the use the SQL2005 version from there on.
> THe problem is that when I detach, users can't get at the data. I've got
> 200 some internal users and lord knows how many external users accessing this
> data. It doesn't seem right that there is no way to do this without
> detaching the database interrupting the users? Can't I use a
> backup/restore? I've tried but can't seem to get the restore to work. Is
> there compatibility difference between SQL2000 backup and SQL2005 backup? In
> which case is there someway I an get a copy of all the data on the SQL2000
> server to the SQL2005 Server without interrupting users on the SQL2000
> server?
> Sorry, might seem a basic question, but I've been out of the line of fire
> for a long time on this sort of thing, so I appreciate your patience.
> Thanks
> Bill
>
Hi Bill
A Backup/Restore shouldn't cause a problem, and is actually it's a more
"safe" procedure. When you detach your database, you haven't got
anything until you get it attached again. Not even your source is
available. This means that you have a potential risk that the attach
fails and in that case you've lost your database. I know it's not very
likely that it really happens, but the risk is always there.
If you use backup/restore, you'll keep your source online and working.
Then if the backup file is corrupt in one way or the other, you can
always go back and do a new backup.
As Andrew mentions, you'll have to provide some more info on what it is
that goes wrong with your restore - then it's easier to help you...;-).
Regards
Steen
|||Backup and restore is the most obvious option...
However, if you have the SQL script to create your database on the SQL 2005
server, you could create it and then use DTS to copy across the data . This
gives you the opportunity to also review some of the data types used and
swap them for the SQL 2005 types alternatives (if preferred) in the SQL
script before creating the database.
Griff
|||In addition to the other posts, you might want to read about sp_change_users_login (and also search
KB for sp_help_revlogins).
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"billd" <billd@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4CD409FA-7537-4967-A9CD-8813CF813DF9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi... I've recently had to pick up being an SQL Administrator again after
> about 5 years without touching it.
> I have just installed SQL Server 2005 on a new cluster and it is all up and
> running and ready to test our CRM application against it.
> I'm a bit non-plussed about backup/restore, vs attach/detach functionality.
> I want to copy the data from our SQL Server 2000 instance to our SQL Server
> 2005 instance. I seem to be able to do this by detaching the database,
> copying the mdf/ldf and then re-attaching the copy data to the test SQL2005
> server and re-attaching the original data to the SQL2000 copy which will
> remain live until we finish testing compatibility. At which point we would
> then copy the live data again from the SQL2000 instance to the SQL2005
> instance and the use the SQL2005 version from there on.
> THe problem is that when I detach, users can't get at the data. I've got
> 200 some internal users and lord knows how many external users accessing this
> data. It doesn't seem right that there is no way to do this without
> detaching the database interrupting the users? Can't I use a
> backup/restore? I've tried but can't seem to get the restore to work. Is
> there compatibility difference between SQL2000 backup and SQL2005 backup? In
> which case is there someway I an get a copy of all the data on the SQL2000
> server to the SQL2005 Server without interrupting users on the SQL2000
> server?
> Sorry, might seem a basic question, but I've been out of the line of fire
> for a long time on this sort of thing, so I appreciate your patience.
> Thanks
> Bill
>
|||Thanks Steen... I feel the same way that you do about detach/attach! It took
a really long time to detach the northwind database and I was very nervous
the whole while that it might take down the SQL engine itself.. I hate when
things take a long time... so, anyway, the failure: My SQL2000 data is on
the F: drive, which is a clustered resource. I backup up to base.bak in the
temp dir. Then I copy this to my S: drive which is the clustered resource on
my SQL2005 server. I then try to restore this base.bak file (it only has one
backup in it) I think get the error message: (grrrr, why don't then let you
cut and paste the text from error messages?)
... and as I did this, I realized... just this very minute, that I hadn't
gone to the database page and checked the overwrite database box... was the
problem, so yes I have found the answer...
