Hello,
What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database: (1)
restore it from the backup, restore msdb, and then user databases or (2)
restore user databases, restore master, and then msdb.
I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
accessible?
Many thanks,
Pablo
Hi,
What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database?
This is the correct step:- Restore it from the backup (Master) , Restore
msdb, and then user databases
Have a look into steps (15 - 28) in the attached link.
http://www.dbarecovery.com/restoremasterdb.html
I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
accessible?
You have to restore the Master database and then the user databases.
Otherwise Master database restore will
overwrite the existing database entries.
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
news:OcAE63nREHA.3052@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database: (1)
> restore it from the backup, restore msdb, and then user databases or (2)
> restore user databases, restore master, and then msdb.
> I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
> accessible?
> --
> Many thanks,
> Pablo
|||Thanks, Hari.
Still, one thing remains unclear to me: what will happen when I restore
master then start the server and user databases aren't where they
supposed to be. Will the references to them in master be automatically
erased or will the databases be marked suspect? Will I have to drop the
suspect databases before restoring them or will I have to use WITH
REPLACE clause to force the restore over the existing (suspect) user
database?
Thanks,
Pablo
Hari wrote:
> Hi,
> What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database?
> This is the correct step:- Restore it from the backup (Master) , Restore
> msdb, and then user databases
> Have a look into steps (15 - 28) in the attached link.
> http://www.dbarecovery.com/restoremasterdb.html
> I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
> accessible?
> You have to restore the Master database and then the user databases.
> Otherwise Master database restore will
> overwrite the existing database entries.
> Thanks
> Hari
> MCDBA
>
> "msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
> news:OcAE63nREHA.3052@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
>
|||If SQL Server expects a databases's MDF file be in a place, and the file isn't there, you have a suspect
database. Drop it and do a regular restore.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
news:uLaYNSvREHA.3628@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks, Hari.
> Still, one thing remains unclear to me: what will happen when I restore
> master then start the server and user databases aren't where they
> supposed to be. Will the references to them in master be automatically
> erased or will the databases be marked suspect? Will I have to drop the
> suspect databases before restoring them or will I have to use WITH
> REPLACE clause to force the restore over the existing (suspect) user
> database?
> --
> Thanks,
> Pablo
> Hari wrote:
Showing posts with label restore. Show all posts
Showing posts with label restore. Show all posts
Monday, March 26, 2012
Rebuilt master, what's next?
Hello,
What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database: (1)
restore it from the backup, restore msdb, and then user databases or (2)
restore user databases, restore master, and then msdb.
I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
accessible?
--
Many thanks,
PabloHi,
What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database?
This is the correct step:- Restore it from the backup (Master) , Restore
msdb, and then user databases
Have a look into steps (15 - 28) in the attached link.
http://www.dbarecovery.com/restoremasterdb.html
I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
accessible?
You have to restore the Master database and then the user databases.
Otherwise Master database restore will
overwrite the existing database entries.
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
news:OcAE63nREHA.3052@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database: (1)
> restore it from the backup, restore msdb, and then user databases or (2)
> restore user databases, restore master, and then msdb.
> I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
> accessible?
> --
> Many thanks,
> Pablo|||Thanks, Hari.
Still, one thing remains unclear to me: what will happen when I restore
master then start the server and user databases aren't where they
supposed to be. Will the references to them in master be automatically
erased or will the databases be marked suspect? Will I have to drop the
suspect databases before restoring them or will I have to use WITH
REPLACE clause to force the restore over the existing (suspect) user
database?
--
Thanks,
Pablo
Hari wrote:
> Hi,
> What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database?
> This is the correct step:- Restore it from the backup (Master) , Restore
> msdb, and then user databases
> Have a look into steps (15 - 28) in the attached link.
> http://www.dbarecovery.com/restoremasterdb.html
> I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
> accessible?
> You have to restore the Master database and then the user databases.
> Otherwise Master database restore will
> overwrite the existing database entries.
> Thanks
> Hari
> MCDBA
>
> "msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
> news:OcAE63nREHA.3052@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>Hello,
>>What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database: (1)
>>restore it from the backup, restore msdb, and then user databases or (2)
>>restore user databases, restore master, and then msdb.
>>I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
>>accessible?
