database move help

Greetings.
My company is buying a new, more robust server for their SQL database. It's
currently running on a W2K Server and will be moved to a Win 2003 Server
with more horsepower. Can anyone tell me if this hard to do and where I
could find more "how to" info? Thx!
These should help:
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=314546 Moving DB's between Servers
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=224071 Moving SQL Server Databases
to a New Location with Detach/Attach
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=221465 Using WITH MOVE in a
Restore
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=246133 How To Transfer Logins and
Passwords Between SQL Servers
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=298897 Mapping Logins & SIDs after a
Restore
http://www.dbmaint.com/SyncSqlLogins.asp Utility to map logins to
users
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=168001 User Logon and/or Permission
Errors After Restoring Dump
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=240872 How to Resolve Permission
Issues When a Database Is Moved Between SQL Servers
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/scri...p?scriptid=599
Restoring a .mdf
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=307775 Disaster Recovery Articles
for SQL Server
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=274463 Copy DB Wizard issues
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Mark Adams" <MarkAdams71@.earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:OVmv59ocEHA.2504@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Greetings.
> My company is buying a new, more robust server for their SQL database.
It's
> currently running on a W2K Server and will be moved to a Win 2003 Server
> with more horsepower. Can anyone tell me if this hard to do and where I
> could find more "how to" info? Thx!
>

Database Mirroring with SQLEXPRESS as witness

I am trying to setup SQLServer 2005 to use Database Mirroring.
The principal and mirror servers are running on Windows2003 64bit edition.
The witness server is running Windows2003 32bit.
I have configured endpoints for both the principal and mirror but when I try
to setup SQLEXPRESS as the witness using...
create endpoint MirroringEndPoint
state=started
as tcp (listener_port=10111)
for database_mirroring (role=all)
I get..
Msg 7878, Level 16, State 4, Line 4
This "ROLE=PARTNER/ALL ENDPOINT" statement is not supported on this edition
of SQL Server.
SQLEXPRESS is SP2. I have tried the initial SQLEXPRESS release but then it
complains about mirroring not being supported in a production environment
which is why I have upgraded to SP2.
Best regards
MarkSorry, I misread. Specify role=witness, which is the only role supported for
Express Edition.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Mark Baldwin" <sWozzi3@.community.nospam> wrote in message
news:uBslxtVmHHA.3736@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I am trying to setup SQLServer 2005 to use Database Mirroring.
> The principal and mirror servers are running on Windows2003 64bit edition.
The witness server is
> running Windows2003 32bit.
> I have configured endpoints for both the principal and mirror but when I t
ry to setup SQLEXPRESS
> as the witness using...
> create endpoint MirroringEndPoint
> state=started
> as tcp (listener_port=10111)
> for database_mirroring (role=all)
> I get..
> Msg 7878, Level 16, State 4, Line 4
> This "ROLE=PARTNER/ALL ENDPOINT" statement is not supported on this editio
n of SQL Server.
> SQLEXPRESS is SP2. I have tried the initial SQLEXPRESS release but then it
complains about
> mirroring not being supported in a production environment which is why I h
ave upgraded to SP2.
> --
> Best regards
> Mark
>|||You need standard or enterprise edition for mirroring. By the name of your i
nstance to judge, it is
express edition.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Mark Baldwin" <sWozzi3@.community.nospam> wrote in message
news:uBslxtVmHHA.3736@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I am trying to setup SQLServer 2005 to use Database Mirroring.
> The principal and mirror servers are running on Windows2003 64bit edition.
The witness server is
> running Windows2003 32bit.
> I have configured endpoints for both the principal and mirror but when I t
ry to setup SQLEXPRESS
> as the witness using...
> create endpoint MirroringEndPoint
> state=started
> as tcp (listener_port=10111)
> for database_mirroring (role=all)
> I get..
> Msg 7878, Level 16, State 4, Line 4
> This "ROLE=PARTNER/ALL ENDPOINT" statement is not supported on this editio
n of SQL Server.
> SQLEXPRESS is SP2. I have tried the initial SQLEXPRESS release but then it
complains about
> mirroring not being supported in a production environment which is why I h
ave upgraded to SP2.
> --
> Best regards
> Mark
>|||Thanks, that seems to have sorted the problem out but I have another issue
with security now - still I shall leave that to another thread
Best regards
Mark
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OzTxF%23VmHHA.4768@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Sorry, I misread. Specify role=witness, which is the only role supported
> for Express Edition.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "Mark Baldwin" <sWozzi3@.community.nospam> wrote in message
> news:uBslxtVmHHA.3736@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>

Database Mirroring with SQLEXPRESS as witness

I am trying to setup SQLServer 2005 to use Database Mirroring.
The principal and mirror servers are running on Windows2003 64bit edition.
The witness server is running Windows2003 32bit.
I have configured endpoints for both the principal and mirror but when I try
to setup SQLEXPRESS as the witness using...
create endpoint MirroringEndPoint
state=started
as tcp (listener_port=10111)
for database_mirroring (role=all)
I get..
Msg 7878, Level 16, State 4, Line 4
This "ROLE=PARTNER/ALL ENDPOINT" statement is not supported on this edition
of SQL Server.
SQLEXPRESS is SP2. I have tried the initial SQLEXPRESS release but then it
complains about mirroring not being supported in a production environment
which is why I have upgraded to SP2.
--
Best regards
MarkSorry, I misread. Specify role=witness, which is the only role supported for Express Edition.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Mark Baldwin" <sWozzi3@.community.nospam> wrote in message
news:uBslxtVmHHA.3736@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I am trying to setup SQLServer 2005 to use Database Mirroring.
> The principal and mirror servers are running on Windows2003 64bit edition. The witness server is
> running Windows2003 32bit.
> I have configured endpoints for both the principal and mirror but when I try to setup SQLEXPRESS
> as the witness using...
> create endpoint MirroringEndPoint
> state=started
> as tcp (listener_port=10111)
> for database_mirroring (role=all)
> I get..
> Msg 7878, Level 16, State 4, Line 4
> This "ROLE=PARTNER/ALL ENDPOINT" statement is not supported on this edition of SQL Server.
> SQLEXPRESS is SP2. I have tried the initial SQLEXPRESS release but then it complains about
> mirroring not being supported in a production environment which is why I have upgraded to SP2.
> --
> Best regards
> Mark
>|||You need standard or enterprise edition for mirroring. By the name of your instance to judge, it is
express edition.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Mark Baldwin" <sWozzi3@.community.nospam> wrote in message
news:uBslxtVmHHA.3736@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I am trying to setup SQLServer 2005 to use Database Mirroring.
> The principal and mirror servers are running on Windows2003 64bit edition. The witness server is
> running Windows2003 32bit.
> I have configured endpoints for both the principal and mirror but when I try to setup SQLEXPRESS
> as the witness using...
> create endpoint MirroringEndPoint
> state=started
> as tcp (listener_port=10111)
> for database_mirroring (role=all)
> I get..
> Msg 7878, Level 16, State 4, Line 4
> This "ROLE=PARTNER/ALL ENDPOINT" statement is not supported on this edition of SQL Server.
> SQLEXPRESS is SP2. I have tried the initial SQLEXPRESS release but then it complains about
> mirroring not being supported in a production environment which is why I have upgraded to SP2.
> --
> Best regards
> Mark
>|||Thanks, that seems to have sorted the problem out but I have another issue
with security now - still I shall leave that to another thread
--
Best regards
Mark
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OzTxF%23VmHHA.4768@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Sorry, I misread. Specify role=witness, which is the only role supported
> for Express Edition.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "Mark Baldwin" <sWozzi3@.community.nospam> wrote in message
> news:uBslxtVmHHA.3736@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>I am trying to setup SQLServer 2005 to use Database Mirroring.
>> The principal and mirror servers are running on Windows2003 64bit
>> edition. The witness server is running Windows2003 32bit.
>> I have configured endpoints for both the principal and mirror but when I
>> try to setup SQLEXPRESS as the witness using...
>> create endpoint MirroringEndPoint
>> state=started
>> as tcp (listener_port=10111)
>> for database_mirroring (role=all)
>> I get..
>> Msg 7878, Level 16, State 4, Line 4
>> This "ROLE=PARTNER/ALL ENDPOINT" statement is not supported on this
>> edition of SQL Server.
>> SQLEXPRESS is SP2. I have tried the initial SQLEXPRESS release but then
>> it complains about mirroring not being supported in a production
>> environment which is why I have upgraded to SP2.
>> --
>> Best regards
>> Mark
>

