Rebuild fulltext

Hi!
I have a problem with a 4-node cluster. It was a 2-node sql2k on w2k.
We installed new hw with w2k3 and installed the old instances there
(restore). After that we added 2 more w2k3 nodes and installed the
original 2 instances on all 4 nodes. We also set up 2 new instances to
be a total of 4.
The problem is that when we put in the new hw (node 3 and 4) we saw
that we lost the control of the fulltext resource on the first 2
instances. It started failing and then failback, sometimes it started,
sometimes not. This started before we actually joined node 3-4 to the
clustrer. Since we don't use fulltext we took away the resource from
the cluster on these 2 instances. On the new instances (3 and 4) there
has newer been a problem. All nodes can run all 4 instances. There is
no problem with any other resource.
I have seen kb 812666 and I think that I should try rebuildning
fulltext. I think it looks very complex, is there anyone that have
done this?
/Peter
Peter,
Yes, KB article 812666 "How to recover a failed full-text search resource on
a clustered instance of SQL Server 2000" at
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=812666 is complex, but since
you don't use the MSSearch (Fulltext ) service, and have already removed the
fulltext (Microsoft Search) service from the cluster resource, rebuilding
this service is not necessary/
Note, you can also post FTS related questions to the newsgroup:
microsoft.public.sqlserver.fulltext
Regards,
John
"Peter Lindberg" <peter.lindbergTAKE@.AWAYmartinsson.se> wrote in message
news:415bfda4.4507871@.msnews.microsoft.com...
> Hi!
> I have a problem with a 4-node cluster. It was a 2-node sql2k on w2k.
> We installed new hw with w2k3 and installed the old instances there
> (restore). After that we added 2 more w2k3 nodes and installed the
> original 2 instances on all 4 nodes. We also set up 2 new instances to
> be a total of 4.
> The problem is that when we put in the new hw (node 3 and 4) we saw
> that we lost the control of the fulltext resource on the first 2
> instances. It started failing and then failback, sometimes it started,
> sometimes not. This started before we actually joined node 3-4 to the
> clustrer. Since we don't use fulltext we took away the resource from
> the cluster on these 2 instances. On the new instances (3 and 4) there
> has newer been a problem. All nodes can run all 4 instances. There is
> no problem with any other resource.
> I have seen kb 812666 and I think that I should try rebuildning
> fulltext. I think it looks very complex, is there anyone that have
> done this?
> /Peter
|||John,
thanks for the reply. My intention is to get all 4 nodes equal setup.
We want to be able to run new databases where it's best suitet and
don't depend on differenses between instances. That's way I want to do
this. I have to set up my test environment so I can test it before I
go in the production.
Have you done this in a cluster?
/Peter
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 11:19:01 -0700, "John Kane" <jt-kane@.comcast.net>
wrotc:

>Peter,
>Yes, KB article 812666 "How to recover a failed full-text search resource on
>a clustered instance of SQL Server 2000" at
>http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=812666 is complex, but since
>you don't use the MSSearch (Fulltext ) service, and have already removed the
>fulltext (Microsoft Search) service from the cluster resource, rebuilding
>this service is not necessary/
>Note, you can also post FTS related questions to the newsgroup:
>microsoft.public.sqlserver.fulltext
>Regards,
>John
>
>
>"Peter Lindberg" <peter.lindbergTAKE@.AWAYmartinsson.se> wrote in message
>news:415bfda4.4507871@.msnews.microsoft.com...
>
|||You're welcome, Peter,
Unfortunately, I do not have a clustered environment to test this KB
article, as I have only one home server and a laptop... ;-(
If you do have a test clustered environment, even one with just two nodes,
I'd recommend that you test using that environment.
Regards,
John
"Peter Lindberg" <peter.lindbergTAKE@.AWAYmartinsson.se> wrote in message
news:415d70eb.31078308@.msnews.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> John,
> thanks for the reply. My intention is to get all 4 nodes equal setup.
> We want to be able to run new databases where it's best suitet and
> don't depend on differenses between instances. That's way I want to do
> this. I have to set up my test environment so I can test it before I
> go in the production.
> Have you done this in a cluster?
> /Peter
> On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 11:19:01 -0700, "John Kane" <jt-kane@.comcast.net>
> wrotc:
on[vbcol=seagreen]
since[vbcol=seagreen]
the
>
|||I'll definitive test it. It will be under vmware gsx.
/Peter
On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 10:57:02 -0700, "John Kane" <jt-kane@.comcast.net>
wrotc:

