Three simple suggestions:
1- Run the DTS package manually and see where (Which step)
you get the error.
2- Create an output file through Package-->Properties--
>Logging in the DTS package and read the output file for
the error.
3- If you upgraded from SQL Server 7.0 to 2000, run
sp_updatestats stored proc for all the databases in the QA.
>--Original Message--
>Ever since migrating to SQL 2000 from SQL 7 I receive
this error at least
>once a day while running jobs through SQL Agent. It may
not be the same job
>having the problem. Any thoughts?
>Executed as user: domain\user. DTSRun: Loading...
Error: -2147467259
>(80004005); Provider Error: 0 (0) Error string:
Timeout expired
>Error source: Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL
Server Help file:
> Help context: 0. Process Exit Code 1. The step failed.
>.
>
The job is only failing once or twice a day even though it runs every hour or
in the case of another job, every 1/2 hour. It is never the same time of
day. I can run the DTS job manually and it work without failing. I will
give the logging a try and the sp_updatestats. I didn't upgrade the server -
it was a clean install and a restore from SQL 7. Thanks for your help
"Mark" wrote:
> Three simple suggestions:
> 1- Run the DTS package manually and see where (Which step)
> you get the error.
> 2- Create an output file through Package-->Properties--
> the error.
> 3- If you upgraded from SQL Server 7.0 to 2000, run
> sp_updatestats stored proc for all the databases in the QA.
>
>
> this error at least
> not be the same job
> Error: -2147467259
> Timeout expired
> Server Help file:
>
Showing posts with label file. Show all posts
Showing posts with label file. Show all posts
Friday, March 30, 2012
Receiving Export file name
Hello,
I work with Crystal in Visual Studio 2005.
Is it possible to receive the export file name after the report viewer finished exporting?I think it is not possible. It is also not possible to figure out which format was used for exporting, which optional parameters were used etc.
If I needed that information, I would probably create my own form for entering export file name and export options.
I work with Crystal in Visual Studio 2005.
Is it possible to receive the export file name after the report viewer finished exporting?I think it is not possible. It is also not possible to figure out which format was used for exporting, which optional parameters were used etc.
If I needed that information, I would probably create my own form for entering export file name and export options.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Receive multiple FTP files
Is there a way to get more than one file with a single ftp task in SQL 2005?
I need to get 5 files from one server. They are in two different directories is that makes any difference. Right now I have a separate task for each but would like to have one task if possible.
Thanks
You can use a wild card (*) in your path... If you can't use a wild card to get your 5 files, then you'll have to split up the tasks.|||I figured something like that would be the answer...
Thats ok though... Thanks for the response.
|||Bill, we actually use a table for our connection (directories, files, etc.) for FTP's and loop through the table replacing the FTP properties (in the FTP task) with the info from the table. If you did this, you could read the connection info into a recordset. Add a ForEach task and place the FTP task within the ForEach container.
The recordset info then drives the connection info for the FTP task... Since you mention two directories, you could use a row for each directory. Lots cleaner (and easier to maintain!) than having five separate FTP tasks firing...
receive files from remote site only if file does not exist in local directory
I need to only receive files via ftp when the file does not exist on my local machine. FIles are being added to the remote location on a weekly basis and they are being downloaded locally. I do not want to download all the files each time. Instead, just download what was not already downloaded. Is there a way to do this? I want to do this using SSIS / ftp task.
Thanks in advance.
One way to accomplish this is to use the Execute Process task to run ftp.exe to get a list of the files on the server, then compare that list to your local directory. You could compare the file lists through a script task. Then FTP each file that you need to pull down.|||Thanks very much. I will try that.Monday, March 26, 2012
Recataloging a log backup disk file
Backup Log DataBaseName to
DISK='\\ServerName\ShareName\Path\FileName.TRN' with
RetainDays=1, Description='Daily Backup Routine'
When I restore a database and logs to an alternate
server, I can restore the full database backup and the
first iteration of the log backups without any problems.
The problem is with all subsequent log backups that were
performed and apended to the file created by the above
statement. I know and can get to the subsequent appended
logs via TSQL, but not an easy task if there are 15
appended log backups on the device. Is there a way I can
recatalog all the log backups so I can use Enterprise
Manager's point an click interface to restore? Will the
STOPAT parameter restore the first log backup, and all
subsequent backups, up to the STOPAT? The command used
to create the log backup is stated above.
Thanx soo much for your help,
D2David,
> Is there a way I can
> recatalog all the log backups so I can use Enterprise
> Manager's point an click interface to restore?
Not easily. I guess you can write a TSQL script that uses RESTORE HEADERONLY and based on that
inserts data into the backup history tables in msdb. Note that *this is not supported*! EM has an
option to generate backuphistory as you select a backup device in the restore dialog, but that isn't
dine on a file basis, but on a backup basis, so using EM to generate backuphistory, you would have
to go through that dialog 15 times.
> Will the
> STOPAT parameter restore the first log backup, and all
> subsequent backups, up to the STOPAT?
No. All RESTORE commands only addresses one backup at a time.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"David Danh" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:370101c4a05d$53fc68b0$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
> Backup Log DataBaseName to
> DISK='\\ServerName\ShareName\Path\FileName.TRN' with
> RetainDays=1, Description='Daily Backup Routine'
> When I restore a database and logs to an alternate
> server, I can restore the full database backup and the
> first iteration of the log backups without any problems.
> The problem is with all subsequent log backups that were
> performed and apended to the file created by the above
> statement. I know and can get to the subsequent appended
> logs via TSQL, but not an easy task if there are 15
> appended log backups on the device. Is there a way I can
> recatalog all the log backups so I can use Enterprise
> Manager's point an click interface to restore? Will the
> STOPAT parameter restore the first log backup, and all
> subsequent backups, up to the STOPAT? The command used
> to create the log backup is stated above.
> Thanx soo much for your help,
> D2
>|||Thanks for the help... I ended up doing this...
RESTORE VERIFYONLY FROM DISK='FilePath' WITH
FILE=#,LOADHISTORY
Replaced the # with 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ...
I just wish it can be done with one command.
>--Original Message--
>David,
>> Is there a way I can
>> recatalog all the log backups so I can use Enterprise
>> Manager's point an click interface to restore?
>Not easily. I guess you can write a TSQL script that
uses RESTORE HEADERONLY and based on that
>inserts data into the backup history tables in msdb.
Note that *this is not supported*! EM has an
>option to generate backuphistory as you select a backup
device in the restore dialog, but that isn't
>dine on a file basis, but on a backup basis, so using EM
to generate backuphistory, you would have
>to go through that dialog 15 times.
>> Will the
>> STOPAT parameter restore the first log backup, and all
>> subsequent backups, up to the STOPAT?
>No. All RESTORE commands only addresses one backup at a
time.
>--
>Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
>"David Danh" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
in message
>news:370101c4a05d$53fc68b0$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Backup Log DataBaseName to
>> DISK='\\ServerName\ShareName\Path\FileName.TRN' with
>> RetainDays=1, Description='Daily Backup Routine'
>> When I restore a database and logs to an alternate
>> server, I can restore the full database backup and the
>> first iteration of the log backups without any
problems.
>> The problem is with all subsequent log backups that
were
>> performed and apended to the file created by the above
>> statement. I know and can get to the subsequent
appended
>> logs via TSQL, but not an easy task if there are 15
>> appended log backups on the device. Is there a way I
can
>> recatalog all the log backups so I can use Enterprise
>> Manager's point an click interface to restore? Will
the
>> STOPAT parameter restore the first log backup, and all
>> subsequent backups, up to the STOPAT? The command used
>> to create the log backup is stated above.
>> Thanx soo much for your help,
>> D2
>
>.
>
DISK='\\ServerName\ShareName\Path\FileName.TRN' with
RetainDays=1, Description='Daily Backup Routine'
When I restore a database and logs to an alternate
server, I can restore the full database backup and the
first iteration of the log backups without any problems.
The problem is with all subsequent log backups that were
performed and apended to the file created by the above
statement. I know and can get to the subsequent appended
logs via TSQL, but not an easy task if there are 15
appended log backups on the device. Is there a way I can
recatalog all the log backups so I can use Enterprise
Manager's point an click interface to restore? Will the
STOPAT parameter restore the first log backup, and all
subsequent backups, up to the STOPAT? The command used
to create the log backup is stated above.
Thanx soo much for your help,
D2David,
> Is there a way I can
> recatalog all the log backups so I can use Enterprise
> Manager's point an click interface to restore?
Not easily. I guess you can write a TSQL script that uses RESTORE HEADERONLY and based on that
inserts data into the backup history tables in msdb. Note that *this is not supported*! EM has an
option to generate backuphistory as you select a backup device in the restore dialog, but that isn't
dine on a file basis, but on a backup basis, so using EM to generate backuphistory, you would have
to go through that dialog 15 times.
> Will the
> STOPAT parameter restore the first log backup, and all
> subsequent backups, up to the STOPAT?
No. All RESTORE commands only addresses one backup at a time.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"David Danh" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:370101c4a05d$53fc68b0$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
> Backup Log DataBaseName to
> DISK='\\ServerName\ShareName\Path\FileName.TRN' with
> RetainDays=1, Description='Daily Backup Routine'
> When I restore a database and logs to an alternate
> server, I can restore the full database backup and the
> first iteration of the log backups without any problems.
> The problem is with all subsequent log backups that were
> performed and apended to the file created by the above
> statement. I know and can get to the subsequent appended
> logs via TSQL, but not an easy task if there are 15
> appended log backups on the device. Is there a way I can
> recatalog all the log backups so I can use Enterprise
> Manager's point an click interface to restore? Will the
> STOPAT parameter restore the first log backup, and all
> subsequent backups, up to the STOPAT? The command used
> to create the log backup is stated above.
> Thanx soo much for your help,
> D2
>|||Thanks for the help... I ended up doing this...
RESTORE VERIFYONLY FROM DISK='FilePath' WITH
FILE=#,LOADHISTORY
Replaced the # with 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ...
I just wish it can be done with one command.
>--Original Message--
>David,
>> Is there a way I can
>> recatalog all the log backups so I can use Enterprise
>> Manager's point an click interface to restore?
>Not easily. I guess you can write a TSQL script that
uses RESTORE HEADERONLY and based on that
>inserts data into the backup history tables in msdb.
Note that *this is not supported*! EM has an
>option to generate backuphistory as you select a backup
device in the restore dialog, but that isn't
>dine on a file basis, but on a backup basis, so using EM
to generate backuphistory, you would have
>to go through that dialog 15 times.
>> Will the
>> STOPAT parameter restore the first log backup, and all
>> subsequent backups, up to the STOPAT?
>No. All RESTORE commands only addresses one backup at a
time.
>--
>Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
>"David Danh" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
in message
>news:370101c4a05d$53fc68b0$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Backup Log DataBaseName to
>> DISK='\\ServerName\ShareName\Path\FileName.TRN' with
>> RetainDays=1, Description='Daily Backup Routine'
>> When I restore a database and logs to an alternate
>> server, I can restore the full database backup and the
>> first iteration of the log backups without any
problems.
>> The problem is with all subsequent log backups that
were
>> performed and apended to the file created by the above
>> statement. I know and can get to the subsequent
appended
>> logs via TSQL, but not an easy task if there are 15
>> appended log backups on the device. Is there a way I
can
>> recatalog all the log backups so I can use Enterprise
>> Manager's point an click interface to restore? Will
the
>> STOPAT parameter restore the first log backup, and all
>> subsequent backups, up to the STOPAT? The command used
>> to create the log backup is stated above.
>> Thanx soo much for your help,
>> D2
>
>.
>
rebuilt option for master database
I was testing Disaster Recovery plann for master database recovery , While
rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error , can u
pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single user
mode .
Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
cannot be used
There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
Regards,
swati
Seems like your SQL Server is still started so that rebuildm.exe can't create the database files...
Also, note that rebuildm has a bug where it can't run the source database files from the CD, as it
doesn't remove the read-only attribute.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
news:%23gE5zkwwEHA.3528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I was testing Disaster Recovery plann for master database recovery , While
> rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error , can u
> pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single user
> mode .
> Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
> cannot be used
> There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
>
> Regards,
> swati
>
>
|||Hi !
sql server is in single user mode , and then i tried to rebulid the same
using rebuild option ,i am accessing the files which are present in
c:\programme files \ ..ie. a default directory . there is no read only
option for data /log files . Pls tell me what should be done ?
Regards,
Swati
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:#$zD9pwwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Seems like your SQL Server is still started so that rebuildm.exe can't
create the database files...
> Also, note that rebuildm has a bug where it can't run the source database
files from the CD, as it[vbcol=seagreen]
> doesn't remove the read-only attribute.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
> news:%23gE5zkwwEHA.3528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
While[vbcol=seagreen]
can u[vbcol=seagreen]
user
>
|||Seems you are using the rebildm.exe program in a completely wrong way, I'm afraid. I recommend that
you start by reading in Books Online how this program work, no need to re-phrase all the information
from Books Online as you already have the information there. And then you can of course post back
questions here is you still don't get it working.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
news:OaroX0wwEHA.2572@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi !
> sql server is in single user mode , and then i tried to rebulid the same
> using rebuild option ,i am accessing the files which are present in
> c:\programme files \ ..ie. a default directory . there is no read only
> option for data /log files . Pls tell me what should be done ?
>
> Regards,
> Swati
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
> message news:#$zD9pwwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> create the database files...
> files from the CD, as it
> While
> can u
> user
>
rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error , can u
pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single user
mode .
Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
cannot be used
There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
Regards,
swati
Seems like your SQL Server is still started so that rebuildm.exe can't create the database files...
Also, note that rebuildm has a bug where it can't run the source database files from the CD, as it
doesn't remove the read-only attribute.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
news:%23gE5zkwwEHA.3528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I was testing Disaster Recovery plann for master database recovery , While
> rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error , can u
> pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single user
> mode .
> Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
> cannot be used
> There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
>
> Regards,
> swati
>
>
|||Hi !
sql server is in single user mode , and then i tried to rebulid the same
using rebuild option ,i am accessing the files which are present in
c:\programme files \ ..ie. a default directory . there is no read only
option for data /log files . Pls tell me what should be done ?
Regards,
Swati
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:#$zD9pwwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Seems like your SQL Server is still started so that rebuildm.exe can't
create the database files...
> Also, note that rebuildm has a bug where it can't run the source database
files from the CD, as it[vbcol=seagreen]
> doesn't remove the read-only attribute.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
> news:%23gE5zkwwEHA.3528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
While[vbcol=seagreen]
can u[vbcol=seagreen]
user
>
|||Seems you are using the rebildm.exe program in a completely wrong way, I'm afraid. I recommend that
you start by reading in Books Online how this program work, no need to re-phrase all the information
from Books Online as you already have the information there. And then you can of course post back
questions here is you still don't get it working.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
news:OaroX0wwEHA.2572@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi !
> sql server is in single user mode , and then i tried to rebulid the same
> using rebuild option ,i am accessing the files which are present in
> c:\programme files \ ..ie. a default directory . there is no read only
> option for data /log files . Pls tell me what should be done ?
>
> Regards,
> Swati
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
> message news:#$zD9pwwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> create the database files...
> files from the CD, as it
> While
> can u
> user
>
rebuilt option for master database
I was testing Disaster Recovery plann for master database recovery , While
rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error , can u
pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single user
mode .
Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
cannot be used
There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
Regards,
swatiSeems like your SQL Server is still started so that rebuildm.exe can't creat
e the database files...
Also, note that rebuildm has a bug where it can't run the source database fi
les from the CD, as it
doesn't remove the read-only attribute.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
news:%23gE5zkwwEHA.3528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I was testing Disaster Recovery plann for master database recovery , Whi
le
> rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error , can
u
> pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single use
r
> mode .
> Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
> cannot be used
> There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
>
> Regards,
> swati
>
>|||Hi !
sql server is in single user mode , and then i tried to rebulid the same
using rebuild option ,i am accessing the files which are present in
c:\programme files \ ..ie. a default directory . there is no read only
option for data /log files . Pls tell me what should be done ?
Regards,
Swati
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:#$zD9pwwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Seems like your SQL Server is still started so that rebuildm.exe can't
create the database files...
> Also, note that rebuildm has a bug where it can't run the source database
files from the CD, as it
> doesn't remove the read-only attribute.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
> news:%23gE5zkwwEHA.3528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
While[vbcol=seagreen]
can u[vbcol=seagreen]
user[vbcol=seagreen]
>|||Seems you are using the rebildm.exe program in a completely wrong way, I'm a
fraid. I recommend that
you start by reading in Books Online how this program work, no need to re-ph
rase all the information
from Books Online as you already have the information there. And then you ca
n of course post back
questions here is you still don't get it working.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
news:OaroX0wwEHA.2572@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi !
> sql server is in single user mode , and then i tried to rebulid the same
> using rebuild option ,i am accessing the files which are present in
> c:\programme files \ ..ie. a default directory . there is no read only
> option for data /log files . Pls tell me what should be done ?
>
> Regards,
> Swati
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote i
n
> message news:#$zD9pwwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> create the database files...
> files from the CD, as it
> While
> can u
> user
>sql
rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error , can u
pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single user
mode .
Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
cannot be used
There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
Regards,
swatiSeems like your SQL Server is still started so that rebuildm.exe can't creat
e the database files...
Also, note that rebuildm has a bug where it can't run the source database fi
les from the CD, as it
doesn't remove the read-only attribute.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
news:%23gE5zkwwEHA.3528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I was testing Disaster Recovery plann for master database recovery , Whi
le
> rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error , can
u
> pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single use
r
> mode .
> Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
> cannot be used
> There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
>
> Regards,
> swati
>
>|||Hi !
sql server is in single user mode , and then i tried to rebulid the same
using rebuild option ,i am accessing the files which are present in
c:\programme files \ ..ie. a default directory . there is no read only
option for data /log files . Pls tell me what should be done ?
Regards,
Swati
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:#$zD9pwwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Seems like your SQL Server is still started so that rebuildm.exe can't
create the database files...
> Also, note that rebuildm has a bug where it can't run the source database
files from the CD, as it
> doesn't remove the read-only attribute.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
> news:%23gE5zkwwEHA.3528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
While[vbcol=seagreen]
can u[vbcol=seagreen]
user[vbcol=seagreen]
>|||Seems you are using the rebildm.exe program in a completely wrong way, I'm a
fraid. I recommend that
you start by reading in Books Online how this program work, no need to re-ph
rase all the information
from Books Online as you already have the information there. And then you ca
n of course post back
questions here is you still don't get it working.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
news:OaroX0wwEHA.2572@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi !
> sql server is in single user mode , and then i tried to rebulid the same
> using rebuild option ,i am accessing the files which are present in
> c:\programme files \ ..ie. a default directory . there is no read only
> option for data /log files . Pls tell me what should be done ?
>
> Regards,
> Swati
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote i
n
> message news:#$zD9pwwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> create the database files...
> files from the CD, as it
> While
> can u
> user
>sql
rebuilt option for master database
I was testing Disaster Recovery plann for master database recovery , While
rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error , can u
pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single user
mode .
Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
cannot be used
There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
Regards,
swatiSeems like your SQL Server is still started so that rebuildm.exe can't create the database files...
Also, note that rebuildm has a bug where it can't run the source database files from the CD, as it
doesn't remove the read-only attribute.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
news:%23gE5zkwwEHA.3528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I was testing Disaster Recovery plann for master database recovery , While
> rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error , can u
> pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single user
> mode .
> Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
> cannot be used
> There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
>
> Regards,
> swati
>
>|||Hi !
sql server is in single user mode , and then i tried to rebulid the same
using rebuild option ,i am accessing the files which are present in
c:\programme files \ ..ie. a default directory . there is no read only
option for data /log files . Pls tell me what should be done ?
Regards,
Swati
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:#$zD9pwwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Seems like your SQL Server is still started so that rebuildm.exe can't
create the database files...
> Also, note that rebuildm has a bug where it can't run the source database
files from the CD, as it
> doesn't remove the read-only attribute.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
> news:%23gE5zkwwEHA.3528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I was testing Disaster Recovery plann for master database recovery ,
While
> > rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error ,
can u
> > pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single
user
> > mode .
> >
> > Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
> > cannot be used
> > There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > swati
> >
> >
> >
>|||Seems you are using the rebildm.exe program in a completely wrong way, I'm afraid. I recommend that
you start by reading in Books Online how this program work, no need to re-phrase all the information
from Books Online as you already have the information there. And then you can of course post back
questions here is you still don't get it working.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
news:OaroX0wwEHA.2572@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi !
> sql server is in single user mode , and then i tried to rebulid the same
> using rebuild option ,i am accessing the files which are present in
> c:\programme files \ ..ie. a default directory . there is no read only
> option for data /log files . Pls tell me what should be done ?
>
> Regards,
> Swati
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
> message news:#$zD9pwwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > Seems like your SQL Server is still started so that rebuildm.exe can't
> create the database files...
> >
> > Also, note that rebuildm has a bug where it can't run the source database
> files from the CD, as it
> > doesn't remove the read-only attribute.
> >
> > --
> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >
> >
> > "swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
> > news:%23gE5zkwwEHA.3528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > I was testing Disaster Recovery plann for master database recovery ,
> While
> > > rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error ,
> can u
> > > pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single
> user
> > > mode .
> > >
> > > Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
> > > cannot be used
> > > There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > swati
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error , can u
pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single user
mode .
Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
cannot be used
There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
Regards,
swatiSeems like your SQL Server is still started so that rebuildm.exe can't create the database files...
Also, note that rebuildm has a bug where it can't run the source database files from the CD, as it
doesn't remove the read-only attribute.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
news:%23gE5zkwwEHA.3528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I was testing Disaster Recovery plann for master database recovery , While
> rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error , can u
> pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single user
> mode .
> Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
> cannot be used
> There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
>
> Regards,
> swati
>
>|||Hi !
sql server is in single user mode , and then i tried to rebulid the same
using rebuild option ,i am accessing the files which are present in
c:\programme files \ ..ie. a default directory . there is no read only
option for data /log files . Pls tell me what should be done ?
Regards,
Swati
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:#$zD9pwwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Seems like your SQL Server is still started so that rebuildm.exe can't
create the database files...
> Also, note that rebuildm has a bug where it can't run the source database
files from the CD, as it
> doesn't remove the read-only attribute.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
> news:%23gE5zkwwEHA.3528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I was testing Disaster Recovery plann for master database recovery ,
While
> > rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error ,
can u
> > pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single
user
> > mode .
> >
> > Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
> > cannot be used
> > There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > swati
> >
> >
> >
>|||Seems you are using the rebildm.exe program in a completely wrong way, I'm afraid. I recommend that
you start by reading in Books Online how this program work, no need to re-phrase all the information
from Books Online as you already have the information there. And then you can of course post back
questions here is you still don't get it working.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
news:OaroX0wwEHA.2572@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi !
> sql server is in single user mode , and then i tried to rebulid the same
> using rebuild option ,i am accessing the files which are present in
> c:\programme files \ ..ie. a default directory . there is no read only
> option for data /log files . Pls tell me what should be done ?
>
> Regards,
> Swati
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
> message news:#$zD9pwwEHA.3824@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > Seems like your SQL Server is still started so that rebuildm.exe can't
> create the database files...
> >
> > Also, note that rebuildm has a bug where it can't run the source database
> files from the CD, as it
> > doesn't remove the read-only attribute.
> >
> > --
> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >
> >
> > "swati" <swati.zingade@.ugamsolutions.com> wrote in message
> > news:%23gE5zkwwEHA.3528@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > I was testing Disaster Recovery plann for master database recovery ,
> While
> > > rebuliding master file on test setup , I am getting following error ,
> can u
> > > pls let me know why does it give this error ..I am already in a single
> user
> > > mode .
> > >
> > > Rebuilt master is failed due to following error no : 266 , copy function
> > > cannot be used
> > > There has been sharing violations in source or destination file .
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > swati
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
RebuildM: Cannot copy file error?
Hi All,
I tried to rebuild my Master data file unsuccessfully. After selecting the
directory where my Master.dbf and .ldf, I clicked on the Rebuild button, and
RebuildM gives me the following error message:
Cannot copy Master: There has been a sharing violation.
The source or destination file may be in use.
I am not so sure which one is source, which one is destination? I tried to
delete and restore the master.ldf and master.mdf files and they are deleted
and restored fine, which means that they are not in use.
What else do I have to do in order to rebuild the master file?
Hi, David,
From you information, when you use the rebuildm.exe to rebuild the master
database, you encoutere error message of:
Cannot copy Master: There has been a sharing violation.
The source or destination file may be in use.
Based on my knowledge, The Rebuild Master utility reinstalls the master
database. Rebuilding the master database removes all database objects and
data. After rebuilding the master database, re-create the database objects
and reload the data, or reattach the data and log files using sp_attach_db.
Please refer to the following articles before you run it.
Rebuild master Utility
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...us/coprompt/cp
_rebuildm_6dbt.asp
How to rebuild the master database (Rebuild Master utility)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...us/howtosql/ht
_install_8w8p.asp
You should choose the resorce by click on the browse button and Select the
\Data folder on the SQL Server compact disc or in the shared network
directory from which SQL Server was installed, and then click OK.
Hope this helps.
Best regards
Baisong Wei
Microsoft Online Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.
|||HI
before use the rebuildm.exe, copy SQL Server install CD to hard disk, and remove Read Only flag from files.
JBandi
|||Hi, David,
I am reviewing you post. Since we have not heard from you in he newsgroup
for some days, I want to know if you have problem resolved or there is any
question that need our assistance. For any question, please feel free to
post here and we are glad to help. Thanks.