>>--
>>Many thanks,
>>Pablo
>
>|||If SQL Server expects a databases's MDF file be in a place, and the file isn't there, you have a suspect
database. Drop it and do a regular restore.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
news:uLaYNSvREHA.3628@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Thanks, Hari.
> Still, one thing remains unclear to me: what will happen when I restore
> master then start the server and user databases aren't where they
> supposed to be. Will the references to them in master be automatically
> erased or will the databases be marked suspect? Will I have to drop the
> suspect databases before restoring them or will I have to use WITH
> REPLACE clause to force the restore over the existing (suspect) user
> database?
> --
> Thanks,
> Pablo
> Hari wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database?
> >
> > This is the correct step:- Restore it from the backup (Master) , Restore
> > msdb, and then user databases
> >
> > Have a look into steps (15 - 28) in the attached link.
> >
> > http://www.dbarecovery.com/restoremasterdb.html
> >
> > I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
> > accessible?
> >
> > You have to restore the Master database and then the user databases.
> > Otherwise Master database restore will
> > overwrite the existing database entries.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Hari
> > MCDBA
> >
> >
> >
> > "msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
> > news:OcAE63nREHA.3052@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> >
> >>Hello,
> >>
> >>What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database: (1)
> >>restore it from the backup, restore msdb, and then user databases or (2)
> >>restore user databases, restore master, and then msdb.
> >>
> >>I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
> >>accessible?
> >>
> >>--
> >>Many thanks,
> >>Pablo
> >
> >
> >
What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database: (1)
restore it from the backup, restore msdb, and then user databases or (2)
restore user databases, restore master, and then msdb.
I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
accessible?
--
Many thanks,
PabloHi,
What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database?
This is the correct step:- Restore it from the backup (Master) , Restore
msdb, and then user databases
Have a look into steps (15 - 28) in the attached link.
http://www.dbarecovery.com/restoremasterdb.html
I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
accessible?
You have to restore the Master database and then the user databases.
Otherwise Master database restore will
overwrite the existing database entries.
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
news:OcAE63nREHA.3052@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database: (1)
> restore it from the backup, restore msdb, and then user databases or (2)
> restore user databases, restore master, and then msdb.
> I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
> accessible?
> --
> Many thanks,
> Pablo|||Thanks, Hari.
Still, one thing remains unclear to me: what will happen when I restore
master then start the server and user databases aren't where they
supposed to be. Will the references to them in master be automatically
erased or will the databases be marked suspect? Will I have to drop the
suspect databases before restoring them or will I have to use WITH
REPLACE clause to force the restore over the existing (suspect) user
database?
--
Thanks,
Pablo
Hari wrote:
> Hi,
> What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database?
> This is the correct step:- Restore it from the backup (Master) , Restore
> msdb, and then user databases
> Have a look into steps (15 - 28) in the attached link.
> http://www.dbarecovery.com/restoremasterdb.html
> I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
> accessible?
> You have to restore the Master database and then the user databases.
> Otherwise Master database restore will
> overwrite the existing database entries.
> Thanks
> Hari
> MCDBA
>
> "msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
> news:OcAE63nREHA.3052@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>Hello,
>>What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database: (1)
>>restore it from the backup, restore msdb, and then user databases or (2)
>>restore user databases, restore master, and then msdb.
>>I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
>>accessible?
>>--
>>Many thanks,
>>Pablo
>
>|||If SQL Server expects a databases's MDF file be in a place, and the file isn't there, you have a suspect
database. Drop it and do a regular restore.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
news:uLaYNSvREHA.3628@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Thanks, Hari.
> Still, one thing remains unclear to me: what will happen when I restore
> master then start the server and user databases aren't where they
> supposed to be. Will the references to them in master be automatically
> erased or will the databases be marked suspect? Will I have to drop the
> suspect databases before restoring them or will I have to use WITH
> REPLACE clause to force the restore over the existing (suspect) user
> database?
> --
> Thanks,
> Pablo
> Hari wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database?
> >
> > This is the correct step:- Restore it from the backup (Master) , Restore
> > msdb, and then user databases
> >
> > Have a look into steps (15 - 28) in the attached link.
> >
> > http://www.dbarecovery.com/restoremasterdb.html
> >
> > I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
> > accessible?
