Disk permission to move SQL 2005 databases too...

I have a server with SQL 2000 and a name instance of SQL 2005, I am trying
to use the copy wizard to move databases from SQL2000 to SQL2005, when I do
this and to try to change the drive letters to my D: drive for the logs and
E: drive for the database, it goes through the process and fails. So I have
tried it again this time to the default location that SQL 2005 wants, which
is on the C: drive - of course this is not acceptable, but it works that
way. I figure it is a NTFS / permissions issue. But what permissions do I
need to setup on the other drive D: and E: to get this to work properly,
anyone please help me.
Thanks,
Andres
andres.perales@.mclaneat.com
Hi
Take a look at RESTORE command WITH MOVE option in the BOL
"Andres Perales" <andres@.andresperales.com> wrote in message
news:eu%23YtAyIHHA.1248@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I have a server with SQL 2000 and a name instance of SQL 2005, I am trying
>to use the copy wizard to move databases from SQL2000 to SQL2005, when I do
>this and to try to change the drive letters to my D: drive for the logs and
>E: drive for the database, it goes through the process and fails. So I
>have tried it again this time to the default location that SQL 2005 wants,
>which is on the C: drive - of course this is not acceptable, but it works
>that way. I figure it is a NTFS / permissions issue. But what permissions
>do I need to setup on the other drive D: and E: to get this to work
>properly, anyone please help me.
> Thanks,
> Andres
> andres.perales@.mclaneat.com
>
>

Disk permission to move SQL 2005 databases too...

I have a server with SQL 2000 and a name instance of SQL 2005, I am trying
to use the copy wizard to move databases from SQL2000 to SQL2005, when I do
this and to try to change the drive letters to my D: drive for the logs and
E: drive for the database, it goes through the process and fails. So I have
tried it again this time to the default location that SQL 2005 wants, which
is on the C: drive - of course this is not acceptable, but it works that
way. I figure it is a NTFS / permissions issue. But what permissions do I
need to setup on the other drive D: and E: to get this to work properly,
anyone please help me.
Thanks,
Andres
andres.perales@.mclaneat.comHi
Take a look at RESTORE command WITH MOVE option in the BOL
"Andres Perales" <andres@.andresperales.com> wrote in message
news:eu%23YtAyIHHA.1248@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I have a server with SQL 2000 and a name instance of SQL 2005, I am trying
>to use the copy wizard to move databases from SQL2000 to SQL2005, when I do
>this and to try to change the drive letters to my D: drive for the logs and
>E: drive for the database, it goes through the process and fails. So I
>have tried it again this time to the default location that SQL 2005 wants,
>which is on the C: drive - of course this is not acceptable, but it works
>that way. I figure it is a NTFS / permissions issue. But what permissions
>do I need to setup on the other drive D: and E: to get this to work
>properly, anyone please help me.
> Thanks,
> Andres
> andres.perales@.mclaneat.com
>
>|||Assuming the RESTORE command is correct (you have used the MOVE options corr
ectly):
The account used by the SQL Server service need create file and write permis
sions on the directory.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Andres Perales" <andres@.andresperales.com> wrote in message
news:eu%23YtAyIHHA.1248@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I have a server with SQL 2000 and a name instance of SQL 2005, I am trying
to use the copy wizard
>to move databases from SQL2000 to SQL2005, when I do this and to try to cha
nge the drive letters to
>my D: drive for the logs and E: drive for the database, it goes through the
process and fails. So
>I have tried it again this time to the default location that SQL 2005 wants
, which is on the C:
>drive - of course this is not acceptable, but it works that way. I figure
it is a NTFS /
>permissions issue. But what permissions do I need to setup on the other dri
ve D: and E: to get this
>to work properly, anyone please help me.
> Thanks,
> Andres
> andres.perales@.mclaneat.com
>
>

Disk permission to move SQL 2005 databases too...

