Best way to copy database: running

Showing posts with label running. Show all posts

Thursday, March 22, 2012

bigint problem

Hi,
I have two sql server enterprise servers running sp4 on windows server2003
sp1
I have a DTS package that does some various processing on one machine, then
at the end of the package. I copy tables to the other sql server box.
In one of the tables being copied, I have a bigint data type. The table
copies and shows that the bigint datatype is still part of the table
definition, but the values in the bigint column are negatives and positives.
Does anyone have any ideas as to what might be causing this?
thanks in advance,
Troy
Values in a bigint column can be negative as well as positive, but I assume
that you have only positive values on one side and end up with negative and
positive values on the other? If that's the case it looks to me like your
bigints are accidentally treated as ints somewhere along the way, at a
binary level.
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Troy Sherrill" <tsherrill@.nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ekzUk8kfFHA.460@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have two sql server enterprise servers running sp4 on windows server2003
> sp1
> I have a DTS package that does some various processing on one machine,
> then
> at the end of the package. I copy tables to the other sql server box.
> In one of the tables being copied, I have a bigint data type. The table
> copies and shows that the bigint datatype is still part of the table
> definition, but the values in the bigint column are negatives and
> positives.
> Does anyone have any ideas as to what might be causing this?
> thanks in advance,
> Troy
>
|||What provider are you using? It may not understand a BigInt datatype.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Troy Sherrill" <tsherrill@.nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ekzUk8kfFHA.460@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have two sql server enterprise servers running sp4 on windows server2003
> sp1
> I have a DTS package that does some various processing on one machine,
> then
> at the end of the package. I copy tables to the other sql server box.
> In one of the tables being copied, I have a bigint data type. The table
> copies and shows that the bigint datatype is still part of the table
> definition, but the values in the bigint column are negatives and
> positives.
> Does anyone have any ideas as to what might be causing this?
> thanks in advance,
> Troy
>

bigint problem

Hi,
I have two sql server enterprise servers running sp4 on windows server2003
sp1
I have a DTS package that does some various processing on one machine, then
at the end of the package. I copy tables to the other sql server box.
In one of the tables being copied, I have a bigint data type. The table
copies and shows that the bigint datatype is still part of the table
definition, but the values in the bigint column are negatives and positives.
Does anyone have any ideas as to what might be causing this?
thanks in advance,
TroyValues in a bigint column can be negative as well as positive, but I assume
that you have only positive values on one side and end up with negative and
positive values on the other? If that's the case it looks to me like your
bigints are accidentally treated as ints somewhere along the way, at a
binary level.
--
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Troy Sherrill" <tsherrill@.nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ekzUk8kfFHA.460@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have two sql server enterprise servers running sp4 on windows server2003
> sp1
> I have a DTS package that does some various processing on one machine,
> then
> at the end of the package. I copy tables to the other sql server box.
> In one of the tables being copied, I have a bigint data type. The table
> copies and shows that the bigint datatype is still part of the table
> definition, but the values in the bigint column are negatives and
> positives.
> Does anyone have any ideas as to what might be causing this?
> thanks in advance,
> Troy
>|||What provider are you using? It may not understand a BigInt datatype.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Troy Sherrill" <tsherrill@.nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ekzUk8kfFHA.460@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have two sql server enterprise servers running sp4 on windows server2003
> sp1
> I have a DTS package that does some various processing on one machine,
> then
> at the end of the package. I copy tables to the other sql server box.
> In one of the tables being copied, I have a bigint data type. The table
> copies and shows that the bigint datatype is still part of the table
> definition, but the values in the bigint column are negatives and
> positives.
> Does anyone have any ideas as to what might be causing this?
> thanks in advance,
> Troy
>sql

bigint problem

Hi,
I have two sql server enterprise servers running sp4 on windows server2003
sp1
I have a DTS package that does some various processing on one machine, then
at the end of the package. I copy tables to the other sql server box.
In one of the tables being copied, I have a bigint data type. The table
copies and shows that the bigint datatype is still part of the table
definition, but the values in the bigint column are negatives and positives.
Does anyone have any ideas as to what might be causing this?
thanks in advance,
TroyValues in a bigint column can be negative as well as positive, but I assume
that you have only positive values on one side and end up with negative and
positive values on the other? If that's the case it looks to me like your
bigints are accidentally treated as ints somewhere along the way, at a
binary level.
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Troy Sherrill" <tsherrill@.nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ekzUk8kfFHA.460@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have two sql server enterprise servers running sp4 on windows server2003
> sp1
> I have a DTS package that does some various processing on one machine,
> then
> at the end of the package. I copy tables to the other sql server box.
> In one of the tables being copied, I have a bigint data type. The table
> copies and shows that the bigint datatype is still part of the table
> definition, but the values in the bigint column are negatives and
> positives.
> Does anyone have any ideas as to what might be causing this?
> thanks in advance,
> Troy
>|||What provider are you using? It may not understand a BigInt datatype.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Troy Sherrill" <tsherrill@.nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ekzUk8kfFHA.460@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have two sql server enterprise servers running sp4 on windows server2003
> sp1
> I have a DTS package that does some various processing on one machine,
> then
> at the end of the package. I copy tables to the other sql server box.
> In one of the tables being copied, I have a bigint data type. The table
> copies and shows that the bigint datatype is still part of the table
> definition, but the values in the bigint column are negatives and
> positives.
> Does anyone have any ideas as to what might be causing this?
> thanks in advance,
> Troy
>

