Basic Question: Setting a varaiable to a datasource.select value

Hi!

I am trying to do something that I would think should be rather simple.

I have a SQLDataSource that has a simple select statement.

I have a String Variable st_temp

I know my SQLDataSource returns only one value, and it's a string.

HOW DO I DO somehitng like st_temp=SQLDataSource.Select;

I am getting nothing but errorrs

Thanks in advance

Dan

What errors are you getting?|||

If you are using just a single value then there is no need for SQLDataSource object. You can directly use SQLCommand.ExecuteScalar() method.

|||

2 things:

1. sorry to be so dense but how do I use SQLCommand.ExecuteScalar() method. in C#?

2. Errors are

":CS0201: Only assignment, call, increment, decrement, and new object expressions can be used as a statement" when I call SDSSelect.Select;

and

":CS0428: Cannot convert method group 'Select' to non-delegate type 'string'. Did you intend to invoke the method?" when I call Label1.Text= SDSSelect.Select;

Thanks again for the help...i shouldda stayed in Java land!|||

Thanks for all the HELP!!!

Dan

Basic question.... on Index....

Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
clustered here?
Thanks,
Jessy
Hi,
Physical ordering of data inside the data page will be same as the Index key
order.
The pages in the data chain and the records on the pages are ordered on the
value of the clustered index key. All inserts are made at the point the key
value in the inserted row fits in the ordering sequence.
See more details of cluetsred index in books online.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
> clustered here?
> Thanks,
> Jessy
>
|||Clustered means the index keys and the table are clustered in the same page?
Jessy
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23xMrpksZFHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> Physical ordering of data inside the data page will be same as the Index
key
> order.
> The pages in the data chain and the records on the pages are ordered on
the
> value of the clustered index key. All inserts are made at the point the
key
> value in the inserted row fits in the ordering sequence.
> See more details of cluetsred index in books online.
>
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
>
> "Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||Hi,
No. There are seperate Index and Data pages. read the below article.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...es_05_5h6b.asp
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23rDFQpsZFHA.2124@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Clustered means the index keys and the table are clustered in the same
> page?
> Jessy
>
> "Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23xMrpksZFHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> key
> the
> key
>
|||"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:#Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
> clustered here?
> Thanks,
> Jessy
>
As an example...
A clustered index is sort of like a dictionary. The keys (dictionary words)
are stored in sorted order. If you need to add a new row called Alligator,
then it would be placed in the correct location in the dictionary.
A non-clustered index is more like the index you find at the back of a book.
The index at the back of the book is stored in sorted order, however, it has
page numbers which tell you to go to page xx to find your word. When you
insert a row here, the data will be appended to the end of the table (unless
you have a clustered index on it), and the index at the back of the book
will be updated appropriately.
One thing to note is that when you have a nonclustered index on a table that
has a clustered index, the "page numbers" don't actually point at the pages,
but rather point at the clustered index key (dictionary word from above).
When you do an insert, the nonclustered index has it's row modified and it
then points to the clustered index key and the row is added in the
dictionary order.
HTH
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
|||Excellent explanation. This is the sort of explanation I was looking
Thank you very much,
Jessy
"Rick Sawtell" <r_sawtell@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OYPXjysZFHA.1456@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:#Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> As an example...
> A clustered index is sort of like a dictionary. The keys (dictionary
words)
> are stored in sorted order. If you need to add a new row called
Alligator,
> then it would be placed in the correct location in the dictionary.
> A non-clustered index is more like the index you find at the back of a
book.
> The index at the back of the book is stored in sorted order, however, it
has
> page numbers which tell you to go to page xx to find your word. When you
> insert a row here, the data will be appended to the end of the table
(unless
> you have a clustered index on it), and the index at the back of the book
> will be updated appropriately.
> One thing to note is that when you have a nonclustered index on a table
that
> has a clustered index, the "page numbers" don't actually point at the
pages,
> but rather point at the clustered index key (dictionary word from above).
> When you do an insert, the nonclustered index has it's row modified and it
> then points to the clustered index key and the row is added in the
> dictionary order.
> HTH
> Rick Sawtell
> MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
>
>
|||One of the main benefits of clustered indexes is that you can get better
response for range queries or queries with duplicate keys, because the data
is stored on the same or side by side pages. An IO of 1 page will return
multiple rows that satisfy such a query, reducing IO time in a big way.
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
> clustered here?
> Thanks,
> Jessy
>
|||Hari:
I'm not sure what you mean by this statement. Your statement is true for
non-clustered indexes, but for the clustered index, the index key and the
data are on the same pages and ARE the data pages. The clustered index does
not use Index pages; they are the data pages, at the leaf level.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas

"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Tcu7vsZFHA.3120@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
Hi,
No. There are seperate Index and Data pages. read the below article.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...es_05_5h6b.asp
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23rDFQpsZFHA.2124@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Clustered means the index keys and the table are clustered in the same
> page?
> Jessy
>
> "Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23xMrpksZFHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> key
> the
> key
>
sql

Basic question.... on Index....

Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
clustered here?
Thanks,
JessyHi,
Physical ordering of data inside the data page will be same as the Index key
order.
The pages in the data chain and the records on the pages are ordered on the
value of the clustered index key. All inserts are made at the point the key
value in the inserted row fits in the ordering sequence.
See more details of cluetsred index in books online.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
> clustered here?
> Thanks,
> Jessy
>|||Clustered means the index keys and the table are clustered in the same page?
Jessy
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23xMrpksZFHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> Physical ordering of data inside the data page will be same as the Index
key
> order.
> The pages in the data chain and the records on the pages are ordered on
the
> value of the clustered index key. All inserts are made at the point the
key
> value in the inserted row fits in the ordering sequence.
> See more details of cluetsred index in books online.
>
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
>
> "Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
> > clustered here?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jessy
> >
> >
>|||Hi,
No. There are seperate Index and Data pages. read the below article.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/createdb/cm_8_des_05_5h6b.asp
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23rDFQpsZFHA.2124@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Clustered means the index keys and the table are clustered in the same
> page?
> Jessy
>
> "Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23xMrpksZFHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>> Physical ordering of data inside the data page will be same as the Index
> key
>> order.
>> The pages in the data chain and the records on the pages are ordered on
> the
>> value of the clustered index key. All inserts are made at the point the
> key
>> value in the inserted row fits in the ordering sequence.
>> See more details of cluetsred index in books online.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Hari
>> SQL Server MVP
>>
>> "Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> > Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
>> > clustered here?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Jessy
>> >
>> >
>>
>|||"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:#Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
> clustered here?
> Thanks,
> Jessy
>
As an example...
A clustered index is sort of like a dictionary. The keys (dictionary words)
are stored in sorted order. If you need to add a new row called Alligator,
then it would be placed in the correct location in the dictionary.
A non-clustered index is more like the index you find at the back of a book.
The index at the back of the book is stored in sorted order, however, it has
page numbers which tell you to go to page xx to find your word. When you
insert a row here, the data will be appended to the end of the table (unless
you have a clustered index on it), and the index at the back of the book
will be updated appropriately.
One thing to note is that when you have a nonclustered index on a table that
has a clustered index, the "page numbers" don't actually point at the pages,
but rather point at the clustered index key (dictionary word from above).
When you do an insert, the nonclustered index has it's row modified and it
then points to the clustered index key and the row is added in the
dictionary order.
HTH
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA|||Excellent explanation. This is the sort of explanation I was looking
Thank you very much,
Jessy
"Rick Sawtell" <r_sawtell@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OYPXjysZFHA.1456@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:#Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
> > clustered here?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jessy
> >
> >
> As an example...
> A clustered index is sort of like a dictionary. The keys (dictionary
words)
> are stored in sorted order. If you need to add a new row called
Alligator,
> then it would be placed in the correct location in the dictionary.
> A non-clustered index is more like the index you find at the back of a
book.
> The index at the back of the book is stored in sorted order, however, it
has
> page numbers which tell you to go to page xx to find your word. When you
> insert a row here, the data will be appended to the end of the table
(unless
> you have a clustered index on it), and the index at the back of the book
> will be updated appropriately.
> One thing to note is that when you have a nonclustered index on a table
that
> has a clustered index, the "page numbers" don't actually point at the
pages,
> but rather point at the clustered index key (dictionary word from above).
> When you do an insert, the nonclustered index has it's row modified and it
> then points to the clustered index key and the row is added in the
> dictionary order.
> HTH
> Rick Sawtell
> MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
>
>|||One of the main benefits of clustered indexes is that you can get better
response for range queries or queries with duplicate keys, because the data
is stored on the same or side by side pages. An IO of 1 page will return
multiple rows that satisfy such a query, reducing IO time in a big way.
--
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
> clustered here?
> Thanks,
> Jessy
>|||Hari:
I'm not sure what you mean by this statement. Your statement is true for
non-clustered indexes, but for the clustered index, the index key and the
data are on the same pages and ARE the data pages. The clustered index does
not use Index pages; they are the data pages, at the leaf level.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Tcu7vsZFHA.3120@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
Hi,
No. There are seperate Index and Data pages. read the below article.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/createdb/cm_8_des_05_5h6b.asp
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23rDFQpsZFHA.2124@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Clustered means the index keys and the table are clustered in the same
> page?
> Jessy
>
> "Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23xMrpksZFHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>> Physical ordering of data inside the data page will be same as the Index
> key
>> order.
>> The pages in the data chain and the records on the pages are ordered on
> the
>> value of the clustered index key. All inserts are made at the point the
> key
>> value in the inserted row fits in the ordering sequence.
>> See more details of cluetsred index in books online.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Hari
>> SQL Server MVP
>>
>> "Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> > Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
>> > clustered here?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Jessy
>> >
>> >
>>
>

Basic question.... on Index....

Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
clustered here?
Thanks,
JessyHi,
Physical ordering of data inside the data page will be same as the Index key
order.
The pages in the data chain and the records on the pages are ordered on the
value of the clustered index key. All inserts are made at the point the key
value in the inserted row fits in the ordering sequence.
See more details of cluetsred index in books online.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
> clustered here?
> Thanks,
> Jessy
>|||Clustered means the index keys and the table are clustered in the same page?
Jessy
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23xMrpksZFHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> Physical ordering of data inside the data page will be same as the Index
key
> order.
> The pages in the data chain and the records on the pages are ordered on
the
> value of the clustered index key. All inserts are made at the point the
key
> value in the inserted row fits in the ordering sequence.
> See more details of cluetsred index in books online.
>
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
>
> "Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>|||Hi,
No. There are seperate Index and Data pages. read the below article.
_05_5h6b.asp" target="_blank">http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...>
_05_5h6b.asp
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23rDFQpsZFHA.2124@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Clustered means the index keys and the table are clustered in the same
> page?
> Jessy
>
> "Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23xMrpksZFHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> key
> the
> key
>|||"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:#Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
> clustered here?
> Thanks,
> Jessy
>
As an example...
A clustered index is sort of like a dictionary. The keys (dictionary words)
are stored in sorted order. If you need to add a new row called Alligator,
then it would be placed in the correct location in the dictionary.
A non-clustered index is more like the index you find at the back of a book.
The index at the back of the book is stored in sorted order, however, it has
page numbers which tell you to go to page xx to find your word. When you
insert a row here, the data will be appended to the end of the table (unless
you have a clustered index on it), and the index at the back of the book
will be updated appropriately.
One thing to note is that when you have a nonclustered index on a table that
has a clustered index, the "page numbers" don't actually point at the pages,
but rather point at the clustered index key (dictionary word from above).
When you do an insert, the nonclustered index has it's row modified and it
then points to the clustered index key and the row is added in the
dictionary order.
HTH
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA|||Excellent explanation. This is the sort of explanation I was looking
Thank you very much,
Jessy
"Rick Sawtell" <r_sawtell@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OYPXjysZFHA.1456@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:#Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> As an example...
> A clustered index is sort of like a dictionary. The keys (dictionary
words)
> are stored in sorted order. If you need to add a new row called
Alligator,
> then it would be placed in the correct location in the dictionary.
> A non-clustered index is more like the index you find at the back of a
book.
> The index at the back of the book is stored in sorted order, however, it
has
> page numbers which tell you to go to page xx to find your word. When you
> insert a row here, the data will be appended to the end of the table
(unless
> you have a clustered index on it), and the index at the back of the book
> will be updated appropriately.
> One thing to note is that when you have a nonclustered index on a table
that
> has a clustered index, the "page numbers" don't actually point at the
pages,
> but rather point at the clustered index key (dictionary word from above).
> When you do an insert, the nonclustered index has it's row modified and it
> then points to the clustered index key and the row is added in the
> dictionary order.
> HTH
> Rick Sawtell
> MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
>
>|||One of the main benefits of clustered indexes is that you can get better
response for range queries or queries with duplicate keys, because the data
is stored on the same or side by side pages. An IO of 1 page will return
multiple rows that satisfy such a query, reducing IO time in a big way.
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Sy2IfsZFHA.3852@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Why the name clustered is used in the clustered index? What is exactly
> clustered here?
> Thanks,
> Jessy
>|||Hari:
I'm not sure what you mean by this statement. Your statement is true for
non-clustered indexes, but for the clustered index, the index key and the
data are on the same pages and ARE the data pages. The clustered index does
not use Index pages; they are the data pages, at the leaf level.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Tcu7vsZFHA.3120@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
Hi,
No. There are seperate Index and Data pages. read the below article.
_05_5h6b.asp" target="_blank">http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...>
_05_5h6b.asp
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Jessy Martin" <Jessy_Smith79@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23rDFQpsZFHA.2124@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Clustered means the index keys and the table are clustered in the same
> page?
> Jessy
>
> "Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23xMrpksZFHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> key
> the
> key
>