Database Mirroring vs SQL Server FailOver (Performance)

Hi there.

I′m running some tests in a database with Mirroring and without Mirroring. As expected there is a performance hit using Database mirroring.

The tests i′m running are just simple functions inserting and updating the database, and then counting the number of sucedeed inserts and updates in a time interval.

My question here is: What if i use Sql Server failover mechanism?

I know that failover time will increase and management is more complex, but what can i expect in terms of performance ?

Database mirroring performance will vary depending on many factors. I assume you have been using Mirrroring in high protection mode which ensures all writes are synchronously made to both databases. This has a larger impact on throughput than the high performance asynchronous mode. The failover mechanism should not have any impact on the performance of you database workload since it's basic purpose is to re-direct the connection to the mirror database when the principal fails.

|||

I think you missunderstood me. My question isn′t very clear, sorry for that.

I′m using High Availability mode (with witness).

I want to know if, in fact, i should expect better performance when using SQL Server Failover Clustering(with shared disk array).

Thanks in advance.

|||

If you are asking if you are getting better performance (throughput) using database mirroring or Failover clustering, then the answer is Failover clustering will have better peformance.

In fact, the cluster performance should be about the same (if not exactly the same) as a stand alone server.

Failover times are another matter, though.

|||

I also was thinking that cluster performance would be the same, when comparing to a stand alone server. But i′m not very deep into this mechanism and needed an answer from someone with "know how" in the area.

Thanks for your help Mark.

|||Database mirroring is useful technology for disaster scope. You can have two failover clusters in two geographics positions and database mirroring help you data be in consistent state (sorry for my english :( )|||

To be clear, failover times for the database mirroring can be in the seconds, because the instance of SQL is up and running and constantly redoing as much it can.

For failover clustering, for a failover to happen, the instance on the new node has to start up and then run recovery on the database before it is opened. This generally takes 10s of seconds and even could take place on the order of minutes.

Thanks,

Mark

|||

Fail-over clustering will perform better than database mirroring (in synchronous mode), since the Principal has to wait for the Mirror to commit transactions. This makes you dependent on the bandwidth and latency of the network connection between the two databases, and on the disk IO on the Mirror.

DB Mirroring will fail-over much faster than fail-over clustering, so it is better for routine maintence.

Database Mirroring vs SQL Server FailOver (Performance)

Hi there.

I′m running some tests in a database with Mirroring and without Mirroring. As expected there is a performance hit using Database mirroring.

The tests i′m running are just simple functions inserting and updating the database, and then counting the number of sucedeed inserts and updates in a time interval.

My question here is: What if i use Sql Server failover mechanism?

I know that failover time will increase and management is more complex, but what can i expect in terms of performance ?

Database mirroring performance will vary depending on many factors. I assume you have been using Mirrroring in high protection mode which ensures all writes are synchronously made to both databases. This has a larger impact on throughput than the high performance asynchronous mode. The failover mechanism should not have any impact on the performance of you database workload since it's basic purpose is to re-direct the connection to the mirror database when the principal fails.

|||

I think you missunderstood me. My question isn′t very clear, sorry for that.

I′m using High Availability mode (with witness).

I want to know if, in fact, i should expect better performance when using SQL Server Failover Clustering(with shared disk array).

Thanks in advance.

|||

If you are asking if you are getting better performance (throughput) using database mirroring or Failover clustering, then the answer is Failover clustering will have better peformance.

In fact, the cluster performance should be about the same (if not exactly the same) as a stand alone server.

Failover times are another matter, though.

|||

I also was thinking that cluster performance would be the same, when comparing to a stand alone server. But i′m not very deep into this mechanism and needed an answer from someone with "know how" in the area.

Thanks for your help Mark.

|||Database mirroring is useful technology for disaster scope. You can have two failover clusters in two geographics positions and database mirroring help you data be in consistent state (sorry for my english :( )|||

To be clear, failover times for the database mirroring can be in the seconds, because the instance of SQL is up and running and constantly redoing as much it can.

For failover clustering, for a failover to happen, the instance on the new node has to start up and then run recovery on the database before it is opened. This generally takes 10s of seconds and even could take place on the order of minutes.

Thanks,

Mark

|||

Fail-over clustering will perform better than database mirroring (in synchronous mode), since the Principal has to wait for the Mirror to commit transactions. This makes you dependent on the bandwidth and latency of the network connection between the two databases, and on the disk IO on the Mirror.

DB Mirroring will fail-over much faster than fail-over clustering, so it is better for routine maintence.

Database Mirroring vs SQL Server FailOver (Performance)

Hi there.

I′m running some tests in a database with Mirroring and without Mirroring. As expected there is a performance hit using Database mirroring.

The tests i′m running are just simple functions inserting and updating the database, and then counting the number of sucedeed inserts and updates in a time interval.

My question here is: What if i use Sql Server failover mechanism?

I know that failover time will increase and management is more complex, but what can i expect in terms of performance ?

Database mirroring performance will vary depending on many factors. I assume you have been using Mirrroring in high protection mode which ensures all writes are synchronously made to both databases. This has a larger impact on throughput than the high performance asynchronous mode. The failover mechanism should not have any impact on the performance of you database workload since it's basic purpose is to re-direct the connection to the mirror database when the principal fails.

|||

I think you missunderstood me. My question isn′t very clear, sorry for that.

I′m using High Availability mode (with witness).

I want to know if, in fact, i should expect better performance when using SQL Server Failover Clustering(with shared disk array).

Thanks in advance.

|||

If you are asking if you are getting better performance (throughput) using database mirroring or Failover clustering, then the answer is Failover clustering will have better peformance.

In fact, the cluster performance should be about the same (if not exactly the same) as a stand alone server.

Failover times are another matter, though.

|||

I also was thinking that cluster performance would be the same, when comparing to a stand alone server. But i′m not very deep into this mechanism and needed an answer from someone with "know how" in the area.

