Applying SP2a to SQL 2000/Win 2003

I'm getting this error message while trying to apply SP3a to SQL Server 2000
Standard that runs on Windows Server 2003:
"Setup was unable to verify the state of the server for an upgrade. Verify
the server is able to start and that you provided a valid sa password and
restart setup"
My sa password is definitely valid (verified), I'm able to stop and restart
SQL Server service manually with no problem. Please advise, this problem
happens every time I try to run SP3 or SP3a for SQL Server 2000 Standard that
runs on Windows Server 2003.
Thanks you in advance for your help,
Leon Shargorodsky
Leon Shargorodsky wrote:
> I'm getting this error message while trying to apply SP3a to SQL
> Server 2000 Standard that runs on Windows Server 2003:
> "Setup was unable to verify the state of the server for an upgrade.
> Verify the server is able to start and that you provided a valid sa
> password and restart setup"
> My sa password is definitely valid (verified), I'm able to stop and
> restart SQL Server service manually with no problem. Please advise,
> this problem happens every time I try to run SP3 or SP3a for SQL
> Server 2000 Standard that runs on Windows Server 2003.
> Thanks you in advance for your help,
> Leon Shargorodsky
Maybe the problem is related to the service account your using for the
SQL service. Is this a new SQL Server installation? If so, what SP are
you currently running? Stopping and restarting the service are
independent of the "sa" account and password. I assume you have logged
into SQL Server from Query Analyzer using the "sa" login and everything
works fine.
David Gugick
Imceda Software
www.imceda.com
|||I've tried LocalSystem acount as well as customized acount with admin
priveledges.
Yes, I'm able to log in with my sa cridentials using Query Analyzer.
This is new SQL installation 8.00.194 this is why I'm trying to apply SP3a.
"David Gugick" wrote:

> Leon Shargorodsky wrote:
> Maybe the problem is related to the service account your using for the
> SQL service. Is this a new SQL Server installation? If so, what SP are
> you currently running? Stopping and restarting the service are
> independent of the "sa" account and password. I assume you have logged
> into SQL Server from Query Analyzer using the "sa" login and everything
> works fine.
> --
> David Gugick
> Imceda Software
> www.imceda.com
>
|||Maybe something here will help:
http://www.aspfaq.com/2440
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"Leon Shargorodsky" <LeonShargorodsky@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:9480C132-32CE-4FB1-B8C4-0474DDDFBB2C@.microsoft.com...
> I'm getting this error message while trying to apply SP3a to SQL Server
2000
> Standard that runs on Windows Server 2003:
> "Setup was unable to verify the state of the server for an upgrade. Verify
> the server is able to start and that you provided a valid sa password and
> restart setup"
> My sa password is definitely valid (verified), I'm able to stop and
restart
> SQL Server service manually with no problem. Please advise, this problem
> happens every time I try to run SP3 or SP3a for SQL Server 2000 Standard
that
> runs on Windows Server 2003.
> Thanks you in advance for your help,
> Leon Shargorodsky

Application roles Licensing

I am trying to verify some information that was given to me by another (rival) admin, I was told by him that you can use the server plus user CAL licensing model and buy only enough CAL's to cover as many application roles you use. Is this correct because
if it is, we spent way too much money on licensing and I think that Microsoft would want to change their licensing policy in these regards. Sorry I didn't know what other Discussion Group to post this question. Thanks for any help on this matter.
"DanielG" <DanielG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F87CAE9-2435-4BFD-96D3-15AC1E9A901B@.microsoft.com...
> I am trying to verify some information that was given to me by another
(rival) admin, I was told by him that you can use the server plus user CAL
licensing model and buy only enough CAL's to cover as many application roles
you use. Is this correct because if it is, we spent way too much money on
licensing and I think that Microsoft would want to change their licensing
policy in these regards. Sorry I didn't know what other Discussion Group to
post this question. Thanks for any help on this matter.
I had not heard of cals based on application roles... There is a licensing
white paper you may want to
check(http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobu...rlicensing.asp). While
this does a fair job, it always seems like you need to talk to a lawyer to
get the full story!
Steve
|||Thank you for your reply; I did read the document before I posted (posting is usually the last step I take) but there is no reference to application roles. In theory it does seem possible to just buy a CAL for each application role, I mean logically it is
just one user logging in several times right?
"Steve Thompson" wrote:

> "DanielG" <DanielG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5F87CAE9-2435-4BFD-96D3-15AC1E9A901B@.microsoft.com...
> (rival) admin, I was told by him that you can use the server plus user CAL
> licensing model and buy only enough CAL's to cover as many application roles
> you use. Is this correct because if it is, we spent way too much money on
> licensing and I think that Microsoft would want to change their licensing
> policy in these regards. Sorry I didn't know what other Discussion Group to
> post this question. Thanks for any help on this matter.
> I had not heard of cals based on application roles... There is a licensing
> white paper you may want to
> check(http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobu...rlicensing.asp). While
> this does a fair job, it always seems like you need to talk to a lawyer to
> get the full story!
> Steve
>
>
|||I believe your rival is wrong. I'm not sure if CAL's are required for each
user or each system (computer) that accesses the server, but it's definitely
not by application role.
Mike Kruchten
"DanielG" <DanielG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F87CAE9-2435-4BFD-96D3-15AC1E9A901B@.microsoft.com...
> I am trying to verify some information that was given to me by another
(rival) admin, I was told by him that you can use the server plus user CAL
licensing model and buy only enough CAL's to cover as many application roles
you use. Is this correct because if it is, we spent way too much money on
licensing and I think that Microsoft would want to change their licensing
policy in these regards. Sorry I didn't know what other Discussion Group to
post this question. Thanks for any help on this matter.
|||My thought would be you could use CAL licensing if there's a way you can identify who is logging in before the application role takes over. That's where the licensing takes place, not at the role level. If you can't identify who is logging in, a process
or license is required.
"DGroebe" wrote:

> Thank you for your reply; I did read the document before I posted (posting is usually the last step I take) but there is no reference to application roles. In theory it does seem possible to just buy a CAL for each application role, I mean logically it
is just one user logging in several times right?[vbcol=seagreen]
> "Steve Thompson" wrote:

Application roles Licensing

I am trying to verify some information that was given to me by another (rival) admin, I was told by him that you can use the server plus user CAL licensing model and buy only enough CAL's to cover as many application roles you use. Is this correct because if it is, we spent way too much money on licensing and I think that Microsoft would want to change their licensing policy in these regards. Sorry I didn't know what other Discussion Group to post this question. Thanks for any help on this matter."DanielG" <DanielG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F87CAE9-2435-4BFD-96D3-15AC1E9A901B@.microsoft.com...
> I am trying to verify some information that was given to me by another
(rival) admin, I was told by him that you can use the server plus user CAL
licensing model and buy only enough CAL's to cover as many application roles
you use. Is this correct because if it is, we spent way too much money on
licensing and I think that Microsoft would want to change their licensing
policy in these regards. Sorry I didn't know what other Discussion Group to
post this question. Thanks for any help on this matter.
I had not heard of cals based on application roles... There is a licensing
white paper you may want to
check(http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/sqlserverlicensing.asp). While
this does a fair job, it always seems like you need to talk to a lawyer to
get the full story!
Steve|||Thank you for your reply; I did read the document before I posted (posting is usually the last step I take) but there is no reference to application roles. In theory it does seem possible to just buy a CAL for each application role, I mean logically it is just one user logging in several times right?
"Steve Thompson" wrote:
> "DanielG" <DanielG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5F87CAE9-2435-4BFD-96D3-15AC1E9A901B@.microsoft.com...
> > I am trying to verify some information that was given to me by another
> (rival) admin, I was told by him that you can use the server plus user CAL
> licensing model and buy only enough CAL's to cover as many application roles
> you use. Is this correct because if it is, we spent way too much money on
> licensing and I think that Microsoft would want to change their licensing
> policy in these regards. Sorry I didn't know what other Discussion Group to
> post this question. Thanks for any help on this matter.
> I had not heard of cals based on application roles... There is a licensing
> white paper you may want to
> check(http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/sqlserverlicensing.asp). While
> this does a fair job, it always seems like you need to talk to a lawyer to
> get the full story!
> Steve
>
>|||I believe your rival is wrong. I'm not sure if CAL's are required for each
user or each system (computer) that accesses the server, but it's definitely
not by application role.
Mike Kruchten
"DanielG" <DanielG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F87CAE9-2435-4BFD-96D3-15AC1E9A901B@.microsoft.com...
> I am trying to verify some information that was given to me by another
(rival) admin, I was told by him that you can use the server plus user CAL
licensing model and buy only enough CAL's to cover as many application roles
you use. Is this correct because if it is, we spent way too much money on
licensing and I think that Microsoft would want to change their licensing
policy in these regards. Sorry I didn't know what other Discussion Group to
post this question. Thanks for any help on this matter.|||My thought would be you could use CAL licensing if there's a way you can identify who is logging in before the application role takes over. That's where the licensing takes place, not at the role level. If you can't identify who is logging in, a processor license is required.
"DGroebe" wrote:
> Thank you for your reply; I did read the document before I posted (posting is usually the last step I take) but there is no reference to application roles. In theory it does seem possible to just buy a CAL for each application role, I mean logically it is just one user logging in several times right?
> "Steve Thompson" wrote:
> > "DanielG" <DanielG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:5F87CAE9-2435-4BFD-96D3-15AC1E9A901B@.microsoft.com...
> > > I am trying to verify some information that was given to me by another
> > (rival) admin, I was told by him that you can use the server plus user CAL
> > licensing model and buy only enough CAL's to cover as many application roles
> > you use. Is this correct because if it is, we spent way too much money on
> > licensing and I think that Microsoft would want to change their licensing
> > policy in these regards. Sorry I didn't know what other Discussion Group to
> > post this question. Thanks for any help on this matter.
> >
> > I had not heard of cals based on application roles... There is a licensing
> > white paper you may want to
> > check(http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/sqlserverlicensing.asp). While
> > this does a fair job, it always seems like you need to talk to a lawyer to
> > get the full story!
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >

Application roles Licensing

I am trying to verify some information that was given to me by another (riva
l) admin, I was told by him that you can use the server plus user CAL licens
ing model and buy only enough CAL's to cover as many application roles you u
se. Is this correct because
if it is, we spent way too much money on licensing and I think that Microsof
t would want to change their licensing policy in these regards. Sorry I didn
't know what other Discussion Group to post this question. Thanks for any he
lp on this matter."DanielG" <DanielG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F87CAE9-2435-4BFD-96D3-15AC1E9A901B@.microsoft.com...
> I am trying to verify some information that was given to me by another
(rival) admin, I was told by him that you can use the server plus user CAL
licensing model and buy only enough CAL's to cover as many application roles
you use. Is this correct because if it is, we spent way too much money on
licensing and I think that Microsoft would want to change their licensing
policy in these regards. Sorry I didn't know what other Discussion Group to
post this question. Thanks for any help on this matter.
I had not heard of cals based on application roles... There is a licensing
white paper you may want to
check(http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtob...erlicensing.asp). While
this does a fair job, it always seems like you need to talk to a lawyer to
get the full story!
Steve|||Thank you for your reply; I did read the document before I posted (posting i
s usually the last step I take) but there is no reference to application rol
es. In theory it does seem possible to just buy a CAL for each application r
ole, I mean logically it is
just one user logging in several times right?
"Steve Thompson" wrote:

> "DanielG" <DanielG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5F87CAE9-2435-4BFD-96D3-15AC1E9A901B@.microsoft.com...
> (rival) admin, I was told by him that you can use the server plus user CAL
> licensing model and buy only enough CAL's to cover as many application rol
es
> you use. Is this correct because if it is, we spent way too much money on
> licensing and I think that Microsoft would want to change their licensing
> policy in these regards. Sorry I didn't know what other Discussion Group t
o
> post this question. Thanks for any help on this matter.
> I had not heard of cals based on application roles... There is a licensing
> white paper you may want to
> check(http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtob...erlicensing.asp). While
> this does a fair job, it always seems like you need to talk to a lawyer to
> get the full story!
> Steve
>
>|||I believe your rival is wrong. I'm not sure if CAL's are required for each
user or each system (computer) that accesses the server, but it's definitely
not by application role.
Mike Kruchten
"DanielG" <DanielG@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F87CAE9-2435-4BFD-96D3-15AC1E9A901B@.microsoft.com...
> I am trying to verify some information that was given to me by another
(rival) admin, I was told by him that you can use the server plus user CAL
licensing model and buy only enough CAL's to cover as many application roles
you use. Is this correct because if it is, we spent way too much money on
licensing and I think that Microsoft would want to change their licensing
policy in these regards. Sorry I didn't know what other Discussion Group to
post this question. Thanks for any help on this matter.|||My thought would be you could use CAL licensing if there's a way you can ide
ntify who is logging in before the application role takes over. That's wher
e the licensing takes place, not at the role level. If you can't identify w
ho is logging in, a process
or license is required.
"DGroebe" wrote:

> Thank you for your reply; I did read the document before I posted (posting is usua
lly the last step I take) but there is no reference to application roles. In theory
it does seem possible to just buy a CAL for each application role, I mean logically
it
is just one user logging in several times right?[vbcol=seagreen]
> "Steve Thompson" wrote:
>

App login using credentials from SQL table

I'm trying to create a login screen that will verify a user's username and password from within a SQL table. If the credentials are found in the table, they should be sent to a Main Menu screen. If the credentials are not found, I will throw a message on the screen. Does anyone have code to accomplish this? I am at a total standstill.

Thanks,
BoydMCheck out this tutorial to use .NET security features:

http://www.dotnetjunkies.com/quickstart/aspplus/doc/authandauth.aspx

You can expand on that stuff to use the database or if you want to go ad hoc and not use the .NET security features you could always just have them submit their username and password from the form and compare them to values in the database and whether or not they match depends on where they go. Hope this helps.

- Jesse Williams|||Thanks Jesse. I've read a few articles regarding forms-based authentication, but they all seem to use 1 username and password to compare against (For example, if the username entered equals 'john@.abc.com' and the password equals 'password', then process accordingly). In my situation, I want to compare what the user enters against a table of usernames and passwords to verify they have entered valid credentials.

Any ideas?

Thanks,
BoydM|||You could create your username and password tables in the database and write a stored procedure to execute from your application code. Also if you want to base their privlidges I'd add a userRole (Admin, user, etc.) column in too. The store procedure would have three parameters: username, password, and return value (return the role of the user). Here's what I would envision the procedure to look like:

CREATE PROCEDURE GetUserRole
( @.username varchar(25),
 @.password varchar(10),
 @.userRole varchar(10) OUTPUT
)
AS
BEGIN
IF EXISTS (SELECT userName, password FROM UsersTable WHERE userName = @.userName AND password = @.password)
BEGIN
SELECT @.userRole = userRole FROM UsersTable WHERE userName = @.userName AND password = @.password
RETURN @.userRole
END
ELSE
RETURN -1
END

This is off the top of my head, so I don't know if it's going to run properly. Just configure your SqlCommands in your code to have parameters sending and receiving values and test it out. Anymore help, please post here. Hope this helps. Good luck.

- Jesse Williams|||Thanks. The more I research, the more I'm beginning to realize that I need to use a stored procedure to query the SQL table. I'm fairly new to stored procedures, and even newer to asp.net. A couple questions:
Where do I place the 'CREATE PROCEDURE' code in my aspx.vb file?
Secondly, how do I code my parameters for sending and receiving values?

Thanks again,
BoydM (phellow phan)|||You actually dont place the stored procedure code in your code file. What database are you using? If you are using SQL Server and Enterprise Manager you can use that or Query Analyzer (I prefer Query Analyzer). To create the procedure you would write the code I provided you and execute to create the procedure. This will create the procedure, no need to worry about the create proc stuff anymore. You will execute the proc from your code with the parameters. Here's some code to help you a little more:

'Import SQL Namespace; Required
Import System.Data
Import System.Data.SqlClient
Dim strSQL As String
Dim strConString As String
'Get Connection String From Web.config
strConString = System.Configuration.ConfigurationSettings.AppSettings("sqlCon")
'SQL Statement to execute proc
strSQL = "EXEC GetUserRole"
Dim conSQL As New SqlConnection(strConString)
Dim cmdSqlCommand as New SqlCommand(strSQL, conSQL)
'Add Parameters too command
cmdSqlCommand.Parameters.Add("@.userName", txtUserName.text)
cmdSqlCommand.Parameters.Add("@.password", txtPassword.text)
cmdSqlCommand.Parameters.Add("@.userRole", SqlDbType.VarChar, 10).Direction = ParameterDirection.Output
cmdSqlCommand.Parameters.Add("RETURN_VALUE", SqlDbType.Int, 4).Direction = ParameterDirection.ReturnValue
'Execute the command
cmdSqlCommand.ExecuteNonQuery()
'Retrieve Return Value
. . .
'Do the Rest of your code here
. . .

Again, this is off the top of my head, so some stuff may need fixing. Hope this helps and good luck.

- Jesse Williams