Apps cannot connect to SQL after server upgrade to 2003 R2

I had a working SQL Server 2005 install based on an evaluation of Windows
Server 2003 SP2 Ent. I have several other servers running MOSS 07 and WSUS.
I upgraded the SQL server machine to 2003 R2 SP2 Ent. as the evaluation had
9 days before expiry.
However after the upgrade other machines cannot connect to the databases in
SQL, yet i can connect locally using SQL server management studio, the
databases are all intact and permissions have not been changed.
Any ideas would be gratefully received as I have my A Level coursework
stored in a a sharepoint site in one of these Databases!!!!!
AdamDid you check your Windows Firewall settings in your upgraded machine?
If it's not the problem, what's the error message exactly?
--
Ekrem Ã?nsoy
"Adam Gent" <AdamGent@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2997350C-2891-46FB-AC33-010DBA43C807@.microsoft.com...
>I had a working SQL Server 2005 install based on an evaluation of Windows
> Server 2003 SP2 Ent. I have several other servers running MOSS 07 and
> WSUS.
> I upgraded the SQL server machine to 2003 R2 SP2 Ent. as the evaluation
> had
> 9 days before expiry.
> However after the upgrade other machines cannot connect to the databases
> in
> SQL, yet i can connect locally using SQL server management studio, the
> databases are all intact and permissions have not been changed.
> Any ideas would be gratefully received as I have my A Level coursework
> stored in a a sharepoint site in one of these Databases!!!!!
> Adam|||windows firewall is off - i get error message when i try to access sharepoint
pages - "cannot connect to configuration database" and WSUS gives similar
error.
I can see no errrors in the application logs on the SQL server.|||Then go to SQL Server Configuration Manager and check out your protocols.
Ensure they are enabled and configured correctly.
Also, You did not mention which SQL Server Edition you have, however SQL
Server 2005 Express and Developer Editions are configured Remote Connections
disabled by default. You could check it from SQL Server Surface Area
Configuration tool.
--
Ekrem Ã?nsoy
"Adam Gent" <AdamGent@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:654B7ED7-35C6-4854-8DBA-128757AAC45F@.microsoft.com...
> windows firewall is off - i get error message when i try to access
> sharepoint
> pages - "cannot connect to configuration database" and WSUS gives similar
> error.
> I can see no errrors in the application logs on the SQL server.|||I have SQL Server 2005 SP2 Enterprise.
All remote protocols are enabled apart from VIA as the service wont start
with it enabled.
"Ekrem Ã?nsoy" wrote:
> Then go to SQL Server Configuration Manager and check out your protocols.
> Ensure they are enabled and configured correctly.
> Also, You did not mention which SQL Server Edition you have, however SQL
> Server 2005 Express and Developer Editions are configured Remote Connections
> disabled by default. You could check it from SQL Server Surface Area
> Configuration tool.
> --
> Ekrem Ã?nsoy
>
> "Adam Gent" <AdamGent@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:654B7ED7-35C6-4854-8DBA-128757AAC45F@.microsoft.com...
> > windows firewall is off - i get error message when i try to access
> > sharepoint
> > pages - "cannot connect to configuration database" and WSUS gives similar
> > error.
> >
> > I can see no errrors in the application logs on the SQL server.
>