Thanks for your help Mark.

|||Database mirroring is useful technology for disaster scope. You can have two failover clusters in two geographics positions and database mirroring help you data be in consistent state (sorry for my english :( )|||

To be clear, failover times for the database mirroring can be in the seconds, because the instance of SQL is up and running and constantly redoing as much it can.

For failover clustering, for a failover to happen, the instance on the new node has to start up and then run recovery on the database before it is opened. This generally takes 10s of seconds and even could take place on the order of minutes.

Thanks,

Mark

|||

Fail-over clustering will perform better than database mirroring (in synchronous mode), since the Principal has to wait for the Mirror to commit transactions. This makes you dependent on the bandwidth and latency of the network connection between the two databases, and on the disk IO on the Mirror.

DB Mirroring will fail-over much faster than fail-over clustering, so it is better for routine maintence.

Database Mirroring in comp. mode 80

Hi

Is it possible to use Database Mirroring when running a SQL Server 2005 database in compatibility mode 80 (SQL Server 2000)?

If upgrading to SQL Server 2005 we would have to run Principal, Mirror and Witness in mode 80 to support our Transact-SQL Queries. To upgrade our Queries would be equally (or more) costly then to buy new SAN hardware for a cluster in wich case we might well continue running our 2000 cluster. (Buying hardware is slightly more time efficent then rewriting some 1500 queries)

Please advise, thank you

Hi Pmela

The database mirroring will work for databases running in 2000 compatibility mode.

Jag

|||

Thank you for your reply Jag!

I've already installed 2 instaces of the SQL Server 2005 180-Trial and tested this myself. It is working great

Database mirroring connection errors

I'm currently using database mirroring as a hot-standby, without a witness. Everything appears to be running fine, but I'm receiving intermittent errors that appear to state that my servers are loosing connectivity, thus disabling (inactivating) the mirror until the connection has been reestablished.

The errors are listed below, basically, I note a block of log entries for each mirrored database stating that mirroring is inactive for the database(s), next Error 1474, next the connection error, then another block of log entries for each mirrored database stating that the mirroring session is once again active.

Database mirroring is inactive for database 'NetRS'. This is an informational message only. No user action is required.

Error: 1474, Severity: 16, State: 1.

Database mirroring connection error 4 '64(The specified network name is no longer available.)' for 'TCP://SQL01NRS:7024'.

Database mirroring is active with database 'Telephony' as the principal copy. This is an informational message only. No user action is required.

I have confirmed that the sessions are in sync, so am not concerned about the data - but would love to get rid of these errors / disable / enable. I'm assumming that if I had setup a Witness, that I would see the mirrored database flip-flopping back and forth between Principal and Mirror.

Please let me know if I can provide any additional details to assist ...

Hi,

What build (service pack) of SQL Server you are runnng.

Check the following link if any of this applies to your situation.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/912422

Jag

|||

Edition and Build Information on server acting as Principal

Enterprise Edition 9.00.2047.00

Edition and Build Information on server acting as Mirror

Enterprise Edition 9.00.2047.00

|||

Jag:

Thanks for your inquiry and feedback. I looked over the article that you referenced, and appears that this might be applicable. We are running a Synchronous mirroring session without a Witness. Unfortunately, we are running SP1, and this issue appears to have been resolved with SP1. Any ideas?

|||

Hi,

If there are no other errors in SQL server error log, then its possible that the problem is likely to be the windows server or the network.

Error 64 is a windows error.

Check the following:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888319/en-us

regards

Jag

Database Mirroring and Login Transfer

Hi All:
I am running SQL 2005 EE SP1 and have implemented database mirroring and
have a mix of SQL accounts and Windows accounts. . Is there a way to
automatically synchronize logins between the servers...including additions,
deletions, roles, passwords, permissions and SIDs. I know Mirroring has
nothing built in for this but am hoping someone has figured something out.For additions, I use sp_help_revlogin to synchronize logins between servers,
the procedure is described in the following article:
How to transfer logins and passwords between instances of SQL Server
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/246133
"Jim Norton" wrote:

> Hi All:
> I am running SQL 2005 EE SP1 and have implemented database mirroring and
> have a mix of SQL accounts and Windows accounts. . Is there a way to
> automatically synchronize logins between the servers...including additions
,
> deletions, roles, passwords, permissions and SIDs. I know Mirroring has
> nothing built in for this but am hoping someone has figured something out.
>
>
>|||Check my post about this. I had the same problem some days ago ...
8e803" target="_blank">http://groups.google.com/group/micr...38
8e803
Let me know.
My 2 cents: do not use the script, its easier with SSIS...
Edgardo wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> For additions, I use sp_help_revlogin to synchronize logins between server
s,
> the procedure is described in the following article:
> How to transfer logins and passwords between instances of SQL Server
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/246133
>
> "Jim Norton" wrote:
>sql

Database Mirroring and Login Transfer

Hi All:
I am running SQL 2005 EE SP1 and have implemented database mirroring and
have a mix of SQL accounts and Windows accounts. . Is there a way to
automatically synchronize logins between the servers...including additions,
deletions, roles, passwords, permissions and SIDs. I know Mirroring has
nothing built in for this but am hoping someone has figured something out.For additions, I use sp_help_revlogin to synchronize logins between servers,
the procedure is described in the following article:
How to transfer logins and passwords between instances of SQL Server
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/246133
"Jim Norton" wrote:
> Hi All:
> I am running SQL 2005 EE SP1 and have implemented database mirroring and
> have a mix of SQL accounts and Windows accounts. . Is there a way to
> automatically synchronize logins between the servers...including additions,
> deletions, roles, passwords, permissions and SIDs. I know Mirroring has
> nothing built in for this but am hoping someone has figured something out.
>
>
>|||Check my post about this. I had the same problem some days ago ...
http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.sqlserver.server/browse_frm/thread/306b27dfc6f8f8ce/a691c85fe388e803?lnk=st&q=jocamp3%40gmail.com&rnum=1#a691c85fe388e803
Let me know.
My 2 cents: do not use the script, its easier with SSIS...
Edgardo wrote:
> For additions, I use sp_help_revlogin to synchronize logins between servers,
> the procedure is described in the following article:
> How to transfer logins and passwords between instances of SQL Server
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/246133
>
> "Jim Norton" wrote:
> > Hi All:
> >
> > I am running SQL 2005 EE SP1 and have implemented database mirroring and
> > have a mix of SQL accounts and Windows accounts. . Is there a way to
> > automatically synchronize logins between the servers...including additions,
> > deletions, roles, passwords, permissions and SIDs. I know Mirroring has
> > nothing built in for this but am hoping someone has figured something out.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

Database Mirroring and Login Transfer

Hi All:
I am running SQL 2005 EE SP1 and have implemented database mirroring and
have a mix of SQL accounts and Windows accounts. . Is there a way to
automatically synchronize logins between the servers...including additions,
deletions, roles, passwords, permissions and SIDs. I know Mirroring has
nothing built in for this but am hoping someone has figured something out.
For additions, I use sp_help_revlogin to synchronize logins between servers,
the procedure is described in the following article:
How to transfer logins and passwords between instances of SQL Server
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/246133
"Jim Norton" wrote:

> Hi All:
> I am running SQL 2005 EE SP1 and have implemented database mirroring and
> have a mix of SQL accounts and Windows accounts. . Is there a way to
> automatically synchronize logins between the servers...including additions,
> deletions, roles, passwords, permissions and SIDs. I know Mirroring has
> nothing built in for this but am hoping someone has figured something out.
>
>
>
|||Check my post about this. I had the same problem some days ago ...
[url]http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.sqlserver.server/browse_frm/thread/306b27dfc6f8f8ce/a691c85fe388e803?lnk=st&q=jocamp3%40gmail.com&rnum =1#a691c85fe388e803[/url]
Let me know.
My 2 cents: do not use the script, its easier with SSIS...
Edgardo wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> For additions, I use sp_help_revlogin to synchronize logins between servers,
> the procedure is described in the following article:
> How to transfer logins and passwords between instances of SQL Server
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/246133
>
> "Jim Norton" wrote:

Database marked suspect

I have a database server and a 3 workstations running on
Windows 2000. Due to a power failure (UPS included), the
whole system rebooted. However, the workstations cannot
acces the database. Upon checking the server directory,
the database is there (C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL\Data). Before attempting anything else we
tried to make a backup copy of the directory; all files
copy except ContinuumLog.ldf, which shows a CRC error and
cannot copy.
Using the Enterprise Manger we tried to look at the
database and found that it is marked "Suspect" by SQL.
Checking the Help menu, there seem to be a number of
procedures to change the "Suspect" mark and recover the
database. As you may have guessed by now, there are no
backups in the disk.
Can anyone help us? Ideally we need a procedure, or,
failing that, where can we look up a procedure to recover
the database.
Thank you all,
TaliaFrom EM or Query Analyzer, are you able to do anything ? If you can, create
a new database and copy all the data from the bad db to the new db.
-Jimmy
****************************************
******************************
Sent via Fuzzy Software @. http://www.fuzzysoftware.com/
Comprehensive, categorised, searchable collection of links to ASP & ASP.NET
resources...|||Hi,
Please restore from good backup if you have CRC errors. If you do not have
the Backup try the below steps.
1. Update the sysdatabases to update to Emergency mode. This will not use
LOG files in start up
Sp_configure "allow updates", 1
go
Reconfigure with override
GO
Update sysdatabases set status = 32768 where name = "BadDbName"
go
Sp_configure "allow updates", 0
go
Reconfigure with override
GO
2. Restart sql server. now the database will be in emergency mode ( You
could access the database)
3. Create a new database and use DTS to transfer the data and object to the
new database.
4. Verify all the objects and data is available in new database.
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Talia Sara-Lafosse" <saralafosse.t@.pucp.edu.pe> wrote in message
news:138a01c4853a$21db8b10$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> I have a database server and a 3 workstations running on
> Windows 2000. Due to a power failure (UPS included), the
> whole system rebooted. However, the workstations cannot
> acces the database. Upon checking the server directory,
> the database is there (C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\MSSQL\Data). Before attempting anything else we
> tried to make a backup copy of the directory; all files
> copy except ContinuumLog.ldf, which shows a CRC error and
> cannot copy.
> Using the Enterprise Manger we tried to look at the
> database and found that it is marked "Suspect" by SQL.
> Checking the Help menu, there seem to be a number of
> procedures to change the "Suspect" mark and recover the
> database. As you may have guessed by now, there are no
> backups in the disk.
> Can anyone help us? Ideally we need a procedure, or,
> failing that, where can we look up a procedure to recover
> the database.
> Thank you all,
> Talia
>|||The problem is that i can not copy the damaged file; and i
dont't know what to do with the data with the LDF file
damaged.

>--Original Message--
>From EM or Query Analyzer, are you able to do anything ?
If you can, create a new database and copy all the data
from the bad db to the new db.
>-Jimmy
> ****************************************
******************
************
>Sent via Fuzzy Software @. http://www.fuzzysoftware.com/
>Comprehensive, categorised, searchable collection of
links to ASP & ASP.NET resources...
>.
>

Database marked suspect

I have a database server and a 3 workstations running on
Windows 2000. Due to a power failure (UPS included), the
whole system rebooted. However, the workstations cannot
acces the database. Upon checking the server directory,
the database is there (C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL\Data). Before attempting anything else we
tried to make a backup copy of the directory; all files
copy except ContinuumLog.ldf, which shows a CRC error and
cannot copy.
Using the Enterprise Manger we tried to look at the
database and found that it is marked "Suspect" by SQL.
Checking the Help menu, there seem to be a number of
procedures to change the "Suspect" mark and recover the
database. As you may have guessed by now, there are no
backups in the disk.
Can anyone help us? Ideally we need a procedure, or,
failing that, where can we look up a procedure to recover
the database.
Thank you all,
Talia
From EM or Query Analyzer, are you able to do anything ? If you can, create a new database and copy all the data from the bad db to the new db.
-Jimmy
************************************************** ********************
Sent via Fuzzy Software @. http://www.fuzzysoftware.com/
Comprehensive, categorised, searchable collection of links to ASP & ASP.NET resources...
|||Hi,
Please restore from good backup if you have CRC errors. If you do not have
the Backup try the below steps.
1. Update the sysdatabases to update to Emergency mode. This will not use
LOG files in start up
Sp_configure "allow updates", 1
go
Reconfigure with override
GO
Update sysdatabases set status = 32768 where name = "BadDbName"
go
Sp_configure "allow updates", 0
go
Reconfigure with override
GO
2. Restart sql server. now the database will be in emergency mode ( You
could access the database)
3. Create a new database and use DTS to transfer the data and object to the
new database.
4. Verify all the objects and data is available in new database.
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Talia Sara-Lafosse" <saralafosse.t@.pucp.edu.pe> wrote in message
news:138a01c4853a$21db8b10$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> I have a database server and a 3 workstations running on
> Windows 2000. Due to a power failure (UPS included), the
> whole system rebooted. However, the workstations cannot
> acces the database. Upon checking the server directory,
> the database is there (C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\MSSQL\Data). Before attempting anything else we
> tried to make a backup copy of the directory; all files
> copy except ContinuumLog.ldf, which shows a CRC error and
> cannot copy.
> Using the Enterprise Manger we tried to look at the
> database and found that it is marked "Suspect" by SQL.
> Checking the Help menu, there seem to be a number of
> procedures to change the "Suspect" mark and recover the
> database. As you may have guessed by now, there are no
> backups in the disk.
> Can anyone help us? Ideally we need a procedure, or,
> failing that, where can we look up a procedure to recover
> the database.
> Thank you all,
> Talia
>
|||The problem is that i can not copy the damaged file; and i
dont't know what to do with the data with the LDF file
damaged.