>You're welcome, Peter,
>Unfortunately, I do not have a clustered environment to test this KB
>article, as I have only one home server and a laptop... ;-(
>If you do have a test clustered environment, even one with just two nodes,
>I'd recommend that you test using that environment.
>Regards,
>John
>
>"Peter Lindberg" <peter.lindbergTAKE@.AWAYmartinsson.se> wrote in message
>news:415d70eb.31078308@.msnews.microsoft.com...
>on
>since
>the
>

Reattaching old database

I have just installed SQLExpress version 9.0.1399.

I was using an earlier version of the server before and backed up a copy of my mdf files for safety's sake. However when I now try and attach the old databases I get an error that the database files from the old non-release version (590) is not compatible.

Probably my own fault - the information was probably clearly on display deep in a file somewhere in the documentation (cough). However I would kind of like to get at the data in these files.

Is there any way of getting hold of an earlier version of SQLExpress which will handle these files? Or can they be opened in any other way?

The full error message I am getting is:

Database 'myCMS' cannot be upgraded because its non-release version (590) is not supported by this version of SQL Server. You cannot open a database that is incompatible with this version of sqlservr.exe. You must re-create the database. (Microsoft SQL Server, Error: 950)

I have searched around for more information and the advice seems to be that I should open the database in an older copy of SQLExpress, dump the data with BCP and recreate the database.

So now my question is, where can I find installation files for earlier versions of SQLExpress as I don't seem to have a copy of the original executable?

|||I am afraid these are no longer available, you might be able to get them by calling Customer Support Services but this will cost money

Realtive query cost in the execution plan

Hello everyone!
I have a general question about measuring query cost while tuning
queries. If I put both queries (the old one and the modified one) into
the same batch, can I then use the query cost (relative to the batch)
percentage number as a reliable way of measuring whether the performance
has improved?
I would also appreciate any links to the good articles on this matter.
Thank you,
Igor
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.examnotes.net ***that's a good way to start - if it really unbalanced (e.g., version 1 is
90% of the total cost), then i've typically satisfied as to which is best.
however, i've found the most accurate way to measure it is to get the
actual timings over at least 10 runs. if it's a really long query, this
may not be totally feasible
e.g.
declare @.x datetime
set @.x = getdate()
-- run version 1
select datediff(ms, @.x, getdate()) as Version1_timing
set @.x = getdate()
-- run version 2
select datediff(ms, @.x, getdate()) as Version2_timing
mEmENT0m0RI wrote:
> Hello everyone!
> I have a general question about measuring query cost while tuning
> queries. If I put both queries (the old one and the modified one) into
> the same batch, can I then use the query cost (relative to the batch)
> percentage number as a reliable way of measuring whether the performance
> has improved?
> I would also appreciate any links to the good articles on this matter.
> Thank you,
> Igor
>
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.examnotes.net ***|||Trey,
Thanks for your reply.
How about measuring the absolute query cost? Let's say I've added some
indexes and want to see the performance difference?
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.examnotes.net ***|||by "absolute" do you mean what it actually uses rather than the estimate?
if so, run the queries again, but with the Show Execution Plan option
on. (CTRL-K is the shortcut).
this will show the actual query plan used - btw: you'll have to use this
option rather than the estimated query plan if temp tables are involved.
mEmENT0m0RI wrote:
> Trey,
> Thanks for your reply.
> How about measuring the absolute query cost? Let's say I've added some
> indexes and want to see the performance difference?
>
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.examnotes.net ***