approach for sharing data between servers

hi
i have two "Person" tables
one in server SQL01
and the other in server SQL02
i will integrate these two tables
in a single "Person" table in other server SQL03
then, i think
all the "inner/left joins" to "Person" table
won't work because "Person" table was moved
how can i "join" to the "Person" table
that is in other server '
in other words, wich ways do i have
for accessing a table that is not
in the same server than the stored proc ?
what is the efficience hit ?
thanks
atte,
HernnDoing cross-server joins can be quite slow. Consider using replication and
replicate the two Person tables to SQL01 and SQL02. Then, do the joins
locally.
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
.
"bajopalabra" <bajopalabra@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:O0IPCYfxGHA.1872@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
hi
i have two "Person" tables
one in server SQL01
and the other in server SQL02
i will integrate these two tables
in a single "Person" table in other server SQL03
then, i think
all the "inner/left joins" to "Person" table
won't work because "Person" table was moved
how can i "join" to the "Person" table
that is in other server '
in other words, wich ways do i have
for accessing a table that is not
in the same server than the stored proc ?
what is the efficience hit ?
thanks
atte,
Hernn|||in that case
i will have a problem
with the (unique) ID of the table
how can i sincronize the ID ?
i think i will need a kind of semaphor
to lock a resource (table)
that holds the "NEXT-ID" ...
atte,
Hernn
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> escribi en el mensaje
news:O8vHpbfxGHA.4764@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
| Doing cross-server joins can be quite slow. Consider using replication
and
| replicate the two Person tables to SQL01 and SQL02. Then, do the joins
| locally.
|
| --
| Tom
|
| ----
| Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
| SQL Server MVP
| Toronto, ON Canada
| .
| "bajopalabra" <bajopalabra@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:O0IPCYfxGHA.1872@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| hi
| i have two "Person" tables
| one in server SQL01
| and the other in server SQL02
|
| i will integrate these two tables
| in a single "Person" table in other server SQL03
|
| then, i think
| all the "inner/left joins" to "Person" table
| won't work because "Person" table was moved
|
| how can i "join" to the "Person" table
| that is in other server '
|
| in other words, wich ways do i have
| for accessing a table that is not
| in the same server than the stored proc ?
| what is the efficience hit ?
|
| thanks
|
| --
| atte,
| Hernn
|
|

approach for sharing data between servers

hi
i have two "Person" tables
one in server SQL01
and the other in server SQL02
i will integrate these two tables
in a single "Person" table in other server SQL03
then, i think
all the "inner/left joins" to "Person" table
won't work because "Person" table was moved
how can i "join" to the "Person" table
that is in other server '
in other words, wich ways do i have
for accessing a table that is not
in the same server than the stored proc ?
what is the efficience hit ?
thanks
--
atte,
HernánDoing cross-server joins can be quite slow. Consider using replication and
replicate the two Person tables to SQL01 and SQL02. Then, do the joins
locally.
--
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
.
"bajopalabra" <bajopalabra@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:O0IPCYfxGHA.1872@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
hi
i have two "Person" tables
one in server SQL01
and the other in server SQL02
i will integrate these two tables
in a single "Person" table in other server SQL03
then, i think
all the "inner/left joins" to "Person" table
won't work because "Person" table was moved
how can i "join" to the "Person" table
that is in other server '
in other words, wich ways do i have
for accessing a table that is not
in the same server than the stored proc ?
what is the efficience hit ?
thanks
--
atte,
Hernán|||in that case
i will have a problem
with the (unique) ID of the table
how can i sincronize the ID ?
i think i will need a kind of semaphor
to lock a resource (table)
that holds the "NEXT-ID" ...
--
atte,
Hernán
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> escribió en el mensaje
news:O8vHpbfxGHA.4764@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
| Doing cross-server joins can be quite slow. Consider using replication
and
| replicate the two Person tables to SQL01 and SQL02. Then, do the joins
| locally.
|
| --
| Tom
|
| ----
| Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
| SQL Server MVP
| Toronto, ON Canada
| .
| "bajopalabra" <bajopalabra@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:O0IPCYfxGHA.1872@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| hi
| i have two "Person" tables
| one in server SQL01
| and the other in server SQL02
|
| i will integrate these two tables
| in a single "Person" table in other server SQL03
|
| then, i think
| all the "inner/left joins" to "Person" table
| won't work because "Person" table was moved
|
| how can i "join" to the "Person" table
| that is in other server '
|
| in other words, wich ways do i have
| for accessing a table that is not
| in the same server than the stored proc ?
| what is the efficience hit ?
|
| thanks
|
| --
| atte,
| Hernán
|
|

Applying the snapshot for Merge rep fails everytime because Connection is reset?

Hi guys, Im desperately hoping someone here can help me. Ive been trying to set up merge replication between 2 servers all weekend and it keeps failing. Im setting this up as follows
The Publisher/Distributor is a SQL Server 2005 machine, the database being replicated is 4gb, and the only subscriber is a SQL Server 2000 SP4 machine. I set up my publication normally, and set up the push subscription, adn set it to initialize immediately. It weill then start bulk copying and go on for about 3-4 hours before it fails and gives me the errors:

Error messages:
The merge process was unable to deliver the snapshot to the Subscriber. If using Web synchronization, the merge process may have been unable to create or write to the message file. When troubleshooting, restart the synchronization with verbose history logging and specify an output file to which to write. (Source: MSSQL_REPL, Error number: MSSQL_REPL-2147201001)
Get help: http://help/MSSQL_REPL-2147201001
The process could not bulk copy into table '"dbo"."CONTENT"'. (Source: MSSQL_REPL, Error number: MSSQL_REPL20037)
Get help: http://help/MSSQL_REPL20037
An existing connection was forcibly closed by the remote host. (Source: MSSQLServer, Error number: 0)
Get help: http://help/0
One or more BLOB columns could not be sent to the server, attempt to recover from the problem failed. (Source: MSSQLServer, Error number: 0)
Get help: http://help/0
Communication link failure (Source: MSSQLServer, Error number: 0)
Get help: http://help/0
Unspecified error (Source: MSSQLServer, Error number: 0)
Get help: http://help/0
Failed to send batch after max errors (Source: MSSQLServer, Error number: 0)

This is driving me crazy as I havent slept in ages trying to get this fixed. Anyone have any idea whats going on? Its always one of 2 tables so far that keep failing, ContactLog and Content, what can I do?

For anyone who finds an error similar to this one, its the line "forcibly closed by the remote host" that was the most interesting. Well, found the solution here, in section 4.1.2, http://support.microsoft.com/kb/910228
Basically, SP1 for Win 2K3 includes a lovely feature to prevent DOS attacks, and rather cleverly it thinks SQL Server applying a snapshot is a DOS attack so closes the connection after a set amount of Connect/Disconnects. Jeebus wept. 1 simple registry key cost me my weekend :-|

Hopefully this will save someone the same heartache!

Keep up the good work guys
|||Hello Shane,

Did you find the solution to your problem if yes then please let me know also because i am also facing the same problem from last two weeks and i am not able to solve it and its causing a headache for me please tell me if u have the solution.
my email id is dr_hunaindurrani@.hotmail.com.

Thanks in advance.

Applying the snapshot for Merge rep fails everytime because Connection is reset?

Hi guys, Im desperately hoping someone here can help me. Ive been trying to set up merge replication between 2 servers all weekend and it keeps failing. Im setting this up as follows
The Publisher/Distributor is a SQL Server 2005 machine, the database being replicated is 4gb, and the only subscriber is a SQL Server 2000 SP4 machine. I set up my publication normally, and set up the push subscription, adn set it to initialize immediately. It weill then start bulk copying and go on for about 3-4 hours before it fails and gives me the errors:

Error messages:
The merge process was unable to deliver the snapshot to the Subscriber. If using Web synchronization, the merge process may have been unable to create or write to the message file. When troubleshooting, restart the synchronization with verbose history logging and specify an output file to which to write. (Source: MSSQL_REPL, Error number: MSSQL_REPL-2147201001)
Get help: http://help/MSSQL_REPL-2147201001
The process could not bulk copy into table '"dbo"."CONTENT"'. (Source: MSSQL_REPL, Error number: MSSQL_REPL20037)
Get help: http://help/MSSQL_REPL20037
An existing connection was forcibly closed by the remote host. (Source: MSSQLServer, Error number: 0)
Get help: http://help/0
One or more BLOB columns could not be sent to the server, attempt to recover from the problem failed. (Source: MSSQLServer, Error number: 0)
Get help: http://help/0
Communication link failure (Source: MSSQLServer, Error number: 0)
Get help: http://help/0
Unspecified error (Source: MSSQLServer, Error number: 0)
Get help: http://help/0
Failed to send batch after max errors (Source: MSSQLServer, Error number: 0)

This is driving me crazy as I havent slept in ages trying to get this fixed. Anyone have any idea whats going on? Its always one of 2 tables so far that keep failing, ContactLog and Content, what can I do?

For anyone who finds an error similar to this one, its the line "forcibly closed by the remote host" that was the most interesting. Well, found the solution here, in section 4.1.2, http://support.microsoft.com/kb/910228
Basically, SP1 for Win 2K3 includes a lovely feature to prevent DOS attacks, and rather cleverly it thinks SQL Server applying a snapshot is a DOS attack so closes the connection after a set amount of Connect/Disconnects. Jeebus wept. 1 simple registry key cost me my weekend :-|

Hopefully this will save someone the same heartache!