Best regards
Baisong Wei
Microsoft Online Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.
sql
I tried to rebuild my Master data file unsuccessfully. After selecting the
directory where my Master.dbf and .ldf, I clicked on the Rebuild button, and
RebuildM gives me the following error message:
Cannot copy Master: There has been a sharing violation.
The source or destination file may be in use.
I am not so sure which one is source, which one is destination? I tried to
delete and restore the master.ldf and master.mdf files and they are deleted
and restored fine, which means that they are not in use.
What else do I have to do in order to rebuild the master file?
Hi, David,
From you information, when you use the rebuildm.exe to rebuild the master
database, you encoutere error message of:
Cannot copy Master: There has been a sharing violation.
The source or destination file may be in use.
Based on my knowledge, The Rebuild Master utility reinstalls the master
database. Rebuilding the master database removes all database objects and
data. After rebuilding the master database, re-create the database objects
and reload the data, or reattach the data and log files using sp_attach_db.
Please refer to the following articles before you run it.
Rebuild master Utility
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...us/coprompt/cp
_rebuildm_6dbt.asp
How to rebuild the master database (Rebuild Master utility)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...us/howtosql/ht
_install_8w8p.asp
You should choose the resorce by click on the browse button and Select the
\Data folder on the SQL Server compact disc or in the shared network
directory from which SQL Server was installed, and then click OK.
Hope this helps.
Best regards
Baisong Wei
Microsoft Online Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.
|||HI
before use the rebuildm.exe, copy SQL Server install CD to hard disk, and remove Read Only flag from files.
JBandi
|||Hi, David,
I am reviewing you post. Since we have not heard from you in he newsgroup
for some days, I want to know if you have problem resolved or there is any
question that need our assistance. For any question, please feel free to
post here and we are glad to help. Thanks.
Best regards
Baisong Wei
Microsoft Online Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.
sql
RebuildM: Cannot copy file error?
Hi All,
I tried to rebuild my Master data file unsuccessfully. After selecting the
directory where my Master.dbf and .ldf, I clicked on the Rebuild button, and
RebuildM gives me the following error message:
Cannot copy Master: There has been a sharing violation.
The source or destination file may be in use.
I am not so sure which one is source, which one is destination? I tried to
delete and restore the master.ldf and master.mdf files and they are deleted
and restored fine, which means that they are not in use.
What else do I have to do in order to rebuild the master file?Hi, David,
From you information, when you use the rebuildm.exe to rebuild the master
database, you encoutere error message of:
Cannot copy Master: There has been a sharing violation.
The source or destination file may be in use.
Based on my knowledge, The Rebuild Master utility reinstalls the master
database. Rebuilding the master database removes all database objects and
data. After rebuilding the master database, re-create the database objects
and reload the data, or reattach the data and log files using sp_attach_db.
Please refer to the following articles before you run it.
Rebuild master Utility
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...-us/coprompt/cp
_rebuildm_6dbt.asp
How to rebuild the master database (Rebuild Master utility)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...-us/howtosql/ht
_install_8w8p.asp
You should choose the resorce by click on the browse button and Select the
\Data folder on the SQL Server compact disc or in the shared network
directory from which SQL Server was installed, and then click OK.
Hope this helps.
Best regards
Baisong Wei
Microsoft Online Support
----
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.|||HI
before use the rebuildm.exe, copy SQL Server install CD to hard disk, and re
move Read Only flag from files.
JBandi|||Hi, David,
I am reviewing you post. Since we have not heard from you in he newsgroup
for some days, I want to know if you have problem resolved or there is any
question that need our assistance. For any question, please feel free to
post here and we are glad to help. Thanks.
Best regards
Baisong Wei
Microsoft Online Support
----
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.
I tried to rebuild my Master data file unsuccessfully. After selecting the
directory where my Master.dbf and .ldf, I clicked on the Rebuild button, and
RebuildM gives me the following error message:
Cannot copy Master: There has been a sharing violation.
The source or destination file may be in use.
I am not so sure which one is source, which one is destination? I tried to
delete and restore the master.ldf and master.mdf files and they are deleted
and restored fine, which means that they are not in use.
What else do I have to do in order to rebuild the master file?Hi, David,
From you information, when you use the rebuildm.exe to rebuild the master
database, you encoutere error message of:
Cannot copy Master: There has been a sharing violation.
The source or destination file may be in use.
Based on my knowledge, The Rebuild Master utility reinstalls the master
database. Rebuilding the master database removes all database objects and
data. After rebuilding the master database, re-create the database objects
and reload the data, or reattach the data and log files using sp_attach_db.
Please refer to the following articles before you run it.
Rebuild master Utility
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...-us/coprompt/cp
_rebuildm_6dbt.asp
How to rebuild the master database (Rebuild Master utility)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...-us/howtosql/ht
_install_8w8p.asp
You should choose the resorce by click on the browse button and Select the
\Data folder on the SQL Server compact disc or in the shared network
directory from which SQL Server was installed, and then click OK.
Hope this helps.
Best regards
Baisong Wei
Microsoft Online Support
----
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.|||HI
before use the rebuildm.exe, copy SQL Server install CD to hard disk, and re
move Read Only flag from files.
JBandi|||Hi, David,
I am reviewing you post. Since we have not heard from you in he newsgroup
for some days, I want to know if you have problem resolved or there is any
question that need our assistance. For any question, please feel free to
post here and we are glad to help. Thanks.
Best regards
Baisong Wei
Microsoft Online Support
----
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.
RebuildM: Cannot copy file error?
Hi All,
I tried to rebuild my Master data file unsuccessfully. After selecting the
directory where my Master.dbf and .ldf, I clicked on the Rebuild button, and
RebuildM gives me the following error message:
Cannot copy Master: There has been a sharing violation.
The source or destination file may be in use.
I am not so sure which one is source, which one is destination? I tried to
delete and restore the master.ldf and master.mdf files and they are deleted
and restored fine, which means that they are not in use.
What else do I have to do in order to rebuild the master file?Hi, David,
From you information, when you use the rebuildm.exe to rebuild the master
database, you encoutere error message of:
Cannot copy Master: There has been a sharing violation.
The source or destination file may be in use.
Based on my knowledge, The Rebuild Master utility reinstalls the master
database. Rebuilding the master database removes all database objects and
data. After rebuilding the master database, re-create the database objects
and reload the data, or reattach the data and log files using sp_attach_db.
Please refer to the following articles before you run it.
Rebuild master Utility
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/coprompt/cp
_rebuildm_6dbt.asp
How to rebuild the master database (Rebuild Master utility)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/howtosql/ht
_install_8w8p.asp
You should choose the resorce by click on the browse button and Select the
\Data folder on the SQL Server compact disc or in the shared network
directory from which SQL Server was installed, and then click OK.
Hope this helps.
Best regards
Baisong Wei
Microsoft Online Support
----
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.|||H
before use the rebuildm.exe, copy SQL Server install CD to hard disk, and remove Read Only flag from files
JBandi|||Hi, David,
I am reviewing you post. Since we have not heard from you in he newsgroup
for some days, I want to know if you have problem resolved or there is any
question that need our assistance. For any question, please feel free to
post here and we are glad to help. Thanks.
Best regards
Baisong Wei
Microsoft Online Support
----
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.
I tried to rebuild my Master data file unsuccessfully. After selecting the
directory where my Master.dbf and .ldf, I clicked on the Rebuild button, and
RebuildM gives me the following error message:
Cannot copy Master: There has been a sharing violation.
The source or destination file may be in use.
I am not so sure which one is source, which one is destination? I tried to
delete and restore the master.ldf and master.mdf files and they are deleted
and restored fine, which means that they are not in use.
What else do I have to do in order to rebuild the master file?Hi, David,
From you information, when you use the rebuildm.exe to rebuild the master
database, you encoutere error message of:
Cannot copy Master: There has been a sharing violation.
The source or destination file may be in use.
Based on my knowledge, The Rebuild Master utility reinstalls the master
database. Rebuilding the master database removes all database objects and
data. After rebuilding the master database, re-create the database objects
and reload the data, or reattach the data and log files using sp_attach_db.
Please refer to the following articles before you run it.
Rebuild master Utility
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/coprompt/cp
_rebuildm_6dbt.asp
How to rebuild the master database (Rebuild Master utility)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/howtosql/ht
_install_8w8p.asp
You should choose the resorce by click on the browse button and Select the
\Data folder on the SQL Server compact disc or in the shared network
directory from which SQL Server was installed, and then click OK.
Hope this helps.
Best regards
Baisong Wei
Microsoft Online Support
----
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.|||H
before use the rebuildm.exe, copy SQL Server install CD to hard disk, and remove Read Only flag from files
JBandi|||Hi, David,
I am reviewing you post. Since we have not heard from you in he newsgroup
for some days, I want to know if you have problem resolved or there is any
question that need our assistance. For any question, please feel free to
post here and we are glad to help. Thanks.
Best regards
Baisong Wei
Microsoft Online Support
----
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Rebuild Index grew database .mdf files
Hello,
Overnight, I had a Rebuild Index job run and it grew the size of the database.mdf file approximately 4 times. 300MB to 1.2GB. It also changed the initial size of the database to 1.2GB. Is there any way to recover this space or to shrink the database?
I tried to shrink it with DBCC SHRINKDATABASE to no avail (only recovered 40MB).
Do I have any options to reclaim the space?
Any ideas?
Thanks.It turns out that the cause of the increase in size of database files was due to the fact that I had the Rebuild Index job set with a fill factor of 10%. I tested a bit and found that if I set it to reorganize pages with the default amount of free space that it didn't triple/quadruple/etc the size of the files.
Case Closed!
Rebuild Index Failing
The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
failing.
The text file report is of very little help...
Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
Duration: 00:00:00
Status: Succeeded.
Details:
The job history doesn't tell much either...
Date3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
LogJob History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
Step ID0
ServerSQLSERVER
Job NameWeekly All DB Maintenance Plan
Step Name(Job outcome)
Duration04:25:27
Sql Severity0
Sql Message ID0
Operator Emailed
Operator Net sent
Operator Paged
Retries Attempted0
Message
The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from SQL
2000.
I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring UPDATEUSAGE
be run again.
Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
What is causing this?
Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
Thanks in advance,
John
John,
SP2 will give you a lot more output but there are known problems with maint
plans and checkdb. See:-
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi/archive/2007/03/08/be-aware-sp2-maint-plans-and-checkdb.aspx
Chris
"John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
> The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
> failing.
> The text file report is of very little help...
> Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
> Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
> Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Duration: 00:00:00
> Status: Succeeded.
> Details:
> The job history doesn't tell much either...
> Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
> Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
> Step ID 0
> Server SQLSERVER
> Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Step Name (Job outcome)
> Duration 04:25:27
> Sql Severity 0
> Sql Message ID 0
> Operator Emailed
> Operator Net sent
> Operator Paged
> Retries Attempted 0
> Message
> The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
> Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
>
> These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from
> SQL
> 2000.
> I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
> Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring
> UPDATEUSAGE
> be run again.
> Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
> What is causing this?
> Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
> Thanks in advance,
> John
|||Its well known that index usage counts could get out of whack on SQL 2000
but the algorithm was changed for 2005 suh that they never should. I'd
really like to know more about this - can you send me email with the error
messages you're getting from the rebuilds? (Go to the blog site below and
send email through there).
Thanks
Paul Randal
Principal Lead Program Manager
Microsoft SQL Server Core Storage Engine,
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstorageengine/default.aspx
"John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
> The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
> failing.
> The text file report is of very little help...
> Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
> Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
> Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Duration: 00:00:00
> Status: Succeeded.
> Details:
> The job history doesn't tell much either...
> Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
> Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
> Step ID 0
> Server SQLSERVER
> Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Step Name (Job outcome)
> Duration 04:25:27
> Sql Severity 0
> Sql Message ID 0
> Operator Emailed
> Operator Net sent
> Operator Paged
> Retries Attempted 0
> Message
> The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
> Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
>
> These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from
> SQL
> 2000.
> I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
> Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring
> UPDATEUSAGE
> be run again.
> Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
> What is causing this?
> Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
> Thanks in advance,
> John
|||Hi Paul,
Thank you for taking an interest in my little dilemma.
Forgive me but I don't see how to send an email from your blog. Can you
please expand on how to do it?
Thanks,
John
"Paul S. Randal [MS]" wrote:
> Its well known that index usage counts could get out of whack on SQL 2000
> but the algorithm was changed for 2005 suh that they never should. I'd
> really like to know more about this - can you send me email with the error
> messages you're getting from the rebuilds? (Go to the blog site below and
> send email through there).
> Thanks
> --
> Paul Randal
> Principal Lead Program Manager
> Microsoft SQL Server Core Storage Engine,
> http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstorageengine/default.aspx
>
> "John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
>
>
failing.
The text file report is of very little help...
Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
Duration: 00:00:00
Status: Succeeded.