>--Original Message--
>From EM or Query Analyzer, are you able to do anything ?
If you can, create a new database and copy all the data
from the bad db to the new db.
>-Jimmy
>************************************************* *********
************
>Sent via Fuzzy Software @. http://www.fuzzysoftware.com/
>Comprehensive, categorised, searchable collection of
links to ASP & ASP.NET resources...
>.
>

Database marked suspect

I have a database server and a 3 workstations running on
Windows 2000. Due to a power failure (UPS included), the
whole system rebooted. However, the workstations cannot
acces the database. Upon checking the server directory,
the database is there (C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL\Data). Before attempting anything else we
tried to make a backup copy of the directory; all files
copy except ContinuumLog.ldf, which shows a CRC error and
cannot copy.
Using the Enterprise Manger we tried to look at the
database and found that it is marked "Suspect" by SQL.
Checking the Help menu, there seem to be a number of
procedures to change the "Suspect" mark and recover the
database. As you may have guessed by now, there are no
backups in the disk.
Can anyone help us? Ideally we need a procedure, or,
failing that, where can we look up a procedure to recover
the database.
Thank you all,
TaliaFrom EM or Query Analyzer, are you able to do anything ? If you can, create a new database and copy all the data from the bad db to the new db.
-Jimmy
**********************************************************************
Sent via Fuzzy Software @. http://www.fuzzysoftware.com/
Comprehensive, categorised, searchable collection of links to ASP & ASP.NET resources...|||Hi,
Please restore from good backup if you have CRC errors. If you do not have
the Backup try the below steps.
1. Update the sysdatabases to update to Emergency mode. This will not use
LOG files in start up
Sp_configure "allow updates", 1
go
Reconfigure with override
GO
Update sysdatabases set status = 32768 where name = "BadDbName"
go
Sp_configure "allow updates", 0
go
Reconfigure with override
GO
2. Restart sql server. now the database will be in emergency mode ( You
could access the database)
3. Create a new database and use DTS to transfer the data and object to the
new database.
4. Verify all the objects and data is available in new database.
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Talia Sara-Lafosse" <saralafosse.t@.pucp.edu.pe> wrote in message
news:138a01c4853a$21db8b10$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> I have a database server and a 3 workstations running on
> Windows 2000. Due to a power failure (UPS included), the
> whole system rebooted. However, the workstations cannot
> acces the database. Upon checking the server directory,
> the database is there (C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\MSSQL\Data). Before attempting anything else we
> tried to make a backup copy of the directory; all files
> copy except ContinuumLog.ldf, which shows a CRC error and
> cannot copy.
> Using the Enterprise Manger we tried to look at the
> database and found that it is marked "Suspect" by SQL.
> Checking the Help menu, there seem to be a number of
> procedures to change the "Suspect" mark and recover the
> database. As you may have guessed by now, there are no
> backups in the disk.
> Can anyone help us? Ideally we need a procedure, or,
> failing that, where can we look up a procedure to recover
> the database.
> Thank you all,
> Talia
>|||The problem is that i can not copy the damaged file; and i
dont't know what to do with the data with the LDF file
damaged.
>--Original Message--
>From EM or Query Analyzer, are you able to do anything ?
If you can, create a new database and copy all the data
from the bad db to the new db.
>-Jimmy
>**********************************************************
************
>Sent via Fuzzy Software @. http://www.fuzzysoftware.com/
>Comprehensive, categorised, searchable collection of
links to ASP & ASP.NET resources...
>.
>

database marked as "Suspect"

In SEM, if a database is marked as "Suspect" and no items may be viewed,
what are the possible causes ?
Could this be caused by the hard-drive running out of space (for either the
.mdf or the .ldf files) ?
Thanks.Hi,
Various Reasons for database going to suspect Status.
1. The MDF or LDF file for the database is not available during startup
2. LDF file missing or Corrupted
3. MDF file page allocation problems.
1. The first one can be resolved by executing "sp_resetstatus" stored
procedure and restart SQL server services
2. Start the database in Emergency mode , Update the Status column in
master..sysdatabases table for that database to 32768.
After this database will be usable with out transaction log. AFter this
create a new database and use DTS to transfer objects and data.
3. Third one is critical , try executing DBCC CHECKDB with REPAIR_REBUILD
option. If the problem is not rectified
wither restore from Backup or contact Microsoft support.
How to set to Emergency Mode
--_-
Use emergency mode (also called bypass mode) to recover data when SQL Server
marks a database suspect and the automatic recovery will fail.
Setting the database status to emergency mode tells SQL Server to skip
automatic recovery and lets you access the data. To get your data, use this
script:
Sp_configure "allow updates", 1
go
Reconfigure with override
GO
Update sysdatabases set status = 32768 where name = "BadDbName"
go
Sp_configure "allow updates", 0
go
Reconfigure with override
GO
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"John Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
news:ucwgg2WXFHA.2776@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> In SEM, if a database is marked as "Suspect" and no items may be viewed,
> what are the possible causes ?
> Could this be caused by the hard-drive running out of space (for either
> the .mdf or the .ldf files) ?
> Thanks.
>|||> Could this be caused by the hard-drive running out of space (for either the .mdf or the .l
df
> files) ?
Shouldn't be... See url]
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
[url]http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp" target="_blank">http://www.karaszi.com/SQLServer/in...ver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
news:ucwgg2WXFHA.2776@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> In SEM, if a database is marked as "Suspect" and no items may be viewed, w
hat are the possible
> causes ?
> Could this be caused by the hard-drive running out of space (for either th
e .mdf or the .ldf
> files) ?
> Thanks.
>

database marked as "Suspect"

In SEM, if a database is marked as "Suspect" and no items may be viewed,
what are the possible causes ?
Could this be caused by the hard-drive running out of space (for either the
..mdf or the .ldf files) ?
Thanks.
Hi,
Various Reasons for database going to suspect Status.
1. The MDF or LDF file for the database is not available during startup
2. LDF file missing or Corrupted
3. MDF file page allocation problems.
1. The first one can be resolved by executing "sp_resetstatus" stored
procedure and restart SQL server services
2. Start the database in Emergency mode , Update the Status column in
master..sysdatabases table for that database to 32768.
After this database will be usable with out transaction log. AFter this
create a new database and use DTS to transfer objects and data.
3. Third one is critical , try executing DBCC CHECKDB with REPAIR_REBUILD
option. If the problem is not rectified
wither restore from Backup or contact Microsoft support.
How to set to Emergency Mode
--X-
Use emergency mode (also called bypass mode) to recover data when SQL Server
marks a database suspect and the automatic recovery will fail.
Setting the database status to emergency mode tells SQL Server to skip
automatic recovery and lets you access the data. To get your data, use this
script:
Sp_configure "allow updates", 1
go
Reconfigure with override
GO
Update sysdatabases set status = 32768 where name = "BadDbName"
go
Sp_configure "allow updates", 0
go
Reconfigure with override
GO
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"John Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
news:ucwgg2WXFHA.2776@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> In SEM, if a database is marked as "Suspect" and no items may be viewed,
> what are the possible causes ?
> Could this be caused by the hard-drive running out of space (for either
> the .mdf or the .ldf files) ?
> Thanks.
>
|||> Could this be caused by the hard-drive running out of space (for either the .mdf or the .ldf
> files) ?
Shouldn't be... See http://www.karaszi.com/SQLServer/inf...suspect_db.asp
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
news:ucwgg2WXFHA.2776@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> In SEM, if a database is marked as "Suspect" and no items may be viewed, what are the possible
> causes ?
> Could this be caused by the hard-drive running out of space (for either the .mdf or the .ldf
> files) ?
> Thanks.
>

Database Maintenance question...