Keep up the good work guys
|||Hello Shane,

Did you find the solution to your problem if yes then please let me know also because i am also facing the same problem from last two weeks and i am not able to solve it and its causing a headache for me please tell me if u have the solution.
my email id is dr_hunaindurrani@.hotmail.com.

Thanks in advance.

Applying the latest 2K5 CU Patch Scare me out of it

We're late to the party, as far as rolling out SQL2K5. I would like
to *GASP* apply the latest SP2 cumulative update to the servers(looks
like CU6). We of course have not yet encountered any of the errors
that are addressed in the CU updates. The probably-not-unique-to-us
deal is this: If we encounter any of the addressed bugs in
production, without 'proactively' applying the patch, we will get into
a lot of political hot water. Yes, MS says don't apply UNTIL you
encounter an issue, but that may not fly with the higher-ups.
I think it comes down to this for us: Are these CU patches any more
or less prone to create additional issues than a SP release?Examining how 'buggy' SQL Server service packs have been since SQL 2000 SP3,
I would say that CUs can't be any worse. :-))
There are some very significant bugs fixed in the CUs though, so I would see
if Microsoft will give you 6, or at least 5. I think CU4 (build 3186') is
the latest one you can get without going through MS.
--
Kevin G. Boles
Indicium Resources, Inc.
SQL Server MVP
kgboles a earthlink dt net
<SqlRandall@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:80f70278-531e-4db5-a9cf-dc0c5b5ecd81@.60g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> We're late to the party, as far as rolling out SQL2K5. I would like
> to *GASP* apply the latest SP2 cumulative update to the servers(looks
> like CU6). We of course have not yet encountered any of the errors
> that are addressed in the CU updates. The probably-not-unique-to-us
> deal is this: If we encounter any of the addressed bugs in
> production, without 'proactively' applying the patch, we will get into
> a lot of political hot water. Yes, MS says don't apply UNTIL you
> encounter an issue, but that may not fly with the higher-ups.
> I think it comes down to this for us: Are these CU patches any more
> or less prone to create additional issues than a SP release?|||I cuold be wrong, but I think CU4 is .3200, which is our default. Has
proven to be stable, or we have lots of really lucky customers...
--
Kevin3NF
SQL Server dude
You want fries with that?
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
"TheSQLGuru" <kgboles@.earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:13stt3t4ijltrb4@.corp.supernews.com...
> Examining how 'buggy' SQL Server service packs have been since SQL 2000
> SP3, I would say that CUs can't be any worse. :-))
> There are some very significant bugs fixed in the CUs though, so I would
> see if Microsoft will give you 6, or at least 5. I think CU4 (build
> 3186') is the latest one you can get without going through MS.
> --
> Kevin G. Boles
> Indicium Resources, Inc.
> SQL Server MVP
> kgboles a earthlink dt net
>
> <SqlRandall@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:80f70278-531e-4db5-a9cf-dc0c5b5ecd81@.60g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
>> We're late to the party, as far as rolling out SQL2K5. I would like
>> to *GASP* apply the latest SP2 cumulative update to the servers(looks
>> like CU6). We of course have not yet encountered any of the errors
>> that are addressed in the CU updates. The probably-not-unique-to-us
>> deal is this: If we encounter any of the addressed bugs in
>> production, without 'proactively' applying the patch, we will get into
>> a lot of political hot water. Yes, MS says don't apply UNTIL you
>> encounter an issue, but that may not fly with the higher-ups.
>> I think it comes down to this for us: Are these CU patches any more
>> or less prone to create additional issues than a SP release?
>|||I have found the same with 3215; it is now on all of our dev, qa and
production servers. I have only installed 3228 in one development machine
so far due to time constraints.
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:ue9k0zvfIHA.5996@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I cuold be wrong, but I think CU4 is .3200, which is our default. Has
>proven to be stable, or we have lots of really lucky customers...