Details:
The job history doesn't tell much either...
Date3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
LogJob History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
Step ID0
ServerSQLSERVER
Job NameWeekly All DB Maintenance Plan
Step Name(Job outcome)
Duration04:25:27
Sql Severity0
Sql Message ID0
Operator Emailed
Operator Net sent
Operator Paged
Retries Attempted0
Message
The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from SQL
2000.
I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring UPDATEUSAGE
be run again.
Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
What is causing this?
Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
Thanks in advance,
John
John,
SP2 will give you a lot more output but there are known problems with maint
plans and checkdb. See:-
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi/archive/2007/03/08/be-aware-sp2-maint-plans-and-checkdb.aspx
Chris
"John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
> The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
> failing.
> The text file report is of very little help...
> Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
> Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
> Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Duration: 00:00:00
> Status: Succeeded.
> Details:
> The job history doesn't tell much either...
> Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
> Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
> Step ID 0
> Server SQLSERVER
> Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Step Name (Job outcome)
> Duration 04:25:27
> Sql Severity 0
> Sql Message ID 0
> Operator Emailed
> Operator Net sent
> Operator Paged
> Retries Attempted 0
> Message
> The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
> Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
>
> These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from
> SQL
> 2000.
> I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
> Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring
> UPDATEUSAGE
> be run again.
> Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
> What is causing this?
> Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
> Thanks in advance,
> John
|||Its well known that index usage counts could get out of whack on SQL 2000
but the algorithm was changed for 2005 suh that they never should. I'd
really like to know more about this - can you send me email with the error
messages you're getting from the rebuilds? (Go to the blog site below and
send email through there).
Thanks
Paul Randal
Principal Lead Program Manager
Microsoft SQL Server Core Storage Engine,
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstorageengine/default.aspx
"John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
> The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
> failing.
> The text file report is of very little help...
> Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
> Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
> Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Duration: 00:00:00
> Status: Succeeded.
> Details:
> The job history doesn't tell much either...
> Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
> Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
> Step ID 0
> Server SQLSERVER
> Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Step Name (Job outcome)
> Duration 04:25:27
> Sql Severity 0
> Sql Message ID 0
> Operator Emailed
> Operator Net sent
> Operator Paged
> Retries Attempted 0
> Message
> The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
> Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
>
> These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from
> SQL
> 2000.
> I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
> Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring
> UPDATEUSAGE
> be run again.
> Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
> What is causing this?
> Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
> Thanks in advance,
> John
|||Hi Paul,
Thank you for taking an interest in my little dilemma.
Forgive me but I don't see how to send an email from your blog. Can you
please expand on how to do it?
Thanks,
John
"Paul S. Randal [MS]" wrote:
> Its well known that index usage counts could get out of whack on SQL 2000
> but the algorithm was changed for 2005 suh that they never should. I'd
> really like to know more about this - can you send me email with the error
> messages you're getting from the rebuilds? (Go to the blog site below and
> send email through there).
> Thanks
> --
> Paul Randal
> Principal Lead Program Manager
> Microsoft SQL Server Core Storage Engine,
> http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstorageengine/default.aspx
>
> "John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
>
>
Rebuild Index Failing
The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
failing.
The text file report is of very little help...
Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
Duration: 00:00:00
Status: Succeeded.
Details:
The job history doesn't tell much either...
Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
Step ID 0
Server SQLSERVER
Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
Step Name (Job outcome)
Duration 04:25:27
Sql Severity 0
Sql Message ID 0
Operator Emailed
Operator Net sent
Operator Paged
Retries Attempted 0
Message
The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from SQL
2000.
I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring UPDATEUSAGE
be run again.
Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
What is causing this?
Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
Thanks in advance,
JohnJohn,
SP2 will give you a lot more output but there are known problems with maint
plans and checkdb. See:-
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_kara...nd-checkdb.aspx
Chris
"John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
> The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
> failing.
> The text file report is of very little help...
> Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
> Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
> Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Duration: 00:00:00
> Status: Succeeded.
> Details:
> The job history doesn't tell much either...
> Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
> Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
> Step ID 0
> Server SQLSERVER
> Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Step Name (Job outcome)
> Duration 04:25:27
> Sql Severity 0
> Sql Message ID 0
> Operator Emailed
> Operator Net sent
> Operator Paged
> Retries Attempted 0
> Message
> The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
> Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
>
> These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from
> SQL
> 2000.
> I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
> Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring
> UPDATEUSAGE
> be run again.
> Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
> What is causing this?
> Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
> Thanks in advance,
> John|||Its well known that index usage counts could get out of whack on SQL 2000
but the algorithm was changed for 2005 suh that they never should. I'd
really like to know more about this - can you send me email with the error
messages you're getting from the rebuilds? (Go to the blog site below and
send email through there).
Thanks
Paul Randal
Principal Lead Program Manager
Microsoft SQL Server Core Storage Engine,
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstor...ne/default.aspx
"John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
> The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
> failing.
> The text file report is of very little help...
> Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
> Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
> Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Duration: 00:00:00
> Status: Succeeded.
> Details:
> The job history doesn't tell much either...
> Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
> Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
> Step ID 0
> Server SQLSERVER
> Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Step Name (Job outcome)
> Duration 04:25:27
> Sql Severity 0
> Sql Message ID 0
> Operator Emailed
> Operator Net sent
> Operator Paged
> Retries Attempted 0
> Message
> The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
> Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
>
> These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from
> SQL
> 2000.
> I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
> Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring
> UPDATEUSAGE
> be run again.
> Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
> What is causing this?
> Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
> Thanks in advance,
> John|||Hi Paul,
Thank you for taking an interest in my little dilemma.
Forgive me but I don't see how to send an email from your blog. Can you
please expand on how to do it?
Thanks,
John
"Paul S. Randal [MS]" wrote:
> Its well known that index usage counts could get out of whack on SQL 2000
> but the algorithm was changed for 2005 suh that they never should. I'd
> really like to know more about this - can you send me email with the error
> messages you're getting from the rebuilds? (Go to the blog site below and
> send email through there).
> Thanks
> --
> Paul Randal
> Principal Lead Program Manager
> Microsoft SQL Server Core Storage Engine,
> http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstor...ne/default.aspx
>
> "John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
>
>
failing.
The text file report is of very little help...
Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
Duration: 00:00:00
Status: Succeeded.
Details:
The job history doesn't tell much either...
Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
Step ID 0
Server SQLSERVER
Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
Step Name (Job outcome)
Duration 04:25:27
Sql Severity 0
Sql Message ID 0
Operator Emailed
Operator Net sent
Operator Paged
Retries Attempted 0
Message
The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from SQL
2000.
I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring UPDATEUSAGE
be run again.
Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
What is causing this?
Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
Thanks in advance,
JohnJohn,
SP2 will give you a lot more output but there are known problems with maint
plans and checkdb. See:-
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_kara...nd-checkdb.aspx
Chris
"John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
> The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
> failing.
> The text file report is of very little help...
> Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
> Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
> Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Duration: 00:00:00
> Status: Succeeded.
> Details:
> The job history doesn't tell much either...
> Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
> Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
> Step ID 0
> Server SQLSERVER
> Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Step Name (Job outcome)
> Duration 04:25:27
> Sql Severity 0
> Sql Message ID 0
> Operator Emailed
> Operator Net sent
> Operator Paged
> Retries Attempted 0
> Message
> The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
> Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
>
> These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from
> SQL
> 2000.
> I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
> Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring
> UPDATEUSAGE
> be run again.
> Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
> What is causing this?
> Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
> Thanks in advance,
> John|||Its well known that index usage counts could get out of whack on SQL 2000
but the algorithm was changed for 2005 suh that they never should. I'd
really like to know more about this - can you send me email with the error
messages you're getting from the rebuilds? (Go to the blog site below and
send email through there).
Thanks
Paul Randal
Principal Lead Program Manager
Microsoft SQL Server Core Storage Engine,
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstor...ne/default.aspx
"John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
> The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
> failing.
> The text file report is of very little help...
> Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
> Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
> Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Duration: 00:00:00
> Status: Succeeded.
> Details:
> The job history doesn't tell much either...
> Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
> Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
> Step ID 0
> Server SQLSERVER
> Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Step Name (Job outcome)
> Duration 04:25:27
> Sql Severity 0
> Sql Message ID 0
> Operator Emailed
> Operator Net sent
> Operator Paged
> Retries Attempted 0
> Message
> The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
> Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
>
> These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from
> SQL
> 2000.
> I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
> Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring
> UPDATEUSAGE
> be run again.
> Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
> What is causing this?
> Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
> Thanks in advance,
> John|||Hi Paul,
Thank you for taking an interest in my little dilemma.
Forgive me but I don't see how to send an email from your blog. Can you
please expand on how to do it?
Thanks,
John
"Paul S. Randal [MS]" wrote:
> Its well known that index usage counts could get out of whack on SQL 2000
> but the algorithm was changed for 2005 suh that they never should. I'd
> really like to know more about this - can you send me email with the error
> messages you're getting from the rebuilds? (Go to the blog site below and
> send email through there).
> Thanks
> --
> Paul Randal
> Principal Lead Program Manager
> Microsoft SQL Server Core Storage Engine,
> http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstor...ne/default.aspx
>
> "John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
>
>
Rebuild Index Failing
The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
failing.
The text file report is of very little help...
Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
Duration: 00:00:00
Status: Succeeded.
Details:
The job history doesn't tell much either...
Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
Step ID 0
Server SQLSERVER
Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
Step Name (Job outcome)
Duration 04:25:27
Sql Severity 0
Sql Message ID 0
Operator Emailed
Operator Net sent
Operator Paged
Retries Attempted 0
Message
The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from SQL
2000.
I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring UPDATEUSAGE
be run again.
Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
What is causing this?
Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
Thanks in advance,
JohnJohn,
SP2 will give you a lot more output but there are known problems with maint
plans and checkdb. See:-
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi/archive/2007/03/08/be-aware-sp2-maint-plans-and-checkdb.aspx
Chris
"John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
> The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
> failing.
> The text file report is of very little help...
> Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
> Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
> Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Duration: 00:00:00
> Status: Succeeded.
> Details:
> The job history doesn't tell much either...
> Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
> Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
> Step ID 0
> Server SQLSERVER
> Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Step Name (Job outcome)
> Duration 04:25:27
> Sql Severity 0
> Sql Message ID 0
> Operator Emailed
> Operator Net sent
> Operator Paged
> Retries Attempted 0
> Message
> The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
> Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
>
> These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from
> SQL
> 2000.
> I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
> Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring
> UPDATEUSAGE
> be run again.
> Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
> What is causing this?
> Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
> Thanks in advance,
> John|||Its well known that index usage counts could get out of whack on SQL 2000
but the algorithm was changed for 2005 suh that they never should. I'd
really like to know more about this - can you send me email with the error
messages you're getting from the rebuilds? (Go to the blog site below and
send email through there).
Thanks
--
Paul Randal
Principal Lead Program Manager
Microsoft SQL Server Core Storage Engine,
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstorageengine/default.aspx
"John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
> The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
> failing.
> The text file report is of very little help...
> Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
> Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
> Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Duration: 00:00:00
> Status: Succeeded.
> Details:
> The job history doesn't tell much either...
> Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
> Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
> Step ID 0
> Server SQLSERVER
> Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Step Name (Job outcome)
> Duration 04:25:27
> Sql Severity 0
> Sql Message ID 0
> Operator Emailed
> Operator Net sent
> Operator Paged
> Retries Attempted 0
> Message
> The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
> Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
>
> These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from
> SQL
> 2000.
> I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
> Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring
> UPDATEUSAGE
> be run again.
> Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
> What is causing this?
> Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
> Thanks in advance,
> John|||Hi Paul,
Thank you for taking an interest in my little dilemma.
Forgive me but I don't see how to send an email from your blog. Can you
please expand on how to do it?
Thanks,
John
"Paul S. Randal [MS]" wrote:
> Its well known that index usage counts could get out of whack on SQL 2000
> but the algorithm was changed for 2005 suh that they never should. I'd
> really like to know more about this - can you send me email with the error
> messages you're getting from the rebuilds? (Go to the blog site below and
> send email through there).
> Thanks
> --
> Paul Randal
> Principal Lead Program Manager
> Microsoft SQL Server Core Storage Engine,
> http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstorageengine/default.aspx
>
> "John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
> > The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
> > failing.
> >
> > The text file report is of very little help...
> > Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
> > Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
> > Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> > Duration: 00:00:00
> > Status: Succeeded.
> > Details:
> >
> > The job history doesn't tell much either...
> >
> > Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
> > Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
> > Step ID 0
> > Server SQLSERVER
> > Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> > Step Name (Job outcome)
> > Duration 04:25:27
> > Sql Severity 0
> > Sql Message ID 0
> > Operator Emailed
> > Operator Net sent
> > Operator Paged
> > Retries Attempted 0
> >
> > Message
> > The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
> > Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
> >
> >
> >
> > These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from
> > SQL
> > 2000.
> >
> > I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
> > Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring
> > UPDATEUSAGE
> > be run again.