Thanks to all for your help! I really only needed to know that
backup/restore should work and then could figure it out myself I guess.
restore failed for server SQLDB. (Microsoft.SQLServer.SMO)
Additional Information
System.data.sqlclient.sqlerror cannot use file:
"Steen Persson (DK)" wrote:

> billd wrote:
> Hi Bill
> A Backup/Restore shouldn't cause a problem, and is actually it's a more
> "safe" procedure. When you detach your database, you haven't got
> anything until you get it attached again. Not even your source is
> available. This means that you have a potential risk that the attach
> fails and in that case you've lost your database. I know it's not very
> likely that it really happens, but the risk is always there.
> If you use backup/restore, you'll keep your source online and working.
> Then if the backup file is corrupt in one way or the other, you can
> always go back and do a new backup.
> As Andrew mentions, you'll have to provide some more info on what it is
> that goes wrong with your restore - then it's easier to help you...;-).
> Regards
> Steen
>

backup/restore vs attach/detach

Hi... I've recently had to pick up being an SQL Administrator again after
about 5 years without touching it.
I have just installed SQL Server 2005 on a new cluster and it is all up and
running and ready to test our CRM application against it.
I'm a bit non-plussed about backup/restore, vs attach/detach functionality.
I want to copy the data from our SQL Server 2000 instance to our SQL Server
2005 instance. I seem to be able to do this by detaching the database,
copying the mdf/ldf and then re-attaching the copy data to the test SQL2005
server and re-attaching the original data to the SQL2000 copy which will
remain live until we finish testing compatibility. At which point we would
then copy the live data again from the SQL2000 instance to the SQL2005
instance and the use the SQL2005 version from there on.
THe problem is that when I detach, users can't get at the data. I've got
200 some internal users and lord knows how many external users accessing this
data. It doesn't seem right that there is no way to do this without
detaching the database interrupting the users? Can't I use a
backup/restore? I've tried but can't seem to get the restore to work. Is
there compatibility difference between SQL2000 backup and SQL2005 backup? In
which case is there someway I an get a copy of all the data on the SQL2000
server to the SQL2005 Server without interrupting users on the SQL2000
server?
Sorry, might seem a basic question, but I've been out of the line of fire
for a long time on this sort of thing, so I appreciate your patience.
Thanks
BillA backup and restore should work just fine and be a totally on-line
operation for the 2000 db. When you say you can't get it to work what
exactly is happening? Is there an error message?
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"billd" <billd@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4CD409FA-7537-4967-A9CD-8813CF813DF9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi... I've recently had to pick up being an SQL Administrator again after
> about 5 years without touching it.
> I have just installed SQL Server 2005 on a new cluster and it is all up
> and
> running and ready to test our CRM application against it.
> I'm a bit non-plussed about backup/restore, vs attach/detach
> functionality.
> I want to copy the data from our SQL Server 2000 instance to our SQL
> Server
> 2005 instance. I seem to be able to do this by detaching the database,
> copying the mdf/ldf and then re-attaching the copy data to the test
> SQL2005
> server and re-attaching the original data to the SQL2000 copy which will
> remain live until we finish testing compatibility. At which point we
> would
> then copy the live data again from the SQL2000 instance to the SQL2005
> instance and the use the SQL2005 version from there on.
> THe problem is that when I detach, users can't get at the data. I've got
> 200 some internal users and lord knows how many external users accessing
> this
> data. It doesn't seem right that there is no way to do this without
> detaching the database interrupting the users? Can't I use a
> backup/restore? I've tried but can't seem to get the restore to work. Is
> there compatibility difference between SQL2000 backup and SQL2005 backup?
> In
> which case is there someway I an get a copy of all the data on the SQL2000
> server to the SQL2005 Server without interrupting users on the SQL2000
> server?
> Sorry, might seem a basic question, but I've been out of the line of fire
> for a long time on this sort of thing, so I appreciate your patience.