Applying SP4 on an active/passive 2 way cluster

I have a 2 way cluster and I want to apply SP4 on it.
Basically, I have 2 servers. Server A runs a default instance and
another instance. While the default services is disabled and the other
instance is running, Server B runs the default instance and has the other
instance disabled. This basically acts like a 2 way cluster
(active/passive).
How can I apply SQL Server 2000 SP4 on the 2 servers and have all the
nodes come up the correct way? What are the steps to achieve this?http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/B/D/1BDF5B78-584E-4DE0-B36F-
C44E06B0D2A3/ReadmeSql2k32sp4.htm#_installing_on_a_failover_cluster
--
Ole Kristian Bangås
MCT, MCDBA, MCDST, MCSE:Security, MCSE:Messaging, MCTS, MCITP|||This is not going to help me. I have explicitly mentioned that I have a 2
way cluster in my original email. So a standard article like you have given
me is NOT going to help.
"Ole Kristian Bangås" <olekristian.bangas@.masterminds.no> wrote in message
news:Xns981DB671F914Folekristianbangaas@.207.46.248.16...
> http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/B/D/1BDF5B78-584E-4DE0-B36F-
> C44E06B0D2A3/ReadmeSql2k32sp4.htm#_installing_on_a_failover_cluster
> --
> Ole Kristian Bangås
> MCT, MCDBA, MCDST, MCSE:Security, MCSE:Messaging, MCTS, MCITP|||"Shiva" <arbitsquare@.hotmail.com> wrote in
news:OTKiIkivGHA.2120@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
> This is not going to help me. I have explicitly mentioned that I have
> a 2 way cluster in my original email. So a standard article like you
> have given me is NOT going to help.
Yes, and I don't quite get the problem. Let me quote point two in the
article I gave a link to:
"Run the service pack from the node that owns the group containing the
virtual server that you plan to upgrade. This installs the service pack
files on all nodes in the failover cluster."
Can you please explain what your problem is? As I understand your scenario
you have a two-node two-instance active-passive SQL cluster. An upgrade of
that cluster should be rather straightforward.
--
Ole Kristian Bangås
MCT, MCDBA, MCDST, MCSE:Security, MCSE:Messaging, MCTS, MCITP|||"Shiva" <arbitsquare@.hotmail.com> wrote in
news:OTKiIkivGHA.2120@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
Correction to my previous post, You actually have an active/active
confuguration, with one instance on each server, but the upgrade procedure
is still valid.
--
Ole Kristian Bangås
MCT, MCDBA, MCDST, MCSE:Security, MCSE:Messaging, MCTS, MCITP

Applying SP4 on an active/passive 2 way cluster

I have a 2 way cluster and I want to apply SP4 on it.

Basically, I have 2 servers. Server A runs a default instance and another instance. While the default services is disabled and the other instance is running, Server B runs the default instance and has the other instance disabled. This basically acts like a 2 way cluster (active/passive).

How can I apply SQL Server 2000 SP4 on the 2 servers and have all the nodes come up the correct way? What are the steps to achieve this?Since SQL Server is a shared resource on a clustered server, installing SP4 on one server is automatically done on the other. Everything is transparent to the user/admin.sql

Applying SP4 on an active/passive 2 way cluster

I have a 2 way cluster and I want to apply SP4 on it.
Basically, I have 2 servers. Server A runs a default instance and
another instance. While the default services is disabled and the other
instance is running, Server B runs the default instance and has the other
instance disabled. This basically acts like a 2 way cluster
(active/passive).
How can I apply SQL Server 2000 SP4 on the 2 servers and have all the
nodes come up the correct way? What are the steps to achieve this?http://download.microsoft.com/downl...584E-4DE0-B36F-
C44E06B0D2A3/ReadmeSql2k32sp4.htm#_installing_on_a_failover_cluster
Ole Kristian Bangs
MCT, MCDBA, MCDST, MCSE:Security, MCSE:Messaging, MCTS, MCITP|||This is not going to help me. I have explicitly mentioned that I have a 2
way cluster in my original email. So a standard article like you have given
me is NOT going to help.
"Ole Kristian Bangs" <olekristian.bangas@.masterminds.no> wrote in message
news:Xns981DB671F914Folekristianbangaas@.
207.46.248.16...
> http://download.microsoft.com/downl...584E-4DE0-B36F-
> C44E06B0D2A3/ReadmeSql2k32sp4.htm#_installing_on_a_failover_cluster
> --
> Ole Kristian Bangs
> MCT, MCDBA, MCDST, MCSE:Security, MCSE:Messaging, MCTS, MCITP|||"Shiva" <arbitsquare@.hotmail.com> wrote in
news:OTKiIkivGHA.2120@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:

> This is not going to help me. I have explicitly mentioned that I have
> a 2 way cluster in my original email. So a standard article like you
> have given me is NOT going to help.
Yes, and I don't quite get the problem. Let me quote point two in the
article I gave a link to:
"Run the service pack from the node that owns the group containing the
virtual server that you plan to upgrade. This installs the service pack
files on all nodes in the failover cluster."
Can you please explain what your problem is? As I understand your scenario
you have a two-node two-instance active-passive SQL cluster. An upgrade of
that cluster should be rather straightforward.
Ole Kristian Bangs
MCT, MCDBA, MCDST, MCSE:Security, MCSE:Messaging, MCTS, MCITP|||"Shiva" <arbitsquare@.hotmail.com> wrote in
news:OTKiIkivGHA.2120@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
Correction to my previous post, You actually have an active/active
confuguration, with one instance on each server, but the upgrade procedure
is still valid.
Ole Kristian Bangs
MCT, MCDBA, MCDST, MCSE:Security, MCSE:Messaging, MCTS, MCITP

Apply Service Pack Question

I have a couple of servers that are running SQL Server 2000 with no service
packs applied. I would like to apply SP3a to both of them. Are there any
possible/known problems that I should be aware of before attempting this.
This will be my first time doing this type of thing...
Thanks
EricMake sure you really read the documentation and readme etc that comes with the service pack! :-)
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"Eric Stewart" <stewarte@.repsilverstate.com> wrote in message
news:uB95tpeZDHA.2236@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I have a couple of servers that are running SQL Server 2000 with no service
> packs applied. I would like to apply SP3a to both of them. Are there any
> possible/known problems that I should be aware of before attempting this.
> This will be my first time doing this type of thing...
> Thanks
> Eric
>

Application Event log message

Recently, I have been seeing the following event(s) in the application event
log on a number of my SQL servers. I have Googled this and get the
impression that it can just be ignored, but these are becoming more
frequent, and was wondering if anyone here could shed a bit more light on
the cause, and any possible way of preventing them. All instances running
SQL 2000 SP3 (or SP3a)
Source: SQLSERVERAGENT
Category: Alert Engine
Event ID: 322
Message: The data portion of event 19004 from MSSQLSERVER is invalid.
R - MCSE (2003, 2000, NT4), MCSA (2003, 2000), MCDBA (SQL2000)Its just a bug...
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-
us;230393
Peter
>--Original Message--
>Recently, I have been seeing the following event(s) in
the application event
>log on a number of my SQL servers. I have Googled this
and get the
>impression that it can just be ignored, but these are
becoming more
>frequent, and was wondering if anyone here could shed a
bit more light on
>the cause, and any possible way of preventing them. All
instances running
>SQL 2000 SP3 (or SP3a)
>Source: SQLSERVERAGENT
>Category: Alert Engine
>Event ID: 322
>Message: The data portion of event 19004 from MSSQLSERVER
is invalid.
>R - MCSE (2003, 2000, NT4), MCSA (2003, 2000), MCDBA
(SQL2000)
>
>.
>|||Thanks for the response. I had already seen that KB article, but was
wondering if anyone had identified what causes this to start occurring. For
well over a year, I have not seen this message, then recently it started to
appear. I am leaning towards an upgrade by our ITS team of SMS 2000 to SMS
2003, and the application of the new SMS advanced client (not sure if SMS
uses SNMP to communicate with clients, and vice-versa). This seems to
roughly coincide with the start of these messages. In the meantime, I will
configure my monitoring software to stop alerting me of these messages.
Any thoughts?
R
"Peter the Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:29be01c47df4$9064e4c0$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> Its just a bug...
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-
> us;230393
> Peter
>
> >--Original Message--
> >Recently, I have been seeing the following event(s) in
> the application event
> >log on a number of my SQL servers. I have Googled this
> and get the
> >impression that it can just be ignored, but these are
> becoming more
> >frequent, and was wondering if anyone here could shed a
> bit more light on
> >the cause, and any possible way of preventing them. All
> instances running
> >SQL 2000 SP3 (or SP3a)
> >
> >Source: SQLSERVERAGENT
> >Category: Alert Engine
> >Event ID: 322
> >
> >Message: The data portion of event 19004 from MSSQLSERVER
> is invalid.
> >
> >R - MCSE (2003, 2000, NT4), MCSA (2003, 2000), MCDBA
> (SQL2000)
> >
> >
> >.
> >|||The only thing I can think of is to go through the check
list below
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sms/sms2003/de
ploy/spgsms03/spsmsaph.mspx
Apologies for the lack of answers.
Peter
>--Original Message--
>Thanks for the response. I had already seen that KB
article, but was
>wondering if anyone had identified what causes this to
start occurring. For
>well over a year, I have not seen this message, then
recently it started to
>appear. I am leaning towards an upgrade by our ITS team
of SMS 2000 to SMS
>2003, and the application of the new SMS advanced client
(not sure if SMS
>uses SNMP to communicate with clients, and vice-versa).
This seems to
>roughly coincide with the start of these messages. In the
meantime, I will
>configure my monitoring software to stop alerting me of
these messages.
>Any thoughts?
>R
>"Peter the Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message
>news:29be01c47df4$9064e4c0$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Its just a bug...
>> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-
>> us;230393
>> Peter
>>
>> >--Original Message--
>> >Recently, I have been seeing the following event(s) in
>> the application event
>> >log on a number of my SQL servers. I have Googled this
>> and get the
>> >impression that it can just be ignored, but these are
>> becoming more
>> >frequent, and was wondering if anyone here could shed a
>> bit more light on
>> >the cause, and any possible way of preventing them. All
>> instances running
>> >SQL 2000 SP3 (or SP3a)
>> >
>> >Source: SQLSERVERAGENT
>> >Category: Alert Engine
>> >Event ID: 322
>> >
>> >Message: The data portion of event 19004 from
MSSQLSERVER
>> is invalid.
>> >
>> >R - MCSE (2003, 2000, NT4), MCSA (2003, 2000), MCDBA
>> (SQL2000)
>> >
>> >
>> >.
>> >
>
>.
>