> >
> > You have to restore the Master database and then the user databases.
> > Otherwise Master database restore will
> > overwrite the existing database entries.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Hari
> > MCDBA
> >
> >
> >
> > "msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
> > news:OcAE63nREHA.3052@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> >
> >>Hello,
> >>
> >>What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database: (1)
> >>restore it from the backup, restore msdb, and then user databases or (2)
> >>restore user databases, restore master, and then msdb.
> >>
> >>I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
> >>accessible?
> >>
> >>--
> >>Many thanks,
> >>Pablo
> >
> >
> >
Rebuilt master, what's next?
Hello,
What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database: (1)
restore it from the backup, restore msdb, and then user databases or (2)
restore user databases, restore master, and then msdb.
I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
accessible?
Many thanks,
PabloHi,
What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database?
This is the correct step:- Restore it from the backup (Master) , Restore
msdb, and then user databases
Have a look into steps (15 - 28) in the attached link.
http://www.dbarecovery.com/restoremasterdb.html
I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
accessible?
You have to restore the Master database and then the user databases.
Otherwise Master database restore will
overwrite the existing database entries.
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
news:OcAE63nREHA.3052@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database: (1)
> restore it from the backup, restore msdb, and then user databases or (2)
> restore user databases, restore master, and then msdb.
> I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
> accessible?
> --
> Many thanks,
> Pablo|||Thanks, Hari.
Still, one thing remains unclear to me: what will happen when I restore
master then start the server and user databases aren't where they
supposed to be. Will the references to them in master be automatically
erased or will the databases be marked suspect? Will I have to drop the
suspect databases before restoring them or will I have to use WITH
REPLACE clause to force the restore over the existing (suspect) user
database?
Thanks,
Pablo
Hari wrote:
> Hi,
> What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database?
> This is the correct step:- Restore it from the backup (Master) , Restore
> msdb, and then user databases
> Have a look into steps (15 - 28) in the attached link.
> http://www.dbarecovery.com/restoremasterdb.html
> I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
> accessible?
> You have to restore the Master database and then the user databases.
> Otherwise Master database restore will
> overwrite the existing database entries.
> Thanks
> Hari
> MCDBA
>
> "msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
> news:OcAE63nREHA.3052@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
>
>|||If SQL Server expects a databases's MDF file be in a place, and the file isn
't there, you have a suspect
database. Drop it and do a regular restore.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
news:uLaYNSvREHA.3628@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks, Hari.
> Still, one thing remains unclear to me: what will happen when I restore
> master then start the server and user databases aren't where they
> supposed to be. Will the references to them in master be automatically
> erased or will the databases be marked suspect? Will I have to drop the
> suspect databases before restoring them or will I have to use WITH
> REPLACE clause to force the restore over the existing (suspect) user
> database?
> --
> Thanks,
> Pablo
> Hari wrote:
What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database: (1)
restore it from the backup, restore msdb, and then user databases or (2)
restore user databases, restore master, and then msdb.
I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
accessible?
Many thanks,
PabloHi,
What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database?
This is the correct step:- Restore it from the backup (Master) , Restore
msdb, and then user databases
Have a look into steps (15 - 28) in the attached link.
http://www.dbarecovery.com/restoremasterdb.html
I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
accessible?
You have to restore the Master database and then the user databases.
Otherwise Master database restore will
overwrite the existing database entries.
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
news:OcAE63nREHA.3052@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database: (1)
> restore it from the backup, restore msdb, and then user databases or (2)
> restore user databases, restore master, and then msdb.
> I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
> accessible?
> --
> Many thanks,
> Pablo|||Thanks, Hari.
Still, one thing remains unclear to me: what will happen when I restore
master then start the server and user databases aren't where they
supposed to be. Will the references to them in master be automatically
erased or will the databases be marked suspect? Will I have to drop the
suspect databases before restoring them or will I have to use WITH
REPLACE clause to force the restore over the existing (suspect) user
database?
Thanks,
Pablo
Hari wrote:
> Hi,
> What would be the way to go after rebuilding master database?
> This is the correct step:- Restore it from the backup (Master) , Restore
> msdb, and then user databases
> Have a look into steps (15 - 28) in the attached link.