> Thanks
> Bill
>|||billd wrote:
> Hi... I've recently had to pick up being an SQL Administrator again after
> about 5 years without touching it.
> I have just installed SQL Server 2005 on a new cluster and it is all up and
> running and ready to test our CRM application against it.
> I'm a bit non-plussed about backup/restore, vs attach/detach functionality.
> I want to copy the data from our SQL Server 2000 instance to our SQL Server
> 2005 instance. I seem to be able to do this by detaching the database,
> copying the mdf/ldf and then re-attaching the copy data to the test SQL2005
> server and re-attaching the original data to the SQL2000 copy which will
> remain live until we finish testing compatibility. At which point we would
> then copy the live data again from the SQL2000 instance to the SQL2005
> instance and the use the SQL2005 version from there on.
> THe problem is that when I detach, users can't get at the data. I've got
> 200 some internal users and lord knows how many external users accessing this
> data. It doesn't seem right that there is no way to do this without
> detaching the database interrupting the users? Can't I use a
> backup/restore? I've tried but can't seem to get the restore to work. Is
> there compatibility difference between SQL2000 backup and SQL2005 backup? In
> which case is there someway I an get a copy of all the data on the SQL2000
> server to the SQL2005 Server without interrupting users on the SQL2000
> server?
> Sorry, might seem a basic question, but I've been out of the line of fire
> for a long time on this sort of thing, so I appreciate your patience.
> Thanks
> Bill
>
Hi Bill
A Backup/Restore shouldn't cause a problem, and is actually it's a more
"safe" procedure. When you detach your database, you haven't got
anything until you get it attached again. Not even your source is
available. This means that you have a potential risk that the attach
fails and in that case you've lost your database. I know it's not very
likely that it really happens, but the risk is always there.
If you use backup/restore, you'll keep your source online and working.
Then if the backup file is corrupt in one way or the other, you can
always go back and do a new backup.
As Andrew mentions, you'll have to provide some more info on what it is
that goes wrong with your restore - then it's easier to help you...;-).
Regards
Steen|||Backup and restore is the most obvious option...
However, if you have the SQL script to create your database on the SQL 2005
server, you could create it and then use DTS to copy across the data . This
gives you the opportunity to also review some of the data types used and
swap them for the SQL 2005 types alternatives (if preferred) in the SQL
script before creating the database.
Griff|||In addition to the other posts, you might want to read about sp_change_users_login (and also search
KB for sp_help_revlogins).
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"billd" <billd@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4CD409FA-7537-4967-A9CD-8813CF813DF9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi... I've recently had to pick up being an SQL Administrator again after
> about 5 years without touching it.
> I have just installed SQL Server 2005 on a new cluster and it is all up and
> running and ready to test our CRM application against it.
> I'm a bit non-plussed about backup/restore, vs attach/detach functionality.
> I want to copy the data from our SQL Server 2000 instance to our SQL Server
> 2005 instance. I seem to be able to do this by detaching the database,
> copying the mdf/ldf and then re-attaching the copy data to the test SQL2005
> server and re-attaching the original data to the SQL2000 copy which will
> remain live until we finish testing compatibility. At which point we would
> then copy the live data again from the SQL2000 instance to the SQL2005
> instance and the use the SQL2005 version from there on.
> THe problem is that when I detach, users can't get at the data. I've got
> 200 some internal users and lord knows how many external users accessing this
> data. It doesn't seem right that there is no way to do this without
> detaching the database interrupting the users? Can't I use a
> backup/restore? I've tried but can't seem to get the restore to work. Is
> there compatibility difference between SQL2000 backup and SQL2005 backup? In
> which case is there someway I an get a copy of all the data on the SQL2000
> server to the SQL2005 Server without interrupting users on the SQL2000
> server?
> Sorry, might seem a basic question, but I've been out of the line of fire
> for a long time on this sort of thing, so I appreciate your patience.