I set up a Database Maintenance plan for backing 3 databases, their
transaction logs, running optimizations, and to perform integrity checks.
I've been noticing that when I don't receive a notice when my jobs have
completed via email, the Status of the jobs are in "Performing completion
actions". The jobs will not re-run until I either restart SQL server or do a
reboot. Then it works for a while, then the status gets stuck again on
"Performing completion actions".
Does anyone know what could be causing this? It's happening on the database
and transaction log backups and the optimization job. Again, the maintenance
plan is configured for 3 databases, all of which are set to "Full" for their
recovery mode, and the total size of all 3 is around 7GB.
Should I maybe create a separate maintenance plan for each individual
database?
Thank you!
Hi
This may be an issue with sending the notification itself see the thread
http://tinyurl.com/yay4yj and
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb%3ben-us%3b328197&Product=sql.
You could use SMTP emails instead see
http://www.sqldev.net/xp/xpsmtp.htminstead and use the job flow logic of the
job to either send a success or failure message.
John
"Saral6978" wrote:

> I set up a Database Maintenance plan for backing 3 databases, their
> transaction logs, running optimizations, and to perform integrity checks.
> I've been noticing that when I don't receive a notice when my jobs have
> completed via email, the Status of the jobs are in "Performing completion
> actions". The jobs will not re-run until I either restart SQL server or do a
> reboot. Then it works for a while, then the status gets stuck again on
> "Performing completion actions".
> Does anyone know what could be causing this? It's happening on the database
> and transaction log backups and the optimization job. Again, the maintenance
> plan is configured for 3 databases, all of which are set to "Full" for their
> recovery mode, and the total size of all 3 is around 7GB.
> Should I maybe create a separate maintenance plan for each individual
> database?
> Thank you!
|||Thank you, John for your response. However, can you double-check the last
link you posted? It doesn't seem to find the page.
Thanks!
"John Bell" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi
> This may be an issue with sending the notification itself see the thread
> http://tinyurl.com/yay4yj and
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb%3ben-us%3b328197&Product=sql.
> You could use SMTP emails instead see
> http://www.sqldev.net/xp/xpsmtp.htminstead and use the job flow logic of the
> job to either send a success or failure message.
> John
> "Saral6978" wrote:
|||Hi
There should have been a space before instead try
http://www.sqldev.net/xp/xpsmtp.htm
John
"Saral6978" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thank you, John for your response. However, can you double-check the last
> link you posted? It doesn't seem to find the page.
> Thanks!
> "John Bell" wrote:
|||Thank you!
"John Bell" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi
> There should have been a space before instead try
> http://www.sqldev.net/xp/xpsmtp.htm
> John
> "Saral6978" wrote:

Database Maintenance question...

I set up a Database Maintenance plan for backing 3 databases, their
transaction logs, running optimizations, and to perform integrity checks.
I've been noticing that when I don't receive a notice when my jobs have
completed via email, the Status of the jobs are in "Performing completion
actions". The jobs will not re-run until I either restart SQL server or do
a
reboot. Then it works for a while, then the status gets stuck again on
"Performing completion actions".
Does anyone know what could be causing this? It's happening on the database
and transaction log backups and the optimization job. Again, the maintenanc
e
plan is configured for 3 databases, all of which are set to "Full" for their
recovery mode, and the total size of all 3 is around 7GB.
Should I maybe create a separate maintenance plan for each individual
database?
Thank you!Hi
This may be an issue with sending the notification itself see the thread
http://tinyurl.com/yay4yj and
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...smtp.htminstead and use the job flow logic of the
job to either send a success or failure message.
John
"Saral6978" wrote:

> I set up a Database Maintenance plan for backing 3 databases, their
> transaction logs, running optimizations, and to perform integrity checks.
> I've been noticing that when I don't receive a notice when my jobs have
> completed via email, the Status of the jobs are in "Performing completion
> actions". The jobs will not re-run until I either restart SQL server or d
o a
> reboot. Then it works for a while, then the status gets stuck again on
> "Performing completion actions".
> Does anyone know what could be causing this? It's happening on the databa
se
> and transaction log backups and the optimization job. Again, the maintena
nce
> plan is configured for 3 databases, all of which are set to "Full" for the
ir
> recovery mode, and the total size of all 3 is around 7GB.
> Should I maybe create a separate maintenance plan for each individual
> database?
> Thank you!|||Thank you, John for your response. However, can you double-check the last
link you posted? It doesn't seem to find the page.
Thanks!
"John Bell" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi
> This may be an issue with sending the notification itself see the thread
> http://tinyurl.com/yay4yj and
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...smtp.htminstead and use the job flow logic of t
he
> job to either send a success or failure message.
> John
> "Saral6978" wrote:
>|||Hi
There should have been a space before instead try
http://www.sqldev.net/xp/xpsmtp.htm
John
"Saral6978" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thank you, John for your response. However, can you double-check the last
> link you posted? It doesn't seem to find the page.
> Thanks!
> "John Bell" wrote:
>|||Thank you!
"John Bell" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi
> There should have been a space before instead try
> http://www.sqldev.net/xp/xpsmtp.htm
> John
> "Saral6978" wrote:
>

Database Maintenance Plans - Not removing Files Older than x days

I have a Windows 2000 SP4 Cluster running MS SQL 2000 SP3, I have a number of
database on the server and have created a database maintenance plan that
backups up all the database nightly. I have also configured the maintenance
plan to delete back files older than 3 days old but this isn't currently
happening.
I haven't applied SP4 to SQL 2000 yet as I wanted to know if anyone else has
seen this problem first. Or if anyone can confirm SP4 fixes this issue.
You'll want to apply SP4 anyway, for lots of other reasons. Test the setup of
SP4 on another system to make sure your apps work correctly first, of course.
Have you checked the various logs SQL Server uses? There's a SQL Server Log,
a SQL Server Agent Log, and the Windows Application Event Log. They might
point out what is happening.
That being said, there is an extended stored procedure that Microsoft uses
to delete the files. If the Agent service doesn't have the proper rights to
the subdirectory you might find that to be the issue.
"Gary S" wrote:

> I have a Windows 2000 SP4 Cluster running MS SQL 2000 SP3, I have a number of
> database on the server and have created a database maintenance plan that
> backups up all the database nightly. I have also configured the maintenance
> plan to delete back files older than 3 days old but this isn't currently
> happening.
> I haven't applied SP4 to SQL 2000 yet as I wanted to know if anyone else has
> seen this problem first. Or if anyone can confirm SP4 fixes this issue.
>
|||What is the extended store procedure that's used so that I can check it
hasn't been removed.
"Buck Woody - Microsoft SQL Server Team" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> You'll want to apply SP4 anyway, for lots of other reasons. Test the setup of
> SP4 on another system to make sure your apps work correctly first, of course.
> Have you checked the various logs SQL Server uses? There's a SQL Server Log,
> a SQL Server Agent Log, and the Windows Application Event Log. They might
> point out what is happening.
> That being said, there is an extended stored procedure that Microsoft uses
> to delete the files. If the Agent service doesn't have the proper rights to
> the subdirectory you might find that to be the issue.
> "Gary S" wrote:
|||It's sp_delete_file - and it's undocumented, meaning unsupported for direct
use by users. Check this thread:
https://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=718788&SiteID=17
"Gary S" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> What is the extended store procedure that's used so that I can check it
> hasn't been removed.
> "Buck Woody - Microsoft SQL Server Team" wrote:
|||Slight correction - that's XP_delete_file. Had an S in there!
"Buck Woody - Microsoft SQL Server Team" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> It's sp_delete_file - and it's undocumented, meaning unsupported for direct
> use by users. Check this thread:
> https://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=718788&SiteID=17
>
> "Gary S" wrote:
|||On Feb 14, 8:35 am, Gary S <G...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> I have a Windows 2000 SP4 Cluster running MS SQL 2000 SP3, I have a number of
> database on the server and have created a database maintenance plan that
> backups up all the database nightly. I have also configured the maintenance
> plan to delete back files older than 3 days old but this isn't currently
> happening.
> I haven't applied SP4 to SQL 2000 yet as I wanted to know if anyone else has
> seen this problem first. Or if anyone can confirm SP4 fixes this issue.
There are a couple of common causes for this:
1. The maintenance plan is configured to do transaction log backups,
but one of the databases included is in Simple mode. The plan fails
when it hits this database, and never reaches the "cleanup" step.
2. One of the files to be deleted is "in use" by another process,
such as a tape backup, causing the cleanup process to fail.
Right-click on the maintenance plan itself (not the Agent job), look
at the history, you should be able to get an actual error message from
there.
|||You have to be a sysadmin to run this stored proc, even in SP2 CTP. I have
been told a fix will be raised for a later service pack.
Chris
"Buck Woody - Microsoft SQL Server Team"
<BuckWoodyMicrosoftSQLServerTeam@.discussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:0751636B-0F16-40EA-BAE8-8ADE57217570@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> It's sp_delete_file - and it's undocumented, meaning unsupported for
> direct
> use by users. Check this thread:
> https://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=718788&SiteID=17
>
> "Gary S" wrote:
|||Thanks Tracey a number of the database were set to Simple Recovery. I'm not a
big fan of database mainatenance plans (perfer setting up the jobs
individual) so as I'm not 100% certain why the databases are set to simple
I'll create seperate backup jobs.
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:

> On Feb 14, 8:35 am, Gary S <G...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> There are a couple of common causes for this:
> 1. The maintenance plan is configured to do transaction log backups,
> but one of the databases included is in Simple mode. The plan fails
> when it hits this database, and never reaches the "cleanup" step.
> 2. One of the files to be deleted is "in use" by another process,
> such as a tape backup, causing the cleanup process to fail.
> Right-click on the maintenance plan itself (not the Agent job), look
> at the history, you should be able to get an actual error message from
> there.
>
|||On Feb 15, 5:13 am, Gary S <G...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> Thanks Tracey a number of the database were set to Simple Recovery. I'm not a
> big fan of database mainatenance plans (perfer setting up the jobs
> individual) so as I'm not 100% certain why the databases are set to simple
> I'll create seperate backup jobs.
>
Here's a script of mine that might help you out:
http://realsqlguy.blogspot.com/2007/02/automating-database-backups.html