> http://www.dbarecovery.com/restoremasterdb.html
> I mean, is it bad, when the master is restored w/o user databases being
> accessible?
> You have to restore the Master database and then the user databases.
> Otherwise Master database restore will
> overwrite the existing database entries.
> Thanks
> Hari
> MCDBA
>
> "msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
> news:OcAE63nREHA.3052@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
>
>|||If SQL Server expects a databases's MDF file be in a place, and the file isn
't there, you have a suspect
database. Drop it and do a regular restore.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"msnews.microsoft.com" <pablo@.this_isnt_my_mail.aaa> wrote in message
news:uLaYNSvREHA.3628@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks, Hari.
> Still, one thing remains unclear to me: what will happen when I restore
> master then start the server and user databases aren't where they
> supposed to be. Will the references to them in master be automatically
> erased or will the databases be marked suspect? Will I have to drop the
> suspect databases before restoring them or will I have to use WITH
> REPLACE clause to force the restore over the existing (suspect) user
> database?
> --
> Thanks,
> Pablo
> Hari wrote:
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
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
>
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
>
rebuild a database from backupfile only?
Hello Rainer,
I understand that you cannot restore a database when the existing mdf/ldf
is remmoved and the database does not exist on the server. If I'm off-base,
please let me know.
You may first run fist command:
restore headeronly FROM DISK = N'C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL.3\MSSQL\Backup\dbacc.bak'
Please see the Databasename in the result, and this shall be the database
name you use in restore command. Please double check the name is correct.
From the error message you encounter, it seems the database name is not
correct in your restore command
In my sample, it is dbacc. If run the command you mentioned, you may see
the following error message:
RESTORE DATABASE [dbacc] FROM DISK = N'C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL.3\MSSQL\Backup\dbacc.bak' WITH FILE = 1,
NORECOVERY, REPLACE, NOUNLOAD, STATS = 10
Msg 5133, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Directory lookup for the file "E:\sql2005\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\dbacc.mdf"
failed with the operating system error 3(The system cannot find the path
specified.).
Msg 3156, Level 16, State 3, Line 1
File 'dbacc' cannot be restored to
'E:\sql2005\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\dbacc.mdf'. Use WITH MOVE to identify a
valid location for the file.
Msg 5133, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Directory lookup for the file "E:\sql2005\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\dbacc_log.ldf"
failed with the operating system error 3(The system cannot find the path
specified.).
Msg 3156, Level 16, State 3, Line 1
File 'dbacc_log' cannot be restored to
'E:\sql2005\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\dbacc_log.ldf'. Use WITH MOVE to identify a
valid location for the file.
Msg 3119, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Problems were identified while planning for the RESTORE statement. Previous
messages provide details.
Msg 3013, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
RESTORE DATABASE is terminating abnormally.
If so, you need to use "with move" statmend in restore command. For example:
RESTORE DATABASE [dbacc] FROM DISK = N'C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL.3\MSSQL\Backup\dbacc.bak' WITH FILE = 1,
NORECOVERY, REPLACE, NOUNLOAD, STATS = 10,
move 'dbacc' to 'C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL.3\MSSQL\Backup\dbacc.mdf',
move 'dbacc_log' to 'C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL.3\MSSQL\Backup\dbacc_log.ldf'
If the issue still occurs, it might be the backup file is corrupted. You
may want to try a new backup/restore to test. Also, you may want to test
directly in QA or mangement studio(2005) to see if there is any difference
More related informaiton:
Moving SQL Server 7.0 databases to a new server with BACKUP and RESTORE
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/304692/
314546 HOW TO: Move Databases Between Computers That Are Running SQL Server
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=314546
Please let's know if you have any further questions or concerns. Thanks.
Best Regards,
Peter Yang
MCSE2000/2003, MCSA, MCDBA
Microsoft Online Community Support
==================================================
Get notification to my posts through email? Please refer to
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/managednewsgroups/default.aspx#notif
ications
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/managednewsgroups/default.aspx>.
Note: The MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues
where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support
Engineer within 1 business day is acceptable. Please note that each follow
up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support
professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the
most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations
that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions or complex
project analysis and dump analysis issues. Issues of this nature are best
handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer by contacting
Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/support/default.aspx>.