> >
> > Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
> >
> > What is causing this?
> >
> > Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > John
>
>
failing.
The text file report is of very little help...
Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
Duration: 00:00:00
Status: Succeeded.
Details:
The job history doesn't tell much either...
Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
Step ID 0
Server SQLSERVER
Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
Step Name (Job outcome)
Duration 04:25:27
Sql Severity 0
Sql Message ID 0
Operator Emailed
Operator Net sent
Operator Paged
Retries Attempted 0
Message
The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from SQL
2000.
I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring UPDATEUSAGE
be run again.
Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
What is causing this?
Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
Thanks in advance,
JohnJohn,
SP2 will give you a lot more output but there are known problems with maint
plans and checkdb. See:-
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi/archive/2007/03/08/be-aware-sp2-maint-plans-and-checkdb.aspx
Chris
"John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
> The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
> failing.
> The text file report is of very little help...
> Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
> Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
> Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Duration: 00:00:00
> Status: Succeeded.
> Details:
> The job history doesn't tell much either...
> Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
> Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
> Step ID 0
> Server SQLSERVER
> Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Step Name (Job outcome)
> Duration 04:25:27
> Sql Severity 0
> Sql Message ID 0
> Operator Emailed
> Operator Net sent
> Operator Paged
> Retries Attempted 0
> Message
> The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
> Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
>
> These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from
> SQL
> 2000.
> I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
> Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring
> UPDATEUSAGE
> be run again.
> Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
> What is causing this?
> Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
> Thanks in advance,
> John|||Its well known that index usage counts could get out of whack on SQL 2000
but the algorithm was changed for 2005 suh that they never should. I'd
really like to know more about this - can you send me email with the error
messages you're getting from the rebuilds? (Go to the blog site below and
send email through there).
Thanks
--
Paul Randal
Principal Lead Program Manager
Microsoft SQL Server Core Storage Engine,
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstorageengine/default.aspx
"John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
> The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
> failing.
> The text file report is of very little help...
> Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
> Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
> Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Duration: 00:00:00
> Status: Succeeded.
> Details:
> The job history doesn't tell much either...
> Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
> Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
> Step ID 0
> Server SQLSERVER
> Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> Step Name (Job outcome)
> Duration 04:25:27
> Sql Severity 0
> Sql Message ID 0
> Operator Emailed
> Operator Net sent
> Operator Paged
> Retries Attempted 0
> Message
> The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
> Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
>
> These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from
> SQL
> 2000.
> I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
> Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring
> UPDATEUSAGE
> be run again.
> Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
> What is causing this?
> Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
> Thanks in advance,
> John|||Hi Paul,
Thank you for taking an interest in my little dilemma.
Forgive me but I don't see how to send an email from your blog. Can you
please expand on how to do it?
Thanks,
John
"Paul S. Randal [MS]" wrote:
> Its well known that index usage counts could get out of whack on SQL 2000
> but the algorithm was changed for 2005 suh that they never should. I'd
> really like to know more about this - can you send me email with the error
> messages you're getting from the rebuilds? (Go to the blog site below and
> send email through there).
> Thanks
> --
> Paul Randal
> Principal Lead Program Manager
> Microsoft SQL Server Core Storage Engine,
> http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstorageengine/default.aspx
>
> "John Oberlin" <JohnOberlin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5F4C1EBF-EE19-486C-A09C-D6B1F3614108@.microsoft.com...
> > The SQL Server 2005 (9.0.2047) 'Rebuild Index' maintenance plan task is
> > failing.
> >
> > The text file report is of very little help...
> > Microsoft(R) Server Maintenance Utility (Unicode) Version 9.0.2047
> > Report was generated on "SQLSERVER".
> > Maintenance Plan: Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> > Duration: 00:00:00
> > Status: Succeeded.
> > Details:
> >
> > The job history doesn't tell much either...
> >
> > Date 3/15/2007 8:00:00 PM
> > Log Job History (Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan)
> > Step ID 0
> > Server SQLSERVER
> > Job Name Weekly All DB Maintenance Plan
> > Step Name (Job outcome)
> > Duration 04:25:27
> > Sql Severity 0
> > Sql Message ID 0
> > Operator Emailed
> > Operator Net sent
> > Operator Paged
> > Retries Attempted 0
> >
> > Message
> > The job failed. The Job was invoked by Schedule 99 (Weekly All DB
> > Maintenance Plan). The last step to run was step 1 (Subplan).
> >
> >
> >
> > These symptoms are worse on (but not limited to) databases migrated from
> > SQL
> > 2000.
> >
> > I have discovered running 'DBCC UPDATEUSAGE (DatabaseName)' allows Rebuild
> > Index to run. But eventually Rebuild Index will fail requiring
> > UPDATEUSAGE
> > be run again.
> >
> > Is there any way to get a more verbose (meaningful) task report?
> >
> > What is causing this?
> >
> > Is there any harm in running UPDATEUSAGE on a regular basis?
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > John
>
>
Rebuild .LDF File
I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've tried
creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting the
database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log file
is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes with
it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
work either. I get an error message that says it can't
find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
system that had the log file path stored pointed to
another drive). Any help is appreciated.
Thanks
Sounds like you have tried "sp_attach_single_file_db" (although this isn't
what you typed). This command to use to attach a database that only has a
the data file. I would review BOL and try this command again. Also is it
possible that you data file is corrupted?
----
-
Need SQL Server Examples check out my website
http://www.geocities.com/sqlserverexamples
"Steve" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:382a01c4a55e$ce066150$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
> transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've tried
> creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
> Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting the
> database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
> Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
> appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log file
> is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
> the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes with
> it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
> work either. I get an error message that says it can't
> find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
> system that had the log file path stored pointed to
> another drive). Any help is appreciated.
> Thanks
|||If sp_attach_single_file doesn't work then see
http://www.nigelrivett.net/RecoverCorruptDatabase.html
"Steve" wrote:
> I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
> transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've tried
> creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
> Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting the
> database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
> Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
> appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log file
> is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
> the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes with
> it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
> work either. I get an error message that says it can't
> find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
> system that had the log file path stored pointed to
> another drive). Any help is appreciated.
> Thanks
>
|||ok, that's what I meant, I didn't check the exact syntax,
but the "sp_attach_single_file_db" doesn't work... I don't
believe the .mdf data file is corrupted. All error
messages seem to point to the log file.
>--Original Message--
>Sounds like you have tried "sp_attach_single_file_db"
(although this isn't
>what you typed). This command to use to attach a
database that only has a
>the data file. I would review BOL and try this command
again. Also is it
>possible that you data file is corrupted?
>--
>----
--
>----
--
>-
>Need SQL Server Examples check out my website
>http://www.geocities.com/sqlserverexamples
>
>"Steve" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message[vbcol=seagreen]
>news:382a01c4a55e$ce066150$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
tried[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
file[vbcol=seagreen]
with
>
>.
>
|||Ok, I just tried your instructions and it didn't work.
The database is in emergency mode, and I can't see any of
the tables, and when I try to setup a dts, I get an error
saying that it can't initialize the database.
[vbcol=seagreen]
>--Original Message--
>If sp_attach_single_file doesn't work then see
>http://www.nigelrivett.net/RecoverCorruptDatabase.html
>"Steve" wrote:
tried[vbcol=seagreen]
SQL[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
file[vbcol=seagreen]
with
>.
>
transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've tried
creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting the
database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log file
is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes with
it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
work either. I get an error message that says it can't
find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
system that had the log file path stored pointed to
another drive). Any help is appreciated.
Thanks
Sounds like you have tried "sp_attach_single_file_db" (although this isn't
what you typed). This command to use to attach a database that only has a
the data file. I would review BOL and try this command again. Also is it
possible that you data file is corrupted?
----
-
Need SQL Server Examples check out my website
http://www.geocities.com/sqlserverexamples
"Steve" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:382a01c4a55e$ce066150$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
> transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've tried
> creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
> Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting the
> database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
> Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
> appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log file
> is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
> the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes with
> it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
> work either. I get an error message that says it can't
> find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
> system that had the log file path stored pointed to
> another drive). Any help is appreciated.
> Thanks
|||If sp_attach_single_file doesn't work then see
http://www.nigelrivett.net/RecoverCorruptDatabase.html
"Steve" wrote:
> I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
> transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've tried
> creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
> Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting the
> database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
> Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
> appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log file
> is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
> the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes with
> it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
> work either. I get an error message that says it can't
> find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
> system that had the log file path stored pointed to
> another drive). Any help is appreciated.
> Thanks
>
|||ok, that's what I meant, I didn't check the exact syntax,
but the "sp_attach_single_file_db" doesn't work... I don't
believe the .mdf data file is corrupted. All error
messages seem to point to the log file.
>--Original Message--
>Sounds like you have tried "sp_attach_single_file_db"
(although this isn't
>what you typed). This command to use to attach a
database that only has a
>the data file. I would review BOL and try this command
again. Also is it
>possible that you data file is corrupted?
>--
>----
--
>----
--
>-
>Need SQL Server Examples check out my website
>http://www.geocities.com/sqlserverexamples
>
>"Steve" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message[vbcol=seagreen]
>news:382a01c4a55e$ce066150$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
tried[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
file[vbcol=seagreen]
with
>
>.
>
|||Ok, I just tried your instructions and it didn't work.
The database is in emergency mode, and I can't see any of
the tables, and when I try to setup a dts, I get an error
saying that it can't initialize the database.
[vbcol=seagreen]
>--Original Message--
>If sp_attach_single_file doesn't work then see
>http://www.nigelrivett.net/RecoverCorruptDatabase.html
>"Steve" wrote:
tried[vbcol=seagreen]
SQL[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
file[vbcol=seagreen]
with
>.
>
Rebuild .LDF File
I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've tried
creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting the
database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log file
is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes with
it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
work either. I get an error message that says it can't
find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
system that had the log file path stored pointed to
another drive). Any help is appreciated.
ThanksSounds like you have tried "sp_attach_single_file_db" (although this isn't
what you typed). This command to use to attach a database that only has a
the data file. I would review BOL and try this command again. Also is it
possible that you data file is corrupted?
--
----
----
-
Need SQL Server Examples check out my website
http://www.geocities.com/sqlserverexamples
"Steve" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:382a01c4a55e$ce066150$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
> transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've tried
> creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
> Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting the
> database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
> Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
> appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log file
> is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
> the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes with
> it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
> work either. I get an error message that says it can't
> find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
> system that had the log file path stored pointed to
> another drive). Any help is appreciated.
> Thanks|||If sp_attach_single_file doesn't work then see
http://www.nigelrivett.net/RecoverCorruptDatabase.html
"Steve" wrote:
> I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
> transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've tried
> creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
> Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting the
> database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
> Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
> appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log file
> is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
> the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes with
> it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
> work either. I get an error message that says it can't
> find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
> system that had the log file path stored pointed to
> another drive). Any help is appreciated.
> Thanks
>|||ok, that's what I meant, I didn't check the exact syntax,
but the "sp_attach_single_file_db" doesn't work... I don't
believe the .mdf data file is corrupted. All error
messages seem to point to the log file.
>--Original Message--
>Sounds like you have tried "sp_attach_single_file_db"
(although this isn't
>what you typed). This command to use to attach a
database that only has a
>the data file. I would review BOL and try this command
again. Also is it
>possible that you data file is corrupted?
>--
>----
--
>----
--
>-
>Need SQL Server Examples check out my website
>http://www.geocities.com/sqlserverexamples
>
>"Steve" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
>news:382a01c4a55e$ce066150$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
>> I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
>> transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've
tried
>> creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
>> Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting
the
>> database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
>> Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
>> appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log
file
>> is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
>> the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes
with
>> it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
>> work either. I get an error message that says it can't
>> find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
>> system that had the log file path stored pointed to
>> another drive). Any help is appreciated.
>> Thanks
>
>.
>|||Hi Steve.
I have a feeling that the reason it didn't work is because
you did not detatch the database first using sp_detach_db,
though that is just a gut feeling.
Unfortunatly now you have a problem, anyway you have three
choices
1. Use Nigels very interesting and funky method to restore
it
2. Restore it from backup
3. Have a pretend nervous breakdown, take down your pants
and run from the office (be it slowly) screaming (that
SHOULD stop your boss from shouting at you).
nb if you have the original database try it again either
back it up, or try an sp_detatch_db.
Peter
"There is no such thing as public opinion. There is only
published opinion."
Winston Churchill
>--Original Message--
>I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
>transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've
tried
>creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
>Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting
the
>database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
>Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
>appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log file
>is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
>the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes
with
>it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
>work either. I get an error message that says it can't
>find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
>system that had the log file path stored pointed to
>another drive). Any help is appreciated.
>Thanks
>.
>|||Ok, I just tried your instructions and it didn't work.
The database is in emergency mode, and I can't see any of
the tables, and when I try to setup a dts, I get an error
saying that it can't initialize the database.