> Thanks
> Bill
>|||Thanks Steen... I feel the same way that you do about detach/attach! It took
a really long time to detach the northwind database and I was very nervous
the whole while that it might take down the SQL engine itself.. I hate when
things take a long time... so, anyway, the failure: My SQL2000 data is on
the F: drive, which is a clustered resource. I backup up to base.bak in the
temp dir. Then I copy this to my S: drive which is the clustered resource on
my SQL2005 server. I then try to restore this base.bak file (it only has one
backup in it) I think get the error message: (grrrr, why don't then let you
cut and paste the text from error messages')
... and as I did this, I realized... just this very minute, that I hadn't
gone to the database page and checked the overwrite database box... was the
problem, so yes I have found the answer...
Thanks to all for your help! I really only needed to know that
backup/restore should work and then could figure it out myself I guess.
restore failed for server SQLDB. (Microsoft.SQLServer.SMO)
Additional Information
System.data.sqlclient.sqlerror cannot use file:
"Steen Persson (DK)" wrote:
> billd wrote:
> > Hi... I've recently had to pick up being an SQL Administrator again after
> > about 5 years without touching it.
> >
> > I have just installed SQL Server 2005 on a new cluster and it is all up and
> > running and ready to test our CRM application against it.
> >
> > I'm a bit non-plussed about backup/restore, vs attach/detach functionality.
> >
> > I want to copy the data from our SQL Server 2000 instance to our SQL Server
> > 2005 instance. I seem to be able to do this by detaching the database,
> > copying the mdf/ldf and then re-attaching the copy data to the test SQL2005
> > server and re-attaching the original data to the SQL2000 copy which will
> > remain live until we finish testing compatibility. At which point we would
> > then copy the live data again from the SQL2000 instance to the SQL2005
> > instance and the use the SQL2005 version from there on.
> >
> > THe problem is that when I detach, users can't get at the data. I've got
> > 200 some internal users and lord knows how many external users accessing this
> > data. It doesn't seem right that there is no way to do this without
> > detaching the database interrupting the users? Can't I use a
> > backup/restore? I've tried but can't seem to get the restore to work. Is
> > there compatibility difference between SQL2000 backup and SQL2005 backup? In
> > which case is there someway I an get a copy of all the data on the SQL2000
> > server to the SQL2005 Server without interrupting users on the SQL2000
> > server?
> >
> > Sorry, might seem a basic question, but I've been out of the line of fire
> > for a long time on this sort of thing, so I appreciate your patience.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Bill
> >
> Hi Bill
> A Backup/Restore shouldn't cause a problem, and is actually it's a more
> "safe" procedure. When you detach your database, you haven't got
> anything until you get it attached again. Not even your source is
> available. This means that you have a potential risk that the attach
> fails and in that case you've lost your database. I know it's not very
> likely that it really happens, but the risk is always there.
> If you use backup/restore, you'll keep your source online and working.
> Then if the backup file is corrupt in one way or the other, you can
> always go back and do a new backup.
> As Andrew mentions, you'll have to provide some more info on what it is
> that goes wrong with your restore - then it's easier to help you...;-).
> Regards
> Steen
>

backup/restore vs attach/detach

Hi... I've recently had to pick up being an SQL Administrator again after
about 5 years without touching it.
I have just installed SQL Server 2005 on a new cluster and it is all up and
running and ready to test our CRM application against it.
I'm a bit non-plussed about backup/restore, vs attach/detach functionality.
I want to copy the data from our SQL Server 2000 instance to our SQL Server
2005 instance. I seem to be able to do this by detaching the database,
copying the mdf/ldf and then re-attaching the copy data to the test SQL2005
server and re-attaching the original data to the SQL2000 copy which will
remain live until we finish testing compatibility. At which point we would
then copy the live data again from the SQL2000 instance to the SQL2005
instance and the use the SQL2005 version from there on.