==================================================
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Hello Rainer,
Please feel free to post back if you have any update. :-)
Best Regards,
Peter Yang
MCSE2000/2003, MCSA, MCDBA
Microsoft Online Partner Support
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
================================================== ===
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
I understand that you cannot restore a database when the existing mdf/ldf
is remmoved and the database does not exist on the server. If I'm off-base,
please let me know.
You may first run fist command:
restore headeronly FROM DISK = N'C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL.3\MSSQL\Backup\dbacc.bak'
Please see the Databasename in the result, and this shall be the database
name you use in restore command. Please double check the name is correct.
From the error message you encounter, it seems the database name is not
correct in your restore command
In my sample, it is dbacc. If run the command you mentioned, you may see
the following error message:
RESTORE DATABASE [dbacc] FROM DISK = N'C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL.3\MSSQL\Backup\dbacc.bak' WITH FILE = 1,
NORECOVERY, REPLACE, NOUNLOAD, STATS = 10
Msg 5133, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Directory lookup for the file "E:\sql2005\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\dbacc.mdf"
failed with the operating system error 3(The system cannot find the path
specified.).
Msg 3156, Level 16, State 3, Line 1
File 'dbacc' cannot be restored to
'E:\sql2005\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\dbacc.mdf'. Use WITH MOVE to identify a
valid location for the file.
Msg 5133, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Directory lookup for the file "E:\sql2005\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\dbacc_log.ldf"
failed with the operating system error 3(The system cannot find the path
specified.).
Msg 3156, Level 16, State 3, Line 1
File 'dbacc_log' cannot be restored to
'E:\sql2005\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\dbacc_log.ldf'. Use WITH MOVE to identify a
valid location for the file.
Msg 3119, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Problems were identified while planning for the RESTORE statement. Previous
messages provide details.
Msg 3013, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
RESTORE DATABASE is terminating abnormally.
If so, you need to use "with move" statmend in restore command. For example:
RESTORE DATABASE [dbacc] FROM DISK = N'C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL.3\MSSQL\Backup\dbacc.bak' WITH FILE = 1,
NORECOVERY, REPLACE, NOUNLOAD, STATS = 10,
move 'dbacc' to 'C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL.3\MSSQL\Backup\dbacc.mdf',
move 'dbacc_log' to 'C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL.3\MSSQL\Backup\dbacc_log.ldf'
If the issue still occurs, it might be the backup file is corrupted. You
may want to try a new backup/restore to test. Also, you may want to test
directly in QA or mangement studio(2005) to see if there is any difference
More related informaiton:
Moving SQL Server 7.0 databases to a new server with BACKUP and RESTORE
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/304692/
314546 HOW TO: Move Databases Between Computers That Are Running SQL Server
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=314546
Please let's know if you have any further questions or concerns. Thanks.
Best Regards,
Peter Yang
MCSE2000/2003, MCSA, MCDBA
Microsoft Online Community Support
==================================================
Get notification to my posts through email? Please refer to
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/managednewsgroups/default.aspx#notif
ications
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/managednewsgroups/default.aspx>.
Note: The MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues
where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support
Engineer within 1 business day is acceptable. Please note that each follow
up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support
professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the
most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations
that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions or complex
project analysis and dump analysis issues. Issues of this nature are best
handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer by contacting
Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/support/default.aspx>.
==================================================
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Hello Rainer,
Please feel free to post back if you have any update. :-)
Best Regards,
Peter Yang
MCSE2000/2003, MCSA, MCDBA
Microsoft Online Partner Support
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
================================================== ===
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Rebuilbm not working
Hello
I have:
Windows 2000 server with SP3, SQL standard SP2
After a NT backup restore I want to use REBUILDM.EXE to create the system databases in order to restore the databases.
I get the error “Rebuild Master failed with error -1:”
I am aware of KB 273572 and I have a copy of the original files into a folder on the server. The files are not “Read-only”
But I get the error. Did some research…no luck.
If you experienced this please let me know.
Thanks a lot
Look at the SQL Server errolog and verify that Shared Memory is loaded. If
not, reboot the machine. Rebuildm makes a shared memory connection so if
shared memory is not loaded it will fail.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
I have:
Windows 2000 server with SP3, SQL standard SP2
After a NT backup restore I want to use REBUILDM.EXE to create the system databases in order to restore the databases.