Apache and Reporting Services

Can Reporting Servers run on Apache?No. It is an ASP.Net application.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"Bryan Avery" <b_avery@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1127394777.321200.26010@.g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Can Reporting Servers run on Apache?
>|||Sort of. Not truely as 'on' Apache, but if your front-end web server is
Apache, and you want to forward certain requests to be handled by reporting
services, then yes, you can make it LOOK as if it came from Apache itself
using Apache's Reverse Proxy functionality.
You'll need to have the Proxy module, and the Rewrite module compiled into
Apache, then set up a section in httpd.conf that looks like the following,
assuming your Report Server is named "RepServ" and is running on Port 80:
RewriteRule ^/ReportServer(.*) http://RepServ/ReportServer$1 [P,NC]
ProxyPassReverse /ReportServer http://RepServ/ReportServer
This way, when Apache sees requests for anything going to a 'ReportServer'
directory, it will reverse-proxy the request to the report server (Along
with everything else on the URL string - that's what the weird (.*) and $1
parts are for.), the report server will generate the report, and return it
to the Apache server (Thinking that the Apache server is just another web
browser), then Apache will send the report to the actual user, making it
look as if it came from the Apache server.
It's all smoke and mirrors :)
"Bryan Avery" <b_avery@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1127394777.321200.26010@.g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Can Reporting Servers run on Apache?
>|||Hi Bryan,
you might have some trouble getting support for running RS on apache
too.. ;-)
Peter|||I agree, it appears more hassle than it's worth.
--
Regards
<<<Bryan Avery>>
"Peter Nolan" wrote:
> Hi Bryan,
> you might have some trouble getting support for running RS on apache
> too.. ;-)
> Peter
>

Anything specific about SQL 2000 64 bit ?

Is there anything special needed to administer a 64 bit SQL Server ? We are
looking forward to deploying 64 bit on some servers and wanted to know if
there is anything I need to be aware of from an admin perspective,
installation,configuring, troubleshooting,etc..
There is a doucment for 64 bit sql server, you can read it before moving to
64 bit platform.
Thanks, Regards, Vincent
"Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23QRBWFKmFHA.2080@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Is there anything special needed to administer a 64 bit SQL Server ? We
> are
> looking forward to deploying 64 bit on some servers and wanted to know if
> there is anything I need to be aware of from an admin perspective,
> installation,configuring, troubleshooting,etc..
>
|||There are two pretty important things you should be aware of relating to
administering a 64-bit instance of SQL 2000.
1) You cannot run DTS packages on the 64-bit instance. You have to have a
32-bit instance that will run the DTS packages against the 64-bit instance
databases.
2) The administrative tools (Enterprise Manager and Query Analyzer, for
example) have no 64-bit editions. Again, you have to run these tools on a
32-bit machine and connect to your 64-bit instance.
If you are planning on running 64-bit SQL 2000, I'm guessing you have an
Itanium machine (I think the 64-bit SQL 2000 edition is only for Itaniums).
SQL 2005 has both Itanium and x64 versions, with a more complete set of tools
and functionality. If you could work with 2005, you might be happier.
Bob Hodgman
"Hassan" wrote:

> Is there anything special needed to administer a 64 bit SQL Server ? We are
> looking forward to deploying 64 bit on some servers and wanted to know if
> there is anything I need to be aware of from an admin perspective,
> installation,configuring, troubleshooting,etc..
>
>

Anything specific about SQL 2000 64 bit ?

Is there anything special needed to administer a 64 bit SQL Server ? We are
looking forward to deploying 64 bit on some servers and wanted to know if
there is anything I need to be aware of from an admin perspective,
installation,configuring, troubleshooting,etc..There is a doucment for 64 bit sql server, you can read it before moving to
64 bit platform.
Thanks, Regards, Vincent
"Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23QRBWFKmFHA.2080@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Is there anything special needed to administer a 64 bit SQL Server ? We
> are
> looking forward to deploying 64 bit on some servers and wanted to know if
> there is anything I need to be aware of from an admin perspective,
> installation,configuring, troubleshooting,etc..
>|||There are two pretty important things you should be aware of relating to
administering a 64-bit instance of SQL 2000.
1) You cannot run DTS packages on the 64-bit instance. You have to have a
32-bit instance that will run the DTS packages against the 64-bit instance
databases.
2) The administrative tools (Enterprise Manager and Query Analyzer, for
example) have no 64-bit editions. Again, you have to run these tools on a
32-bit machine and connect to your 64-bit instance.
If you are planning on running 64-bit SQL 2000, I'm guessing you have an
Itanium machine (I think the 64-bit SQL 2000 edition is only for Itaniums).
SQL 2005 has both Itanium and x64 versions, with a more complete set of tool
s
and functionality. If you could work with 2005, you might be happier.
Bob Hodgman
"Hassan" wrote:

> Is there anything special needed to administer a 64 bit SQL Server ? We ar
e
> looking forward to deploying 64 bit on some servers and wanted to know if
> there is anything I need to be aware of from an admin perspective,
> installation,configuring, troubleshooting,etc..
>
>

Anything specific about SQL 2000 64 bit ?

Is there anything special needed to administer a 64 bit SQL Server ? We are
looking forward to deploying 64 bit on some servers and wanted to know if
there is anything I need to be aware of from an admin perspective,
installation,configuring, troubleshooting,etc..There is a doucment for 64 bit sql server, you can read it before moving to
64 bit platform.
Thanks, Regards, Vincent
"Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23QRBWFKmFHA.2080@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Is there anything special needed to administer a 64 bit SQL Server ? We
> are
> looking forward to deploying 64 bit on some servers and wanted to know if
> there is anything I need to be aware of from an admin perspective,
> installation,configuring, troubleshooting,etc..
>|||There are two pretty important things you should be aware of relating to
administering a 64-bit instance of SQL 2000.
1) You cannot run DTS packages on the 64-bit instance. You have to have a
32-bit instance that will run the DTS packages against the 64-bit instance
databases.
2) The administrative tools (Enterprise Manager and Query Analyzer, for
example) have no 64-bit editions. Again, you have to run these tools on a
32-bit machine and connect to your 64-bit instance.
If you are planning on running 64-bit SQL 2000, I'm guessing you have an
Itanium machine (I think the 64-bit SQL 2000 edition is only for Itaniums).
SQL 2005 has both Itanium and x64 versions, with a more complete set of tools
and functionality. If you could work with 2005, you might be happier.
--
Bob Hodgman
"Hassan" wrote:
> Is there anything special needed to administer a 64 bit SQL Server ? We are
> looking forward to deploying 64 bit on some servers and wanted to know if
> there is anything I need to be aware of from an admin perspective,
> installation,configuring, troubleshooting,etc..
>
>