Basic Question on SQL Server 2005 Backup Theory

I am replicating a large number of databases (the size changes
dynamically) from one sql server to another, all pragmatically.
Once a week, I do a full backup and restore it on the destination.
All other times I am just backing up the log files, copying them over,
and restoring them. Basically a glorified log ship.
About once a week, I get various exceptions stating the following:
********
System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: BACKUP LOG cannot be performed
because there is no current database backup.
********
My question is: with this scenario, how often do I have to actually
perform a full backup? Does SQL Server 2005 really care?
Thanks a lot,
Michael Gorsuch
> My question is: with this scenario, how often do I have to actually
> perform a full backup? Does SQL Server 2005 really care?
Only the very first time. Assuming you ship all transaction log backups, and don't do anything with
the originating database that break the log backup sequence (like put it in simple recovery model).
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Michael Gorsuch" <michael.gorsuch@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177597505.788472.212590@.t39g2000prd.googlegr oups.com...
>I am replicating a large number of databases (the size changes
> dynamically) from one sql server to another, all pragmatically.
> Once a week, I do a full backup and restore it on the destination.
> All other times I am just backing up the log files, copying them over,
> and restoring them. Basically a glorified log ship.
> About once a week, I get various exceptions stating the following:
> ********
> System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: BACKUP LOG cannot be performed
> because there is no current database backup.
> ********
> My question is: with this scenario, how often do I have to actually
> perform a full backup? Does SQL Server 2005 really care?
> Thanks a lot,
> Michael Gorsuch
>

Basic Question on SQL Server 2005 Backup Theory

I am replicating a large number of databases (the size changes
dynamically) from one sql server to another, all pragmatically.
Once a week, I do a full backup and restore it on the destination.
All other times I am just backing up the log files, copying them over,
and restoring them. Basically a glorified log ship.
About once a week, I get various exceptions stating the following:
********
System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: BACKUP LOG cannot be performed
because there is no current database backup.
********
My question is: with this scenario, how often do I have to actually
perform a full backup? Does SQL Server 2005 really care?
Thanks a lot,
Michael Gorsuch> My question is: with this scenario, how often do I have to actually
> perform a full backup? Does SQL Server 2005 really care?
Only the very first time. Assuming you ship all transaction log backups, and
don't do anything with
the originating database that break the log backup sequence (like put it in
simple recovery model).
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Michael Gorsuch" <michael.gorsuch@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177597505.788472.212590@.t39g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>I am replicating a large number of databases (the size changes
> dynamically) from one sql server to another, all pragmatically.
> Once a week, I do a full backup and restore it on the destination.
> All other times I am just backing up the log files, copying them over,
> and restoring them. Basically a glorified log ship.
> About once a week, I get various exceptions stating the following:
> ********
> System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: BACKUP LOG cannot be performed
> because there is no current database backup.
> ********
> My question is: with this scenario, how often do I have to actually
> perform a full backup? Does SQL Server 2005 really care?
> Thanks a lot,
> Michael Gorsuch
>

Basic Question on SQL Server 2005 Backup Theory

I am replicating a large number of databases (the size changes
dynamically) from one sql server to another, all pragmatically.
Once a week, I do a full backup and restore it on the destination.
All other times I am just backing up the log files, copying them over,
and restoring them. Basically a glorified log ship.
About once a week, I get various exceptions stating the following:
********
System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: BACKUP LOG cannot be performed
because there is no current database backup.
********
My question is: with this scenario, how often do I have to actually
perform a full backup? Does SQL Server 2005 really care?
Thanks a lot,
Michael Gorsuch> My question is: with this scenario, how often do I have to actually
> perform a full backup? Does SQL Server 2005 really care?
Only the very first time. Assuming you ship all transaction log backups, and don't do anything with
the originating database that break the log backup sequence (like put it in simple recovery model).
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Michael Gorsuch" <michael.gorsuch@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177597505.788472.212590@.t39g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>I am replicating a large number of databases (the size changes
> dynamically) from one sql server to another, all pragmatically.
> Once a week, I do a full backup and restore it on the destination.
> All other times I am just backing up the log files, copying them over,
> and restoring them. Basically a glorified log ship.
> About once a week, I get various exceptions stating the following:
> ********
> System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: BACKUP LOG cannot be performed
> because there is no current database backup.
> ********
> My question is: with this scenario, how often do I have to actually
> perform a full backup? Does SQL Server 2005 really care?
> Thanks a lot,
> Michael Gorsuch
>sql