I get the error “Rebuild Master failed with error -1:”
I am aware of KB 273572 and I have a copy of the original files into a folder on the server. The files are not “Read-only”
But I get the error. Did some research…no luck.
If you experienced this please let me know.
Thanks a lot
Look at the SQL Server errolog and verify that Shared Memory is loaded. If
not, reboot the machine. Rebuildm makes a shared memory connection so if
shared memory is not loaded it will fail.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Rebuilbm not working
Hello
I have:
Windows 2000 server with SP3, SQL standard SP2
After a NT backup restore I want to use REBUILDM.EXE to create the system da
tabases in order to restore the databases.
I get the error “Rebuild Master failed with error -1:”
I am aware of KB 273572 and I have a copy of the original files into a folde
r on the server. The files are not “Read-only”
But I get the error. Did some research…no luck.
If you experienced this please let me know.
Thanks a lotLook at the SQL Server errolog and verify that Shared Memory is loaded. If
not, reboot the machine. Rebuildm makes a shared memory connection so if
shared memory is not loaded it will fail.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
I have:
Windows 2000 server with SP3, SQL standard SP2
After a NT backup restore I want to use REBUILDM.EXE to create the system da
tabases in order to restore the databases.
I get the error “Rebuild Master failed with error -1:”
I am aware of KB 273572 and I have a copy of the original files into a folde
r on the server. The files are not “Read-only”
But I get the error. Did some research…no luck.
If you experienced this please let me know.
Thanks a lotLook at the SQL Server errolog and verify that Shared Memory is loaded. If
not, reboot the machine. Rebuildm makes a shared memory connection so if
shared memory is not loaded it will fail.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
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?
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Really confusing server problem!
Ok, i have been trying to restore the company helpdesk server since our move at the start of the year and after it was sitting doing nothing for a good six months or so.
I finally got the server going (after extensive messing about on our test box), but i'll set out the scenario for you:
Test Server: XW4000 (win2k Advanced Server + SQL Server 2k)
Main Helpdesk Server :BK_MAN5_INV (NT4 SP6 + SQL Server 2k)
Client Machines: BK_CI_03006 and BK_CI_03010
Now for the problem. Both the test server and the main helpdesk server have been configured in the exact same way, and BK_CI_03006 has no problems connecting to either server. However, BK_CI_03010 can only connect to the test server and not the main helpdesk server.
We are planning on removing the test server as soon as this is sorted, but i have no idea why there is this problem with the machine.
If anyone can provide any input on this at all, i would be really grateful.
Cheers
Alantry making an alias for the server ...|||Could you be more specific about 'connect', like, an application tries to connect or do you browse your network. Is there an errormessage and what's it like? Can you ping both boxes? Is it possible for a router/switch to be configured such that it only allows those with, say, a certain ip-address?|||sorry Kaiowas, i was rushing things a bit. It's quite a strange problem. Both clients can see both servers over the network, and ping it, but the helpdesk software (CA's ServiceIT Enterprise Edition 5) on BK_CI_03010 can only access the test server. The only difference in the client setup's is that BK_CI_03006 has windows 2000 installed and BK_CI_03010 has windows 98. But both installation processes of the helpdesk software were identical.|||Are you connecting through windows authentication or SQL authentication? Also are you within a domain environment?|||We do have a domain environment here, and the connection authentication is just SQL server authentication.|||Are you able to connect to the prod from BK_CI_03010 using some other tool suchs as EM/Query Analyzer/isql/osql/whatever? If you can it's likely it's the Helpdesk Software is at a loss. Otherwise, I'm really curious for the errormessage.|||ok, bk_ci_03006 and 03010 are setup the same, but 03006 can connect fine via odbc and through the software. 03010 can only manage to connect to the server via odbc, and not through the software. the error message that comes up is:
Couldn't connect to the server. Please check the network and that the server daemons are running. (Socket Error 10060)
The daemons part is wrong because they have to be running before any client connections can be made to the server (through the software), and as 03006 can connect through both software and odbc, this proves that the daemons are running.|||Another bit of an update that will probably help out.