I have a server with SQL 2000 and a name instance of SQL 2005, I am trying
to use the copy wizard to move databases from SQL2000 to SQL2005, when I do
this and to try to change the drive letters to my D: drive for the logs and
E: drive for the database, it goes through the process and fails. So I have
tried it again this time to the default location that SQL 2005 wants, which
is on the C: drive - of course this is not acceptable, but it works that
way. I figure it is a NTFS / permissions issue. But what permissions do I
need to setup on the other drive D: and E: to get this to work properly,
anyone please help me.
Thanks,
Andres
andres.perales@.mclaneat.comHi
Take a look at RESTORE command WITH MOVE option in the BOL
"Andres Perales" <andres@.andresperales.com> wrote in message
news:eu%23YtAyIHHA.1248@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I have a server with SQL 2000 and a name instance of SQL 2005, I am trying
>to use the copy wizard to move databases from SQL2000 to SQL2005, when I do
>this and to try to change the drive letters to my D: drive for the logs and
>E: drive for the database, it goes through the process and fails. So I
>have tried it again this time to the default location that SQL 2005 wants,
>which is on the C: drive - of course this is not acceptable, but it works
>that way. I figure it is a NTFS / permissions issue. But what permissions
>do I need to setup on the other drive D: and E: to get this to work
>properly, anyone please help me.
> Thanks,
> Andres
> andres.perales@.mclaneat.com
>
>|||Assuming the RESTORE command is correct (you have used the MOVE options correctly):
The account used by the SQL Server service need create file and write permissions on the directory.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Andres Perales" <andres@.andresperales.com> wrote in message
news:eu%23YtAyIHHA.1248@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I have a server with SQL 2000 and a name instance of SQL 2005, I am trying to use the copy wizard
>to move databases from SQL2000 to SQL2005, when I do this and to try to change the drive letters to
>my D: drive for the logs and E: drive for the database, it goes through the process and fails. So
>I have tried it again this time to the default location that SQL 2005 wants, which is on the C:
>drive - of course this is not acceptable, but it works that way. I figure it is a NTFS /
>permissions issue. But what permissions do I need to setup on the other drive D: and E: to get this
>to work properly, anyone please help me.
> Thanks,
> Andres
> andres.perales@.mclaneat.com
>
>sql

Discontinued Collations in SQL 2000

The collation LATIN1_General_BIN existed in SQL7 but is
not available in SQL2000. Which collation in SQL2000
would be the most appropriate replacement? We have
existing applications using this collation, and are stuck
at how to implement an upgrade path from 7 to 2000.
Thank you,
BillIn 2be501c37976$056ae820$a601280a@.phx.gbl, Bill Kenworthy typed:
> The collation LATIN1_General_BIN existed in SQL7 but is
> not available in SQL2000.
Sorry this is wrong, please see BOL:
"Windows Collation Name"
"SQL Collation Name"
--
Olaf|||Bill,
> The collation LATIN1_General_BIN existed in SQL7 but is
> not available in SQL2000
Not true.Try this query...
SELECT *
FROM ::fn_helpcollations()
WHERE [name] ='LATIN1_General_BIN'
--
Dinesh.
SQL Server FAQ at
http://www.tkdinesh.com
"Bill Kenworthy" <jakesfather@.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2be501c37976$056ae820$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> The collation LATIN1_General_BIN existed in SQL7 but is
> not available in SQL2000. Which collation in SQL2000
> would be the most appropriate replacement? We have
> existing applications using this collation, and are stuck
> at how to implement an upgrade path from 7 to 2000.
> Thank you,
> Bill

Disaster - Recovery Order of events

we are trying to simulate a disater recovery of our SQL2000 and SQL2005 development servers. Which is the order in which we should restore the DBs. I am talking specifically of MSDB, master and user DBs; should we restore user DBs before master and MSDB?
Thanks,
CarlosGenerally, you restore master first, then model(if you made any changes to it), and msdb. After that, all the user databases should be restored. THis goes for SQL 2000 and SQL 2005.|||Generally I have a standby box|||lucky little %^*)|||lucky little %^*)

He didn't say WHAT kind of box. It's actually a box of 64 crayola crayons.

Regards,

hmscott|||i thought the first thing to do was to start blaming other people. maybe followed by some frantic yelling all around the office.

maybe Brett has a squeezebox. But wait, if he has a squeezebox who doesn't sleep at night? I am confused. Back to writing code.