>--Original Message--
>If sp_attach_single_file doesn't work then see
>http://www.nigelrivett.net/RecoverCorruptDatabase.html
>"Steve" wrote:
>> I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
>> transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've
tried
>> creating a new database with the same name, stopping
SQL
>> Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting
the
>> database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
>> Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
>> appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log
file
>> is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
>> the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes
with
>> it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
>> work either. I get an error message that says it can't
>> find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
>> system that had the log file path stored pointed to
>> another drive). Any help is appreciated.
>> Thanks
>.
>|||I'll buy that... I received the file from a client, who
probably just did a standard detach through EM. I'll
probably have to resort to trying to get a hold of
the .BAK file. However I might pull the 3rd suggestion
just for fun.
Thanks
>--Original Message--
>Hi Steve.
>I have a feeling that the reason it didn't work is
because
>you did not detatch the database first using
sp_detach_db,
>though that is just a gut feeling.
>Unfortunatly now you have a problem, anyway you have
three
>choices
>1. Use Nigels very interesting and funky method to
restore
>it
>2. Restore it from backup
>3. Have a pretend nervous breakdown, take down your pants
>and run from the office (be it slowly) screaming (that
>SHOULD stop your boss from shouting at you).
>nb if you have the original database try it again either
>back it up, or try an sp_detatch_db.
>Peter
>"There is no such thing as public opinion. There is only
>published opinion."
>Winston Churchill
>
>>--Original Message--
>>I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
>>transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've
>tried
>>creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
>>Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting
>the
>>database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
>>Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
>>appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log
file
>>is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
>>the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes
>with
>>it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
>>work either. I get an error message that says it can't
>>find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
>>system that had the log file path stored pointed to
>>another drive). Any help is appreciated.
>>Thanks
>>.
>.
>|||Other ways of stopping you boss from shouting at you
include superglue...
>--Original Message--
>I'll buy that... I received the file from a client, who
>probably just did a standard detach through EM. I'll
>probably have to resort to trying to get a hold of
>the .BAK file. However I might pull the 3rd suggestion
>just for fun.
>Thanks
>
>>--Original Message--
>>Hi Steve.
>>I have a feeling that the reason it didn't work is
>because
>>you did not detatch the database first using
>sp_detach_db,
>>though that is just a gut feeling.
>>Unfortunatly now you have a problem, anyway you have
>three
>>choices
>>1. Use Nigels very interesting and funky method to
>restore
>>it
>>2. Restore it from backup
>>3. Have a pretend nervous breakdown, take down your
pants
>>and run from the office (be it slowly) screaming (that
>>SHOULD stop your boss from shouting at you).
>>nb if you have the original database try it again either
>>back it up, or try an sp_detatch_db.
>>Peter
>>"There is no such thing as public opinion. There is only
>>published opinion."
>>Winston Churchill
>>
>>--Original Message--
>>I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
>>transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've
>>tried
>>creating a new database with the same name, stopping
SQL
>>Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting
>>the
>>database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
>>Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
>>appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log
>file
>>is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
>>the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes
>>with
>>it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
>>work either. I get an error message that says it can't
>>find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
>>system that had the log file path stored pointed to
>>another drive). Any help is appreciated.
>>Thanks
>>.
>>.
>.
>
transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've tried
creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting the
database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log file
is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes with
it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
work either. I get an error message that says it can't
find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
system that had the log file path stored pointed to
another drive). Any help is appreciated.
ThanksSounds like you have tried "sp_attach_single_file_db" (although this isn't
what you typed). This command to use to attach a database that only has a
the data file. I would review BOL and try this command again. Also is it
possible that you data file is corrupted?
--
----
----
-
Need SQL Server Examples check out my website
http://www.geocities.com/sqlserverexamples
"Steve" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:382a01c4a55e$ce066150$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
> transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've tried
> creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
> Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting the
> database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
> Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
> appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log file
> is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
> the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes with
> it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
> work either. I get an error message that says it can't
> find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
> system that had the log file path stored pointed to
> another drive). Any help is appreciated.
> Thanks|||If sp_attach_single_file doesn't work then see
http://www.nigelrivett.net/RecoverCorruptDatabase.html
"Steve" wrote:
> I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
> transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've tried
> creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
> Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting the
> database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
> Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
> appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log file
> is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
> the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes with
> it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
> work either. I get an error message that says it can't
> find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
> system that had the log file path stored pointed to
> another drive). Any help is appreciated.
> Thanks
>|||ok, that's what I meant, I didn't check the exact syntax,
but the "sp_attach_single_file_db" doesn't work... I don't
believe the .mdf data file is corrupted. All error
messages seem to point to the log file.
>--Original Message--
>Sounds like you have tried "sp_attach_single_file_db"
(although this isn't
>what you typed). This command to use to attach a
database that only has a
>the data file. I would review BOL and try this command
again. Also is it
>possible that you data file is corrupted?
>--
>----
--
>----
--
>-
>Need SQL Server Examples check out my website
>http://www.geocities.com/sqlserverexamples
>
>"Steve" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
>news:382a01c4a55e$ce066150$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
>> I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
>> transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've
tried
>> creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
>> Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting
the
>> database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
>> Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
>> appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log
file
>> is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
>> the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes
with
>> it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
>> work either. I get an error message that says it can't
>> find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
>> system that had the log file path stored pointed to
>> another drive). Any help is appreciated.
>> Thanks
>
>.
>|||Hi Steve.
I have a feeling that the reason it didn't work is because
you did not detatch the database first using sp_detach_db,
though that is just a gut feeling.
Unfortunatly now you have a problem, anyway you have three
choices
1. Use Nigels very interesting and funky method to restore
it
2. Restore it from backup
3. Have a pretend nervous breakdown, take down your pants
and run from the office (be it slowly) screaming (that
SHOULD stop your boss from shouting at you).
nb if you have the original database try it again either
back it up, or try an sp_detatch_db.
Peter
"There is no such thing as public opinion. There is only
published opinion."
Winston Churchill
>--Original Message--
>I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
>transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've
tried
>creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
>Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting
the
>database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
>Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
>appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log file
>is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
>the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes
with
>it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
>work either. I get an error message that says it can't
>find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
>system that had the log file path stored pointed to
>another drive). Any help is appreciated.
>Thanks
>.
>|||Ok, I just tried your instructions and it didn't work.
The database is in emergency mode, and I can't see any of
the tables, and when I try to setup a dts, I get an error
saying that it can't initialize the database.
>--Original Message--
>If sp_attach_single_file doesn't work then see
>http://www.nigelrivett.net/RecoverCorruptDatabase.html
>"Steve" wrote:
>> I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
>> transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've
tried
>> creating a new database with the same name, stopping
SQL
>> Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting
the
>> database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
>> Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
>> appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log
file
>> is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
>> the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes
with
>> it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
>> work either. I get an error message that says it can't
>> find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
>> system that had the log file path stored pointed to
>> another drive). Any help is appreciated.
>> Thanks
>.
>|||I'll buy that... I received the file from a client, who
probably just did a standard detach through EM. I'll
probably have to resort to trying to get a hold of
the .BAK file. However I might pull the 3rd suggestion
just for fun.
Thanks
>--Original Message--
>Hi Steve.
>I have a feeling that the reason it didn't work is
because
>you did not detatch the database first using
sp_detach_db,
>though that is just a gut feeling.
>Unfortunatly now you have a problem, anyway you have
three
>choices
>1. Use Nigels very interesting and funky method to
restore
>it
>2. Restore it from backup
>3. Have a pretend nervous breakdown, take down your pants
>and run from the office (be it slowly) screaming (that
>SHOULD stop your boss from shouting at you).
>nb if you have the original database try it again either
>back it up, or try an sp_detatch_db.
>Peter
>"There is no such thing as public opinion. There is only
>published opinion."
>Winston Churchill
>
>>--Original Message--
>>I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
>>transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've
>tried
>>creating a new database with the same name, stopping SQL
>>Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting
>the
>>database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
>>Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
>>appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log
file
>>is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
>>the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes
>with
>>it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
>>work either. I get an error message that says it can't
>>find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
>>system that had the log file path stored pointed to
>>another drive). Any help is appreciated.
>>Thanks
>>.
>.
>|||Other ways of stopping you boss from shouting at you
include superglue...
>--Original Message--
>I'll buy that... I received the file from a client, who
>probably just did a standard detach through EM. I'll
>probably have to resort to trying to get a hold of
>the .BAK file. However I might pull the 3rd suggestion
>just for fun.
>Thanks
>
>>--Original Message--
>>Hi Steve.
>>I have a feeling that the reason it didn't work is
>because
>>you did not detatch the database first using
>sp_detach_db,
>>though that is just a gut feeling.
>>Unfortunatly now you have a problem, anyway you have
>three
>>choices
>>1. Use Nigels very interesting and funky method to
>restore
>>it
>>2. Restore it from backup
>>3. Have a pretend nervous breakdown, take down your
pants
>>and run from the office (be it slowly) screaming (that
>>SHOULD stop your boss from shouting at you).
>>nb if you have the original database try it again either
>>back it up, or try an sp_detatch_db.
>>Peter
>>"There is no such thing as public opinion. There is only
>>published opinion."
>>Winston Churchill
>>
>>--Original Message--
>>I'm running SQL Server 2000, trying to rebuild a
>>transaction log since I only have an .MDF file. I've
>>tried
>>creating a new database with the same name, stopping
SQL
>>Server, then inserting the real data file, and setting
>>the
>>database to emergency mode, then running the DBBC
>>Rebuild_Log('dbname', 'c:\somepath') and that command
>>appears to execute ok in Query Analyzer, but the log
>file
>>is not created. Is there any other method for attaching
>>the .mdf when you don't have the valid .ldf that goes
>>with
>>it. (I've tried sp_attach_single_file) and that doesn't
>>work either. I get an error message that says it can't
>>find the log file (this db was pulled off of another
>>system that had the log file path stored pointed to
>>another drive). Any help is appreciated.
>>Thanks
>>.
>>.
>.
>
Friday, March 9, 2012
Reasons to restore individual file groups.
Hi,
I'm making the decision to not backup file groups and only backup databases (with backkup exec.
I don't see any reason I would have to resore individual file groups.
Does anyone know why I should backup file groups or in what situation I would need to restore individual file groups?Dont know your situation. If a user drops a table(which
typically the cant) you could restore it by itself if its
in its own filegroup.
>--Original Message--
>Hi,
>I'm making the decision to not backup file groups and
only backup databases (with backkup exec.)
>I don't see any reason I would have to resore individual
file groups.
>Does anyone know why I should backup file groups or in
what situation I would need to restore individual file
groups?
>.
>|||Chris,
I assume that you mean that the filegroup restore would help to restore only
that table to an earlier point in time? That is not possible as when you
restore a filegroup, you also have to apply all subsequent transaction log
backups.
However, I should hasten to add, in SQL2K, you can do a PARTIAL restore into
a new database and move that table to the production database. There are
restriction, however, like the primary filegroup has top be part of the
backup.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at:
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"chris" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:b15301c3ecc9$e7651950$a101280a@.phx.gbl...
> Dont know your situation. If a user drops a table(which
> typically the cant) you could restore it by itself if its
> in its own filegroup.
>
> >--Original Message--
> >Hi,
> >I'm making the decision to not backup file groups and
> only backup databases (with backkup exec.)
> >I don't see any reason I would have to resore individual
> file groups.
> >Does anyone know why I should backup file groups or in
> what situation I would need to restore individual file
> groups?
> >.
> >|||Mannie,
The way I look at filegroup backup and restore is that I prefer to avoid it
if I can. If I have a database too large to handle with "regular" backup
methods, then I consider it. Just the fact that your database is toast if
you are missing one log backup taken after the filegroup you have restore
feel a bit scary to me.
I prefer to keep things as simple as possible. You can still use filegroups
and even do filegroup restore from a full backup (possibly using the PARTIAL
option of applicable).
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at:
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"mannie" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:53DEF63A-8C4A-45A9-A48A-88A19688217D@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I'm making the decision to not backup file groups and only backup
databases (with backkup exec.)
> I don't see any reason I would have to resore individual file groups.
> Does anyone know why I should backup file groups or in what situation I
would need to restore individual file groups?
I'm making the decision to not backup file groups and only backup databases (with backkup exec.
I don't see any reason I would have to resore individual file groups.
Does anyone know why I should backup file groups or in what situation I would need to restore individual file groups?Dont know your situation. If a user drops a table(which
typically the cant) you could restore it by itself if its
in its own filegroup.
>--Original Message--
>Hi,
>I'm making the decision to not backup file groups and
only backup databases (with backkup exec.)
>I don't see any reason I would have to resore individual
file groups.
>Does anyone know why I should backup file groups or in
what situation I would need to restore individual file
groups?
>.
>|||Chris,
I assume that you mean that the filegroup restore would help to restore only
that table to an earlier point in time? That is not possible as when you
restore a filegroup, you also have to apply all subsequent transaction log
backups.