Database Maintenance Plans - Not removing Files Older than x days

I have a Windows 2000 SP4 Cluster running MS SQL 2000 SP3, I have a number of
database on the server and have created a database maintenance plan that
backups up all the database nightly. I have also configured the maintenance
plan to delete back files older than 3 days old but this isn't currently
happening.
I haven't applied SP4 to SQL 2000 yet as I wanted to know if anyone else has
seen this problem first. Or if anyone can confirm SP4 fixes this issue.You'll want to apply SP4 anyway, for lots of other reasons. Test the setup of
SP4 on another system to make sure your apps work correctly first, of course.
Have you checked the various logs SQL Server uses? There's a SQL Server Log,
a SQL Server Agent Log, and the Windows Application Event Log. They might
point out what is happening.
That being said, there is an extended stored procedure that Microsoft uses
to delete the files. If the Agent service doesn't have the proper rights to
the subdirectory you might find that to be the issue.
"Gary S" wrote:
> I have a Windows 2000 SP4 Cluster running MS SQL 2000 SP3, I have a number of
> database on the server and have created a database maintenance plan that
> backups up all the database nightly. I have also configured the maintenance
> plan to delete back files older than 3 days old but this isn't currently
> happening.
> I haven't applied SP4 to SQL 2000 yet as I wanted to know if anyone else has
> seen this problem first. Or if anyone can confirm SP4 fixes this issue.
>|||What is the extended store procedure that's used so that I can check it
hasn't been removed.
"Buck Woody - Microsoft SQL Server Team" wrote:
> You'll want to apply SP4 anyway, for lots of other reasons. Test the setup of
> SP4 on another system to make sure your apps work correctly first, of course.
> Have you checked the various logs SQL Server uses? There's a SQL Server Log,
> a SQL Server Agent Log, and the Windows Application Event Log. They might
> point out what is happening.
> That being said, there is an extended stored procedure that Microsoft uses
> to delete the files. If the Agent service doesn't have the proper rights to
> the subdirectory you might find that to be the issue.
> "Gary S" wrote:
> > I have a Windows 2000 SP4 Cluster running MS SQL 2000 SP3, I have a number of
> > database on the server and have created a database maintenance plan that
> > backups up all the database nightly. I have also configured the maintenance
> > plan to delete back files older than 3 days old but this isn't currently
> > happening.
> >
> > I haven't applied SP4 to SQL 2000 yet as I wanted to know if anyone else has
> > seen this problem first. Or if anyone can confirm SP4 fixes this issue.
> >
> >|||It's sp_delete_file - and it's undocumented, meaning unsupported for direct
use by users. Check this thread:
https://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=718788&SiteID=17
"Gary S" wrote:
> What is the extended store procedure that's used so that I can check it
> hasn't been removed.
> "Buck Woody - Microsoft SQL Server Team" wrote:
> > You'll want to apply SP4 anyway, for lots of other reasons. Test the setup of
> > SP4 on another system to make sure your apps work correctly first, of course.
> >
> > Have you checked the various logs SQL Server uses? There's a SQL Server Log,
> > a SQL Server Agent Log, and the Windows Application Event Log. They might
> > point out what is happening.
> >
> > That being said, there is an extended stored procedure that Microsoft uses
> > to delete the files. If the Agent service doesn't have the proper rights to
> > the subdirectory you might find that to be the issue.
> >
> > "Gary S" wrote:
> >
> > > I have a Windows 2000 SP4 Cluster running MS SQL 2000 SP3, I have a number of
> > > database on the server and have created a database maintenance plan that
> > > backups up all the database nightly. I have also configured the maintenance
> > > plan to delete back files older than 3 days old but this isn't currently
> > > happening.
> > >
> > > I haven't applied SP4 to SQL 2000 yet as I wanted to know if anyone else has
> > > seen this problem first. Or if anyone can confirm SP4 fixes this issue.
> > >
> > >|||Slight correction - that's XP_delete_file. Had an S in there!
"Buck Woody - Microsoft SQL Server Team" wrote:
> It's sp_delete_file - and it's undocumented, meaning unsupported for direct
> use by users. Check this thread:
> https://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=718788&SiteID=17
>
> "Gary S" wrote:
> > What is the extended store procedure that's used so that I can check it
> > hasn't been removed.
> >
> > "Buck Woody - Microsoft SQL Server Team" wrote:
> >
> > > You'll want to apply SP4 anyway, for lots of other reasons. Test the setup of
> > > SP4 on another system to make sure your apps work correctly first, of course.
> > >
> > > Have you checked the various logs SQL Server uses? There's a SQL Server Log,
> > > a SQL Server Agent Log, and the Windows Application Event Log. They might
> > > point out what is happening.
> > >
> > > That being said, there is an extended stored procedure that Microsoft uses
> > > to delete the files. If the Agent service doesn't have the proper rights to
> > > the subdirectory you might find that to be the issue.
> > >
> > > "Gary S" wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have a Windows 2000 SP4 Cluster running MS SQL 2000 SP3, I have a number of
> > > > database on the server and have created a database maintenance plan that
> > > > backups up all the database nightly. I have also configured the maintenance
> > > > plan to delete back files older than 3 days old but this isn't currently
> > > > happening.
> > > >
> > > > I haven't applied SP4 to SQL 2000 yet as I wanted to know if anyone else has
> > > > seen this problem first. Or if anyone can confirm SP4 fixes this issue.
> > > >
> > > >|||On Feb 14, 8:35 am, Gary S <G...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> I have a Windows 2000 SP4 Cluster running MS SQL 2000 SP3, I have a number of
> database on the server and have created a database maintenance plan that
> backups up all the database nightly. I have also configured the maintenance
> plan to delete back files older than 3 days old but this isn't currently
> happening.
> I haven't applied SP4 to SQL 2000 yet as I wanted to know if anyone else has
> seen this problem first. Or if anyone can confirm SP4 fixes this issue.
There are a couple of common causes for this:
1. The maintenance plan is configured to do transaction log backups,
but one of the databases included is in Simple mode. The plan fails
when it hits this database, and never reaches the "cleanup" step.
2. One of the files to be deleted is "in use" by another process,
such as a tape backup, causing the cleanup process to fail.
Right-click on the maintenance plan itself (not the Agent job), look
at the history, you should be able to get an actual error message from
there.|||You have to be a sysadmin to run this stored proc, even in SP2 CTP. I have
been told a fix will be raised for a later service pack.
Chris
"Buck Woody - Microsoft SQL Server Team"
<BuckWoodyMicrosoftSQLServerTeam@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0751636B-0F16-40EA-BAE8-8ADE57217570@.microsoft.com...
> It's sp_delete_file - and it's undocumented, meaning unsupported for
> direct
> use by users. Check this thread:
> https://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=718788&SiteID=17
>
> "Gary S" wrote:
>> What is the extended store procedure that's used so that I can check it
>> hasn't been removed.
>> "Buck Woody - Microsoft SQL Server Team" wrote:
>> > You'll want to apply SP4 anyway, for lots of other reasons. Test the
>> > setup of
>> > SP4 on another system to make sure your apps work correctly first, of
>> > course.
>> >
>> > Have you checked the various logs SQL Server uses? There's a SQL Server
>> > Log,
>> > a SQL Server Agent Log, and the Windows Application Event Log. They
>> > might
>> > point out what is happening.
>> >
>> > That being said, there is an extended stored procedure that Microsoft
>> > uses
>> > to delete the files. If the Agent service doesn't have the proper
>> > rights to
>> > the subdirectory you might find that to be the issue.
>> >
>> > "Gary S" wrote:
>> >
>> > > I have a Windows 2000 SP4 Cluster running MS SQL 2000 SP3, I have a
>> > > number of
>> > > database on the server and have created a database maintenance plan
>> > > that
>> > > backups up all the database nightly. I have also configured the
>> > > maintenance
>> > > plan to delete back files older than 3 days old but this isn't
>> > > currently
>> > > happening.
>> > >
>> > > I haven't applied SP4 to SQL 2000 yet as I wanted to know if anyone
>> > > else has
>> > > seen this problem first. Or if anyone can confirm SP4 fixes this
>> > > issue.
>> > >
>> > >|||> It's sp_delete_file - and it's undocumented, meaning unsupported for direct
> use by users.
Buck,
Above is for 2005. For 2000, the files are removed by sqlmaint.exe (which is called by xp_sqlmaint
if the plan is created by the wizard).
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Buck Woody - Microsoft SQL Server Team" <BuckWoodyMicrosoftSQLServerTeam@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message news:0751636B-0F16-40EA-BAE8-8ADE57217570@.microsoft.com...
> It's sp_delete_file - and it's undocumented, meaning unsupported for direct
> use by users. Check this thread:
> https://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=718788&SiteID=17
>
> "Gary S" wrote:
>> What is the extended store procedure that's used so that I can check it
>> hasn't been removed.
>> "Buck Woody - Microsoft SQL Server Team" wrote:
>> > You'll want to apply SP4 anyway, for lots of other reasons. Test the setup of
>> > SP4 on another system to make sure your apps work correctly first, of course.
>> >
>> > Have you checked the various logs SQL Server uses? There's a SQL Server Log,
>> > a SQL Server Agent Log, and the Windows Application Event Log. They might
>> > point out what is happening.
>> >
>> > That being said, there is an extended stored procedure that Microsoft uses
>> > to delete the files. If the Agent service doesn't have the proper rights to
>> > the subdirectory you might find that to be the issue.
>> >
>> > "Gary S" wrote:
>> >
>> > > I have a Windows 2000 SP4 Cluster running MS SQL 2000 SP3, I have a number of
>> > > database on the server and have created a database maintenance plan that
>> > > backups up all the database nightly. I have also configured the maintenance
>> > > plan to delete back files older than 3 days old but this isn't currently
>> > > happening.
>> > >
>> > > I haven't applied SP4 to SQL 2000 yet as I wanted to know if anyone else has
>> > > seen this problem first. Or if anyone can confirm SP4 fixes this issue.
>> > >
>> > >|||Thanks Tracey a number of the database were set to Simple Recovery. I'm not a
big fan of database mainatenance plans (perfer setting up the jobs
individual) so as I'm not 100% certain why the databases are set to simple
I'll create seperate backup jobs.
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:
> On Feb 14, 8:35 am, Gary S <G...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > I have a Windows 2000 SP4 Cluster running MS SQL 2000 SP3, I have a number of
> > database on the server and have created a database maintenance plan that
> > backups up all the database nightly. I have also configured the maintenance
> > plan to delete back files older than 3 days old but this isn't currently
> > happening.
> >
> > I haven't applied SP4 to SQL 2000 yet as I wanted to know if anyone else has
> > seen this problem first. Or if anyone can confirm SP4 fixes this issue.
> There are a couple of common causes for this:
> 1. The maintenance plan is configured to do transaction log backups,
> but one of the databases included is in Simple mode. The plan fails
> when it hits this database, and never reaches the "cleanup" step.
> 2. One of the files to be deleted is "in use" by another process,
> such as a tape backup, causing the cleanup process to fail.
> Right-click on the maintenance plan itself (not the Agent job), look
> at the history, you should be able to get an actual error message from
> there.
>|||On Feb 15, 5:13 am, Gary S <G...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> Thanks Tracey a number of the database were set to Simple Recovery. I'm not a
> big fan of database mainatenance plans (perfer setting up the jobs
> individual) so as I'm not 100% certain why the databases are set to simple
> I'll create seperate backup jobs.
>
Here's a script of mine that might help you out:
http://realsqlguy.blogspot.com/2007/02/automating-database-backups.html