Disaster - Recovery Order of events

we are trying to simulate a disater recovery of our SQL2000 and SQL2005
development servers. Which is the order in which we should restore the DBs. I
am talking specifically of MSDB, master and user DBs; should we restore user
DBs before master and MSDB?
Thanks,
CarlosHi
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190190.aspx
"Carlos" <carlosarango@.SQLserver.com> wrote in message
news:580A4901-C15A-4694-8EBF-A9E84B7075E1@.microsoft.com...
> we are trying to simulate a disater recovery of our SQL2000 and SQL2005
> development servers. Which is the order in which we should restore the
> DBs. I
> am talking specifically of MSDB, master and user DBs; should we restore
> user
> DBs before master and MSDB?
> Thanks,
> Carlos|||Thanks Uri
Carlos
"Uri Dimant" wrote:
> Hi
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190190.aspx
>
> "Carlos" <carlosarango@.SQLserver.com> wrote in message
> news:580A4901-C15A-4694-8EBF-A9E84B7075E1@.microsoft.com...
> > we are trying to simulate a disater recovery of our SQL2000 and SQL2005
> > development servers. Which is the order in which we should restore the
> > DBs. I
> > am talking specifically of MSDB, master and user DBs; should we restore
> > user
> > DBs before master and MSDB?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Carlos
>
>

Disapearing Records

The first line in my global.asax is the creation of an ActiveX object that will hold a data connection to a SQL2000 Server database for the lifespan of an "Application" scope.

< OBJECT RUNAT="Server" SCOPE="Application" ID="Conn" name="Conn" PROGID="ADODB.Connection" VIEWASTEXT >< /OBJECT >

With that done, every time a new user invokes global.asax, a routine will verify rather it needs to open the connection or if the connection is already open:

If Conn.State <> adStateOpen Then
Conn.ConnectionTimeOut = 999999
Conn.ConnectionString = strConnStr
Conn.CursorLocation = adUseClient
Conn.Open
End If

The purpose of this is to avoid 400 simultaneous users from having to wait for their connections to estabilish communication to the server before initiating transaction.

Surprisingly enough, this works perfectly (for a massively shared, perpetual Connection object), except that once or twice a month, a record disapears from the main database and takes with it all relevant records from supporting tables.

Yes, it seems like a Forced Roolback is being issued...

Do you see Why?

Aleks,

I don't see anything that would cause that behavior based on the code you've provided.

Logging deletions through a trigger is one possible first step to figuring out when, where and why the behavior is occurring.

David Sceppa
Microsoft

Disabling/enabling of trigger & distributed transaction

I've 2 Windows 2000 server running each own instance of SQL2000. I've setup
both linked servers @. both end.
At server A, it'll call a sp in server B, whereby this sp will update server
B tables based on server A's data. And the server A table A will trigger
back to server B.
However due to some business logic and distributed transaction don't allow a
loopback operation, is there any method the trigger can be bypassed?
I can't drop this trigger as it need to be maintained when other process
access this table.
My question is, can a disable/enable trigger be issued in this sp?
What if another process updating this table at the same time and need the
trigger to be enabled? Will this process be queued after this completion of
sp?
Please advice on how feasible can trigger be controlled from firing..
Server_A call ServerB.sp
|
V
store procedure @. serverB
begin transaction
-- disable trigger
insert into serverB.dbB.dbo.tableB
select * from serverA.dbA.dbo.tableA where key=X
commit transaction
-- enable trigger
|
V
serverB.dbB.dbo.tableB trigger back to serverA
if record not found in serverA
insert into serverA
else
update into server A
Thanks in advance
KristeHi
You can do an ALTER TABLE with the ENABLE/DISABLE TRIGGER, but, the
disabling is for all connections.
The only way you could do this is to have the trigger look up in a table
what connections it can fire for. Not elegant, but might be workable.
Regards
Mike
"Kriste L" wrote:

> I've 2 Windows 2000 server running each own instance of SQL2000. I've setu
p
> both linked servers @. both end.
> At server A, it'll call a sp in server B, whereby this sp will update serv
er
> B tables based on server A's data. And the server A table A will trigger
> back to server B.
> However due to some business logic and distributed transaction don't allow
a
> loopback operation, is there any method the trigger can be bypassed?
> I can't drop this trigger as it need to be maintained when other process
> access this table.
> My question is, can a disable/enable trigger be issued in this sp?
> What if another process updating this table at the same time and need the
> trigger to be enabled? Will this process be queued after this completion o
f
> sp?
> Please advice on how feasible can trigger be controlled from firing..
> Server_A call ServerB.sp
> |
> V
> store procedure @. serverB
> begin transaction
> -- disable trigger
> insert into serverB.dbB.dbo.tableB
> select * from serverA.dbA.dbo.tableA where key=X
> commit transaction
> -- enable trigger
>
> |
> V
> serverB.dbB.dbo.tableB trigger back to serverA
> if record not found in serverA
> insert into serverA
> else
> update into server A
>
> Thanks in advance
> Kriste
>
>