THe problem is that when I detach, users can't get at the data. I've got
200 some internal users and lord knows how many external users accessing thi
s
data. It doesn't seem right that there is no way to do this without
detaching the database interrupting the users? Can't I use a
backup/restore? I've tried but can't seem to get the restore to work. Is
there compatibility difference between SQL2000 backup and SQL2005 backup? I
n
which case is there someway I an get a copy of all the data on the SQL2000
server to the SQL2005 Server without interrupting users on the SQL2000
server?
Sorry, might seem a basic question, but I've been out of the line of fire
for a long time on this sort of thing, so I appreciate your patience.
Thanks
BillA backup and restore should work just fine and be a totally on-line
operation for the 2000 db. When you say you can't get it to work what
exactly is happening? Is there an error message?
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"billd" <billd@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4CD409FA-7537-4967-A9CD-8813CF813DF9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi... I've recently had to pick up being an SQL Administrator again after
> about 5 years without touching it.
> I have just installed SQL Server 2005 on a new cluster and it is all up
> and
> running and ready to test our CRM application against it.
> I'm a bit non-plussed about backup/restore, vs attach/detach
> functionality.
> I want to copy the data from our SQL Server 2000 instance to our SQL
> Server
> 2005 instance. I seem to be able to do this by detaching the database,
> copying the mdf/ldf and then re-attaching the copy data to the test
> SQL2005
> server and re-attaching the original data to the SQL2000 copy which will
> remain live until we finish testing compatibility. At which point we
> would
> then copy the live data again from the SQL2000 instance to the SQL2005
> instance and the use the SQL2005 version from there on.
> THe problem is that when I detach, users can't get at the data. I've got
> 200 some internal users and lord knows how many external users accessing
> this
> data. It doesn't seem right that there is no way to do this without
> detaching the database interrupting the users? Can't I use a
> backup/restore? I've tried but can't seem to get the restore to work. Is
> there compatibility difference between SQL2000 backup and SQL2005 backup?
> In
> which case is there someway I an get a copy of all the data on the SQL2000
> server to the SQL2005 Server without interrupting users on the SQL2000
> server?
> Sorry, might seem a basic question, but I've been out of the line of fire
> for a long time on this sort of thing, so I appreciate your patience.
> Thanks
> Bill
>|||billd wrote:
> Hi... I've recently had to pick up being an SQL Administrator again after
> about 5 years without touching it.
> I have just installed SQL Server 2005 on a new cluster and it is all up an
d
> running and ready to test our CRM application against it.
> I'm a bit non-plussed about backup/restore, vs attach/detach functionality
.
> I want to copy the data from our SQL Server 2000 instance to our SQL Serve
r
> 2005 instance. I seem to be able to do this by detaching the database,
> copying the mdf/ldf and then re-attaching the copy data to the test SQL200
5
> server and re-attaching the original data to the SQL2000 copy which will
> remain live until we finish testing compatibility. At which point we woul
d
> then copy the live data again from the SQL2000 instance to the SQL2005
> instance and the use the SQL2005 version from there on.
> THe problem is that when I detach, users can't get at the data. I've got
> 200 some internal users and lord knows how many external users accessing t
his
> data. It doesn't seem right that there is no way to do this without
> detaching the database interrupting the users? Can't I use a
> backup/restore? I've tried but can't seem to get the restore to work. Is
> there compatibility difference between SQL2000 backup and SQL2005 backup?
In
> which case is there someway I an get a copy of all the data on the SQL2000
> server to the SQL2005 Server without interrupting users on the SQL2000
> server?
> Sorry, might seem a basic question, but I've been out of the line of fire
> for a long time on this sort of thing, so I appreciate your patience.
> Thanks
> Bill
>
Hi Bill
A Backup/Restore shouldn't cause a problem, and is actually it's a more
"safe" procedure. When you detach your database, you haven't got
anything until you get it attached again. Not even your source is
available. This means that you have a potential risk that the attach
fails and in that case you've lost your database. I know it's not very
likely that it really happens, but the risk is always there.