However, I should hasten to add, in SQL2K, you can do a PARTIAL restore into
a new database and move that table to the production database. There are
restriction, however, like the primary filegroup has top be part of the
backup.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at:
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"chris" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:b15301c3ecc9$e7651950$a101280a@.phx.gbl...
> Dont know your situation. If a user drops a table(which
> typically the cant) you could restore it by itself if its
> in its own filegroup.
>
> >--Original Message--
> >Hi,
> >I'm making the decision to not backup file groups and
> only backup databases (with backkup exec.)
> >I don't see any reason I would have to resore individual
> file groups.
> >Does anyone know why I should backup file groups or in
> what situation I would need to restore individual file
> groups?
> >.
> >|||Mannie,
The way I look at filegroup backup and restore is that I prefer to avoid it
if I can. If I have a database too large to handle with "regular" backup
methods, then I consider it. Just the fact that your database is toast if
you are missing one log backup taken after the filegroup you have restore
feel a bit scary to me.
I prefer to keep things as simple as possible. You can still use filegroups
and even do filegroup restore from a full backup (possibly using the PARTIAL
option of applicable).
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at:
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"mannie" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:53DEF63A-8C4A-45A9-A48A-88A19688217D@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I'm making the decision to not backup file groups and only backup
databases (with backkup exec.)
> I don't see any reason I would have to resore individual file groups.
> Does anyone know why I should backup file groups or in what situation I
would need to restore individual file groups?
Reasons to restore individual file groups.
Hi,
I'm making the decision to not backup file groups and only backup databases
(with backkup exec.)
I don't see any reason I would have to resore individual file groups.
Does anyone know why I should backup file groups or in what situation I woul
d need to restore individual file groups?Mannie,
The way I look at filegroup backup and restore is that I prefer to avoid it
if I can. If I have a database too large to handle with "regular" backup
methods, then I consider it. Just the fact that your database is toast if
you are missing one log backup taken after the filegroup you have restore
feel a bit scary to me.
I prefer to keep things as simple as possible. You can still use filegroups
and even do filegroup restore from a full backup (possibly using the PARTIAL
option of applicable).
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at:
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=...ublic.sqlserver
"mannie" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:53DEF63A-8C4A-45A9-A48A-88A19688217D@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I'm making the decision to not backup file groups and only backup
databases (with backkup exec.)
> I don't see any reason I would have to resore individual file groups.
> Does anyone know why I should backup file groups or in what situation I
would need to restore individual file groups?
I'm making the decision to not backup file groups and only backup databases
(with backkup exec.)
I don't see any reason I would have to resore individual file groups.
Does anyone know why I should backup file groups or in what situation I woul
d need to restore individual file groups?Mannie,
The way I look at filegroup backup and restore is that I prefer to avoid it
if I can. If I have a database too large to handle with "regular" backup
methods, then I consider it. Just the fact that your database is toast if
you are missing one log backup taken after the filegroup you have restore
feel a bit scary to me.
I prefer to keep things as simple as possible. You can still use filegroups
and even do filegroup restore from a full backup (possibly using the PARTIAL
option of applicable).
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at:
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=...ublic.sqlserver
"mannie" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:53DEF63A-8C4A-45A9-A48A-88A19688217D@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I'm making the decision to not backup file groups and only backup
databases (with backkup exec.)
> I don't see any reason I would have to resore individual file groups.
> Does anyone know why I should backup file groups or in what situation I
would need to restore individual file groups?
Reasonable size of rdl file?
I'm working with a report that will produce 5 printed pages with key data
for a company. Each page will contain from 3 to 12 diagrams, there will be
39 diagrams totally in the rdl file. Plus some text boxes etc.
Each diagram has a dataset, plus some support datasets. Totally about 45
datasets (all using stored procedures).
I currently have 15 diagrams, and the rdl file is 140kB.
Am I stretching it? Experiences?
More detailed information:
The reason for keeping it in one rdl file is that a scheduled data driven
subscription will produce one PDF file per department (about 100
departments). The PDF file will be send to a printing shop which then will
mail the papers to each department. Each PDF file has 5 A3 pages with the
diagrams.
Keeping it in one RDL file allow for me to have one subscription.
Also, I have text boxes with values for colors for diagram bars etc (I pick
the values for the diagrams from the text boxes using an expression). When
people will start fiddling with changing colors, I can do it in one place,
instead of setting it in all 39 diagrams.
(I want to keep the work in Report Designer as much as possible. Even if I
can edit the RDL file, I don't want that the customer need to do this then
the project is rolled out and I'm out of here... :-). )
TIA
Tibor Karaszi
SQL Server MVPUndo/Redo in Report Designer is somewhat memory intensive. You may find that
you need to restart Report Designer if you use this feature extensively
during a single editing session. Another aspect is that very large RDLs,
especially those that contain a large number of images, can impact the
Report Designer's editing experience. In general, Report Designer should be
able handle this report.
--
Bruce Johnson [MSFT]
Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:eDPik7ymEHA.3944@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I'm working with a report that will produce 5 printed pages with key data
> for a company. Each page will contain from 3 to 12 diagrams, there will be
> 39 diagrams totally in the rdl file. Plus some text boxes etc.
> Each diagram has a dataset, plus some support datasets. Totally about 45
> datasets (all using stored procedures).
> I currently have 15 diagrams, and the rdl file is 140kB.
> Am I stretching it? Experiences?
>
> More detailed information:
> The reason for keeping it in one rdl file is that a scheduled data driven
> subscription will produce one PDF file per department (about 100
> departments). The PDF file will be send to a printing shop which then will
> mail the papers to each department. Each PDF file has 5 A3 pages with the
> diagrams.
> Keeping it in one RDL file allow for me to have one subscription.
> Also, I have text boxes with values for colors for diagram bars etc (I
pick
> the values for the diagrams from the text boxes using an expression). When
> people will start fiddling with changing colors, I can do it in one place,
> instead of setting it in all 39 diagrams.
> (I want to keep the work in Report Designer as much as possible. Even if I
> can edit the RDL file, I don't want that the customer need to do this then
> the project is rolled out and I'm out of here... :-). )
> TIA
> Tibor Karaszi
> SQL Server MVP
>|||OK, sounds good. Good tips. I don't use much UNDO/REDO in the first place, at least not at this
stage. :-)
One thing I do is to copy a whole measurement (three diagrams plus a few text boxes) and then start
work on the new sets of diagrams. This has worked fine so far, and I understand if RD becomes a bit
sluggish. So far I haven't noticed any problems.
I'd just hate to be on the last sets of diagram and I'm going beyond some boundary and RD or RS
comes crashing on me. Even with frequent backups it will take a little while to recover from such,
and if necessary I would then prefer doing it right from the beginning.
Thanks Bruce!
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Bruce Johnson [MSFT]" <brucejoh@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:eCj97r0mEHA.596@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Undo/Redo in Report Designer is somewhat memory intensive. You may find that
> you need to restart Report Designer if you use this feature extensively
> during a single editing session. Another aspect is that very large RDLs,
> especially those that contain a large number of images, can impact the
> Report Designer's editing experience. In general, Report Designer should be
> able handle this report.
> --
> Bruce Johnson [MSFT]
> Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
> message news:eDPik7ymEHA.3944@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> I'm working with a report that will produce 5 printed pages with key data
>> for a company. Each page will contain from 3 to 12 diagrams, there will be
>> 39 diagrams totally in the rdl file. Plus some text boxes etc.
>> Each diagram has a dataset, plus some support datasets. Totally about 45
>> datasets (all using stored procedures).
>> I currently have 15 diagrams, and the rdl file is 140kB.
>> Am I stretching it? Experiences?
>>
>> More detailed information:
>> The reason for keeping it in one rdl file is that a scheduled data driven
>> subscription will produce one PDF file per department (about 100
>> departments). The PDF file will be send to a printing shop which then will
>> mail the papers to each department. Each PDF file has 5 A3 pages with the
>> diagrams.
>> Keeping it in one RDL file allow for me to have one subscription.
>> Also, I have text boxes with values for colors for diagram bars etc (I
> pick
>> the values for the diagrams from the text boxes using an expression). When
>> people will start fiddling with changing colors, I can do it in one place,
>> instead of setting it in all 39 diagrams.
>> (I want to keep the work in Report Designer as much as possible. Even if I
>> can edit the RDL file, I don't want that the customer need to do this then
>> the project is rolled out and I'm out of here... :-). )
>> TIA
>> Tibor Karaszi
>> SQL Server MVP
>>
>|||140 KB is certainly reasonable.
BTW: IIS 6.0 has a security restriction of a default 4 MB file
upload/download limit. This is due to a buffering restriction implemented in
IIS 6.0 (AspMaxRequestEntityAllowed setting in MetaBase.xml). Therefore, if
RDL files get larger than 4 MB, you might run into an issue when uploading
them on the report server.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:eDPik7ymEHA.3944@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I'm working with a report that will produce 5 printed pages with key data
> for a company. Each page will contain from 3 to 12 diagrams, there will be
> 39 diagrams totally in the rdl file. Plus some text boxes etc.
> Each diagram has a dataset, plus some support datasets. Totally about 45
> datasets (all using stored procedures).
> I currently have 15 diagrams, and the rdl file is 140kB.
> Am I stretching it? Experiences?
>
> More detailed information:
> The reason for keeping it in one rdl file is that a scheduled data driven
> subscription will produce one PDF file per department (about 100
> departments). The PDF file will be send to a printing shop which then will
> mail the papers to each department. Each PDF file has 5 A3 pages with the
> diagrams.
> Keeping it in one RDL file allow for me to have one subscription.
> Also, I have text boxes with values for colors for diagram bars etc (I
pick
> the values for the diagrams from the text boxes using an expression). When
> people will start fiddling with changing colors, I can do it in one place,
> instead of setting it in all 39 diagrams.
> (I want to keep the work in Report Designer as much as possible. Even if I
> can edit the RDL file, I don't want that the customer need to do this then
> the project is rolled out and I'm out of here... :-). )
> TIA
> Tibor Karaszi
> SQL Server MVP
>|||Assuming the size of the file is roughly proportional to what I have now, I will probably end up
with a 0.5 MB file after adding the rest of the diagrams and some fluff. Even with lots of fluff, I
will most probably not go over 0.6-0.7 MB. Seems I have some margin, then.
And thanks for the tip about IIS size restriction, good to know if I happen to run into this at some
point. Not something I'd find easily myself. :-)
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Robert Bruckner [MSFT]" <robruc@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:u8LLCp1mEHA.2076@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> 140 KB is certainly reasonable.
> BTW: IIS 6.0 has a security restriction of a default 4 MB file
> upload/download limit. This is due to a buffering restriction implemented in
> IIS 6.0 (AspMaxRequestEntityAllowed setting in MetaBase.xml). Therefore, if
> RDL files get larger than 4 MB, you might run into an issue when uploading
> them on the report server.
> --
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
> message news:eDPik7ymEHA.3944@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> I'm working with a report that will produce 5 printed pages with key data
>> for a company. Each page will contain from 3 to 12 diagrams, there will be
>> 39 diagrams totally in the rdl file. Plus some text boxes etc.
>> Each diagram has a dataset, plus some support datasets. Totally about 45
>> datasets (all using stored procedures).
>> I currently have 15 diagrams, and the rdl file is 140kB.
>> Am I stretching it? Experiences?
>>
>> More detailed information:
>> The reason for keeping it in one rdl file is that a scheduled data driven
>> subscription will produce one PDF file per department (about 100
>> departments). The PDF file will be send to a printing shop which then will
>> mail the papers to each department. Each PDF file has 5 A3 pages with the
>> diagrams.
>> Keeping it in one RDL file allow for me to have one subscription.
>> Also, I have text boxes with values for colors for diagram bars etc (I
> pick
>> the values for the diagrams from the text boxes using an expression). When
>> people will start fiddling with changing colors, I can do it in one place,
>> instead of setting it in all 39 diagrams.
>> (I want to keep the work in Report Designer as much as possible. Even if I
>> can edit the RDL file, I don't want that the customer need to do this then
>> the project is rolled out and I'm out of here... :-). )
>> TIA
>> Tibor Karaszi
>> SQL Server MVP
>>
>|||Just as an FYI:
The rdl file ended up in size 330kB. RD was sluggish but worked. Howeverm
the data-driven subscription did not work. I don't have exact error message
here, but the service logged error messages about memory allocation. The
service terminated. I suspect this was in the PDF rendering (which worked
OK, but was slow both in VS and RM).
So I splitted the report up in 5 files (one per printed page) and it work
fine now. The job finished (for 37 PDF files) in about 5-7 minutes. So, I
now have 5 such jobs, one for each printed file.
Tibor
"Robert Bruckner [MSFT]" <robruc@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:u8LLCp1mEHA.2076@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> 140 KB is certainly reasonable.