I tried pinging both xw4000 and bk_man5_inv from my machine (bk_ci_03006), and both replied. However when i tried the same thing from bk_ci_03010 i only got a reply from xw4000 and not bk_man5_inv.
I think that's where the problem is lying.|||Both clients can see both servers over the network, and ping it, but the helpdesk software (...)
03010 can only manage to connect to the server via odbc (...)
I tried pinging both xw4000 and bk_man5_inv from my machine (bk_ci_03006), and both replied. However when i tried the same thing from bk_ci_03010 i only got a reply from xw4000 and not bk_man5_inv.
Could this suggest that you can ping the IP but not their names?|||It's ok. I got it sorted.
What i did was change the name of the server in the software configuration gui to the ip address that was showing up on my computer when i pinged bk_man5_inv (03010 got a totally different ip address returned).
So for now the computer appears to connect and log in to bk_man5_inv fine.
Thanks for the IP address advice Kaiowas, as soon as i read it i knew what was wrong. I'll get the naming problem sorted out when the IT guy's back from newcastle.
I finally got the server going (after extensive messing about on our test box), but i'll set out the scenario for you:
Test Server: XW4000 (win2k Advanced Server + SQL Server 2k)
Main Helpdesk Server :BK_MAN5_INV (NT4 SP6 + SQL Server 2k)
Client Machines: BK_CI_03006 and BK_CI_03010
Now for the problem. Both the test server and the main helpdesk server have been configured in the exact same way, and BK_CI_03006 has no problems connecting to either server. However, BK_CI_03010 can only connect to the test server and not the main helpdesk server.
We are planning on removing the test server as soon as this is sorted, but i have no idea why there is this problem with the machine.
If anyone can provide any input on this at all, i would be really grateful.
Cheers
Alantry making an alias for the server ...|||Could you be more specific about 'connect', like, an application tries to connect or do you browse your network. Is there an errormessage and what's it like? Can you ping both boxes? Is it possible for a router/switch to be configured such that it only allows those with, say, a certain ip-address?|||sorry Kaiowas, i was rushing things a bit. It's quite a strange problem. Both clients can see both servers over the network, and ping it, but the helpdesk software (CA's ServiceIT Enterprise Edition 5) on BK_CI_03010 can only access the test server. The only difference in the client setup's is that BK_CI_03006 has windows 2000 installed and BK_CI_03010 has windows 98. But both installation processes of the helpdesk software were identical.|||Are you connecting through windows authentication or SQL authentication? Also are you within a domain environment?|||We do have a domain environment here, and the connection authentication is just SQL server authentication.|||Are you able to connect to the prod from BK_CI_03010 using some other tool suchs as EM/Query Analyzer/isql/osql/whatever? If you can it's likely it's the Helpdesk Software is at a loss. Otherwise, I'm really curious for the errormessage.|||ok, bk_ci_03006 and 03010 are setup the same, but 03006 can connect fine via odbc and through the software. 03010 can only manage to connect to the server via odbc, and not through the software. the error message that comes up is:
Couldn't connect to the server. Please check the network and that the server daemons are running. (Socket Error 10060)
The daemons part is wrong because they have to be running before any client connections can be made to the server (through the software), and as 03006 can connect through both software and odbc, this proves that the daemons are running.|||Another bit of an update that will probably help out.
I tried pinging both xw4000 and bk_man5_inv from my machine (bk_ci_03006), and both replied. However when i tried the same thing from bk_ci_03010 i only got a reply from xw4000 and not bk_man5_inv.
I think that's where the problem is lying.|||Both clients can see both servers over the network, and ping it, but the helpdesk software (...)
03010 can only manage to connect to the server via odbc (...)
I tried pinging both xw4000 and bk_man5_inv from my machine (bk_ci_03006), and both replied. However when i tried the same thing from bk_ci_03010 i only got a reply from xw4000 and not bk_man5_inv.
Could this suggest that you can ping the IP but not their names?|||It's ok. I got it sorted.
What i did was change the name of the server in the software configuration gui to the ip address that was showing up on my computer when i pinged bk_man5_inv (03010 got a totally different ip address returned).
So for now the computer appears to connect and log in to bk_man5_inv fine.
Thanks for the IP address advice Kaiowas, as soon as i read it i knew what was wrong. I'll get the naming problem sorted out when the IT guy's back from newcastle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)