If you use backup/restore, you'll keep your source online and working.
Then if the backup file is corrupt in one way or the other, you can
always go back and do a new backup.
As Andrew mentions, you'll have to provide some more info on what it is
that goes wrong with your restore - then it's easier to help you...;-).
Regards
Steen|||Backup and restore is the most obvious option...
However, if you have the SQL script to create your database on the SQL 2005
server, you could create it and then use DTS to copy across the data . This
gives you the opportunity to also review some of the data types used and
swap them for the SQL 2005 types alternatives (if preferred) in the SQL
script before creating the database.
Griff|||In addition to the other posts, you might want to read about sp_change_users
_login (and also search
KB for sp_help_revlogins).
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"billd" <billd@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4CD409FA-7537-4967-A9CD-8813CF813DF9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi... I've recently had to pick up being an SQL Administrator again after
> about 5 years without touching it.
> I have just installed SQL Server 2005 on a new cluster and it is all up an
d
> running and ready to test our CRM application against it.
> I'm a bit non-plussed about backup/restore, vs attach/detach functionality
.
> I want to copy the data from our SQL Server 2000 instance to our SQL Serve
r
> 2005 instance. I seem to be able to do this by detaching the database,
> copying the mdf/ldf and then re-attaching the copy data to the test SQL200
5
> server and re-attaching the original data to the SQL2000 copy which will
> remain live until we finish testing compatibility. At which point we woul
d
> then copy the live data again from the SQL2000 instance to the SQL2005
> instance and the use the SQL2005 version from there on.
> THe problem is that when I detach, users can't get at the data. I've got
> 200 some internal users and lord knows how many external users accessing t
his
> data. It doesn't seem right that there is no way to do this without
> detaching the database interrupting the users? Can't I use a
> backup/restore? I've tried but can't seem to get the restore to work. Is
> there compatibility difference between SQL2000 backup and SQL2005 backup?
In
> which case is there someway I an get a copy of all the data on the SQL2000
> server to the SQL2005 Server without interrupting users on the SQL2000
> server?
> Sorry, might seem a basic question, but I've been out of the line of fire
> for a long time on this sort of thing, so I appreciate your patience.
> Thanks
> Bill
>|||Thanks Steen... I feel the same way that you do about detach/attach! It too
k
a really long time to detach the northwind database and I was very nervous
the whole while that it might take down the SQL engine itself.. I hate when
things take a long time... so, anyway, the failure: My SQL2000 data is on
the F: drive, which is a clustered resource. I backup up to base.bak in the
temp dir. Then I copy this to my S: drive which is the clustered resource o
n
my SQL2005 server. I then try to restore this base.bak file (it only has on
e
backup in it) I think get the error message: (grrrr, why don't then let yo
u
cut and paste the text from error messages')
... and as I did this, I realized... just this very minute, that I hadn't
gone to the database page and checked the overwrite database box... was the
problem, so yes I have found the answer...
Thanks to all for your help! I really only needed to know that
backup/restore should work and then could figure it out myself I guess.
restore failed for server SQLDB. (Microsoft.SQLServer.SMO)
Additional Information
System.data.sqlclient.sqlerror cannot use file:
"Steen Persson (DK)" wrote:

> billd wrote:
> Hi Bill
> A Backup/Restore shouldn't cause a problem, and is actually it's a more
> "safe" procedure. When you detach your database, you haven't got
> anything until you get it attached again. Not even your source is
> available. This means that you have a potential risk that the attach
> fails and in that case you've lost your database. I know it's not very
> likely that it really happens, but the risk is always there.
> If you use backup/restore, you'll keep your source online and working.
> Then if the backup file is corrupt in one way or the other, you can
> always go back and do a new backup.
> As Andrew mentions, you'll have to provide some more info on what it is
> that goes wrong with your restore - then it's easier to help you...;-).
> Regards
> Steen
>