> BTW: IIS 6.0 has a security restriction of a default 4 MB file
> upload/download limit. This is due to a buffering restriction implemented
in
> IIS 6.0 (AspMaxRequestEntityAllowed setting in MetaBase.xml). Therefore,
if
> RDL files get larger than 4 MB, you might run into an issue when uploading
> them on the report server.
> --
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
in
> message news:eDPik7ymEHA.3944@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I'm working with a report that will produce 5 printed pages with key
data
> > for a company. Each page will contain from 3 to 12 diagrams, there will
be
> > 39 diagrams totally in the rdl file. Plus some text boxes etc.
> > Each diagram has a dataset, plus some support datasets. Totally about 45
> > datasets (all using stored procedures).
> >
> > I currently have 15 diagrams, and the rdl file is 140kB.
> >
> > Am I stretching it? Experiences?
> >
> >
> > More detailed information:
> > The reason for keeping it in one rdl file is that a scheduled data
driven
> > subscription will produce one PDF file per department (about 100
> > departments). The PDF file will be send to a printing shop which then
will
> > mail the papers to each department. Each PDF file has 5 A3 pages with
the
> > diagrams.
> >
> > Keeping it in one RDL file allow for me to have one subscription.
> >
> > Also, I have text boxes with values for colors for diagram bars etc (I
> pick
> > the values for the diagrams from the text boxes using an expression).
When
> > people will start fiddling with changing colors, I can do it in one
place,
> > instead of setting it in all 39 diagrams.
> >
> > (I want to keep the work in Report Designer as much as possible. Even if
I
> > can edit the RDL file, I don't want that the customer need to do this
then
> > the project is rolled out and I'm out of here... :-). )
> >
> > TIA
> > Tibor Karaszi
> > SQL Server MVP
> >
> >
>
for a company. Each page will contain from 3 to 12 diagrams, there will be
39 diagrams totally in the rdl file. Plus some text boxes etc.
Each diagram has a dataset, plus some support datasets. Totally about 45
datasets (all using stored procedures).
I currently have 15 diagrams, and the rdl file is 140kB.
Am I stretching it? Experiences?
More detailed information:
The reason for keeping it in one rdl file is that a scheduled data driven
subscription will produce one PDF file per department (about 100
departments). The PDF file will be send to a printing shop which then will
mail the papers to each department. Each PDF file has 5 A3 pages with the
diagrams.
Keeping it in one RDL file allow for me to have one subscription.
Also, I have text boxes with values for colors for diagram bars etc (I pick
the values for the diagrams from the text boxes using an expression). When
people will start fiddling with changing colors, I can do it in one place,
instead of setting it in all 39 diagrams.
(I want to keep the work in Report Designer as much as possible. Even if I
can edit the RDL file, I don't want that the customer need to do this then
the project is rolled out and I'm out of here... :-). )
TIA
Tibor Karaszi
SQL Server MVPUndo/Redo in Report Designer is somewhat memory intensive. You may find that
you need to restart Report Designer if you use this feature extensively
during a single editing session. Another aspect is that very large RDLs,
especially those that contain a large number of images, can impact the
Report Designer's editing experience. In general, Report Designer should be
able handle this report.
--
Bruce Johnson [MSFT]
Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:eDPik7ymEHA.3944@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I'm working with a report that will produce 5 printed pages with key data
> for a company. Each page will contain from 3 to 12 diagrams, there will be
> 39 diagrams totally in the rdl file. Plus some text boxes etc.
> Each diagram has a dataset, plus some support datasets. Totally about 45
> datasets (all using stored procedures).
> I currently have 15 diagrams, and the rdl file is 140kB.
> Am I stretching it? Experiences?
>
> More detailed information:
> The reason for keeping it in one rdl file is that a scheduled data driven
> subscription will produce one PDF file per department (about 100
> departments). The PDF file will be send to a printing shop which then will
> mail the papers to each department. Each PDF file has 5 A3 pages with the
> diagrams.
> Keeping it in one RDL file allow for me to have one subscription.
> Also, I have text boxes with values for colors for diagram bars etc (I
pick
> the values for the diagrams from the text boxes using an expression). When
> people will start fiddling with changing colors, I can do it in one place,
> instead of setting it in all 39 diagrams.
> (I want to keep the work in Report Designer as much as possible. Even if I
> can edit the RDL file, I don't want that the customer need to do this then
> the project is rolled out and I'm out of here... :-). )
> TIA
> Tibor Karaszi
> SQL Server MVP
>|||OK, sounds good. Good tips. I don't use much UNDO/REDO in the first place, at least not at this
stage. :-)
One thing I do is to copy a whole measurement (three diagrams plus a few text boxes) and then start
work on the new sets of diagrams. This has worked fine so far, and I understand if RD becomes a bit
sluggish. So far I haven't noticed any problems.
I'd just hate to be on the last sets of diagram and I'm going beyond some boundary and RD or RS
comes crashing on me. Even with frequent backups it will take a little while to recover from such,
and if necessary I would then prefer doing it right from the beginning.
Thanks Bruce!
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Bruce Johnson [MSFT]" <brucejoh@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:eCj97r0mEHA.596@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Undo/Redo in Report Designer is somewhat memory intensive. You may find that
> you need to restart Report Designer if you use this feature extensively
> during a single editing session. Another aspect is that very large RDLs,
> especially those that contain a large number of images, can impact the
> Report Designer's editing experience. In general, Report Designer should be
> able handle this report.
> --
> Bruce Johnson [MSFT]
> Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
> message news:eDPik7ymEHA.3944@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> I'm working with a report that will produce 5 printed pages with key data
>> for a company. Each page will contain from 3 to 12 diagrams, there will be
>> 39 diagrams totally in the rdl file. Plus some text boxes etc.
>> Each diagram has a dataset, plus some support datasets. Totally about 45
>> datasets (all using stored procedures).
>> I currently have 15 diagrams, and the rdl file is 140kB.
>> Am I stretching it? Experiences?
>>
>> More detailed information:
>> The reason for keeping it in one rdl file is that a scheduled data driven
>> subscription will produce one PDF file per department (about 100
>> departments). The PDF file will be send to a printing shop which then will
>> mail the papers to each department. Each PDF file has 5 A3 pages with the
>> diagrams.
>> Keeping it in one RDL file allow for me to have one subscription.
>> Also, I have text boxes with values for colors for diagram bars etc (I
> pick
>> the values for the diagrams from the text boxes using an expression). When
>> people will start fiddling with changing colors, I can do it in one place,
>> instead of setting it in all 39 diagrams.
>> (I want to keep the work in Report Designer as much as possible. Even if I
>> can edit the RDL file, I don't want that the customer need to do this then
>> the project is rolled out and I'm out of here... :-). )
>> TIA
>> Tibor Karaszi
>> SQL Server MVP
>>
>|||140 KB is certainly reasonable.
BTW: IIS 6.0 has a security restriction of a default 4 MB file
upload/download limit. This is due to a buffering restriction implemented in
IIS 6.0 (AspMaxRequestEntityAllowed setting in MetaBase.xml). Therefore, if
RDL files get larger than 4 MB, you might run into an issue when uploading
them on the report server.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:eDPik7ymEHA.3944@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I'm working with a report that will produce 5 printed pages with key data
> for a company. Each page will contain from 3 to 12 diagrams, there will be
> 39 diagrams totally in the rdl file. Plus some text boxes etc.
> Each diagram has a dataset, plus some support datasets. Totally about 45
> datasets (all using stored procedures).
> I currently have 15 diagrams, and the rdl file is 140kB.
> Am I stretching it? Experiences?
>
> More detailed information:
> The reason for keeping it in one rdl file is that a scheduled data driven
> subscription will produce one PDF file per department (about 100
> departments). The PDF file will be send to a printing shop which then will
> mail the papers to each department. Each PDF file has 5 A3 pages with the
> diagrams.
> Keeping it in one RDL file allow for me to have one subscription.
> Also, I have text boxes with values for colors for diagram bars etc (I
pick
> the values for the diagrams from the text boxes using an expression). When
> people will start fiddling with changing colors, I can do it in one place,
> instead of setting it in all 39 diagrams.
> (I want to keep the work in Report Designer as much as possible. Even if I
> can edit the RDL file, I don't want that the customer need to do this then
> the project is rolled out and I'm out of here... :-). )
> TIA
> Tibor Karaszi
> SQL Server MVP
>|||Assuming the size of the file is roughly proportional to what I have now, I will probably end up
with a 0.5 MB file after adding the rest of the diagrams and some fluff. Even with lots of fluff, I
will most probably not go over 0.6-0.7 MB. Seems I have some margin, then.
And thanks for the tip about IIS size restriction, good to know if I happen to run into this at some
point. Not something I'd find easily myself. :-)
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Robert Bruckner [MSFT]" <robruc@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:u8LLCp1mEHA.2076@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> 140 KB is certainly reasonable.
> BTW: IIS 6.0 has a security restriction of a default 4 MB file
> upload/download limit. This is due to a buffering restriction implemented in
> IIS 6.0 (AspMaxRequestEntityAllowed setting in MetaBase.xml). Therefore, if
> RDL files get larger than 4 MB, you might run into an issue when uploading
> them on the report server.
> --
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
> message news:eDPik7ymEHA.3944@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> I'm working with a report that will produce 5 printed pages with key data
>> for a company. Each page will contain from 3 to 12 diagrams, there will be
>> 39 diagrams totally in the rdl file. Plus some text boxes etc.
>> Each diagram has a dataset, plus some support datasets. Totally about 45
>> datasets (all using stored procedures).
>> I currently have 15 diagrams, and the rdl file is 140kB.
>> Am I stretching it? Experiences?
>>
>> More detailed information:
>> The reason for keeping it in one rdl file is that a scheduled data driven
>> subscription will produce one PDF file per department (about 100
>> departments). The PDF file will be send to a printing shop which then will
>> mail the papers to each department. Each PDF file has 5 A3 pages with the
>> diagrams.
>> Keeping it in one RDL file allow for me to have one subscription.
>> Also, I have text boxes with values for colors for diagram bars etc (I
> pick
>> the values for the diagrams from the text boxes using an expression). When
>> people will start fiddling with changing colors, I can do it in one place,
>> instead of setting it in all 39 diagrams.
>> (I want to keep the work in Report Designer as much as possible. Even if I
>> can edit the RDL file, I don't want that the customer need to do this then
>> the project is rolled out and I'm out of here... :-). )
>> TIA
>> Tibor Karaszi
>> SQL Server MVP
>>
>|||Just as an FYI:
The rdl file ended up in size 330kB. RD was sluggish but worked. Howeverm
the data-driven subscription did not work. I don't have exact error message
here, but the service logged error messages about memory allocation. The
service terminated. I suspect this was in the PDF rendering (which worked
OK, but was slow both in VS and RM).
So I splitted the report up in 5 files (one per printed page) and it work
fine now. The job finished (for 37 PDF files) in about 5-7 minutes. So, I
now have 5 such jobs, one for each printed file.
Tibor
"Robert Bruckner [MSFT]" <robruc@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:u8LLCp1mEHA.2076@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> 140 KB is certainly reasonable.
> BTW: IIS 6.0 has a security restriction of a default 4 MB file
> upload/download limit. This is due to a buffering restriction implemented
in
> IIS 6.0 (AspMaxRequestEntityAllowed setting in MetaBase.xml). Therefore,
if
> RDL files get larger than 4 MB, you might run into an issue when uploading
> them on the report server.
> --
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
in
> message news:eDPik7ymEHA.3944@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I'm working with a report that will produce 5 printed pages with key
data
> > for a company. Each page will contain from 3 to 12 diagrams, there will
be
> > 39 diagrams totally in the rdl file. Plus some text boxes etc.
> > Each diagram has a dataset, plus some support datasets. Totally about 45
> > datasets (all using stored procedures).
> >
> > I currently have 15 diagrams, and the rdl file is 140kB.
> >
> > Am I stretching it? Experiences?
> >
> >
> > More detailed information:
> > The reason for keeping it in one rdl file is that a scheduled data
driven
> > subscription will produce one PDF file per department (about 100
> > departments). The PDF file will be send to a printing shop which then
will
> > mail the papers to each department. Each PDF file has 5 A3 pages with
the
> > diagrams.
> >
> > Keeping it in one RDL file allow for me to have one subscription.
> >
> > Also, I have text boxes with values for colors for diagram bars etc (I
> pick
> > the values for the diagrams from the text boxes using an expression).
When
> > people will start fiddling with changing colors, I can do it in one
place,
> > instead of setting it in all 39 diagrams.
> >
> > (I want to keep the work in Report Designer as much as possible. Even if
I
> > can edit the RDL file, I don't want that the customer need to do this
then
> > the project is rolled out and I'm out of here... :-). )
> >
> > TIA
> > Tibor Karaszi
> > SQL Server MVP
> >
> >
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)