Monday, March 19, 2012

Big Database needs pruning

I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy for
this issue.
So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down, but
that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on the
disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service and
figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding the
pointers.
Question #1)
Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager (EM)
won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB pig) via
SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when you gotta
keep things up and running.
Question #2)
If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
a) sp_detach_db
b) Delete the Log file
c) sp_attach_single_file_db
Will this work?
Question #3)
There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
Can I use a statement like
Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
'2006-10-14 23:59:59'
I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
--
Thanks for any help
Paul"Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
>watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
>to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
>completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy
>for this issue.
> So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down,
> but that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on
> the disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service
> and figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding
> the pointers.
> Question #1)
> Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
> pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager
> (EM) won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB
> pig) via SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when
> you gotta keep things up and running.
> Question #2)
> If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
> a) sp_detach_db
> b) Delete the Log file
> c) sp_attach_single_file_db
> Will this work?
>
> Question #3)
> There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
> want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
> Can I use a statement like
> Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
> '2006-10-14 23:59:59'
> I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
> only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
> only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
> --
I've always used the following statements to shrink big logs.
backup log DBName with truncate_only
go
use DBName
go
dbcc shrinkfile(2, 100, TRUNCATEONLY)
go
You should also look into backing up the log file on a regular basis or
changing to the Simple recovery model if your model allows it.|||This really isn't providing any answers to my questions. Do you know about
the Checkpoint, etc...?
--
Paul Bergson
MVP - Directory Services
MCT, MCSE, MCSA, Security+, BS CSci
2003, 2000 (Early Achiever), NT
http://www.pbbergs.com
Please no e-mails, any questions should be posted in the NewsGroup
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Isaac Alexander" <isaacNOSPAM@.goNOSPAMprocura.com> wrote in message
news:efbR2j8dHHA.2316@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> "Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
>>watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
>>to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
>>completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy
>>for this issue.
>> So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down,
>> but that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on
>> the disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service
>> and figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding
>> the pointers.
>> Question #1)
>> Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
>> pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager
>> (EM) won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB
>> pig) via SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when
>> you gotta keep things up and running.
>> Question #2)
>> If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
>> a) sp_detach_db
>> b) Delete the Log file
>> c) sp_attach_single_file_db
>> Will this work?
>>
>> Question #3)
>> There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
>> want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
>> Can I use a statement like
>> Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
>> '2006-10-14 23:59:59'
>> I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
>> only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
>> only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
>> --
> I've always used the following statements to shrink big logs.
> backup log DBName with truncate_only
> go
> use DBName
> go
> dbcc shrinkfile(2, 100, TRUNCATEONLY)
> go
> You should also look into backing up the log file on a regular basis or
> changing to the Simple recovery model if your model allows it.
>|||"Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
>watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
>to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
>completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy
>for this issue.
> So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down,
> but that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on
> the disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service
> and figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding
> the pointers.
> Question #1)
> Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
> pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager
> (EM) won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB
> pig) via SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when
> you gotta keep things up and running.
> Question #2)
> If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
> a) sp_detach_db
> b) Delete the Log file
> c) sp_attach_single_file_db
> Will this work?
>
> Question #3)
> There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
> want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
> Can I use a statement like
> Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
> '2006-10-14 23:59:59'
> I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
> only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
> only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
> --
> Thanks for any help
> Paul
>|||"Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
>watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
>to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
>completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy
>for this issue.
> So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down,
> but that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on
> the disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service
> and figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding
> the pointers.
> Question #1)
> Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
> pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager
> (EM) won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB
> pig) via SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when
> you gotta keep things up and running.
Check the SQL Error log, but my guess is that DB is still in recovery mode.
(sorry, I don't recall off the top of my head the command to get this via
QA.
I THINK
select * from master.dbo.sysdatabases w
will give the info, but I don't recall which status you need to look for.
> Question #2)
> If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
> a) sp_detach_db
> b) Delete the Log file
> c) sp_attach_single_file_db
> Will this work?
It MIGHT. But don't do that. It's one of those, "99% of the time it'll
work.. and 1% you're hosed.)
You may want to do an actual transaction log backup (especially if up to now
you have a consistent chain of backups.)
Otherwise, do a backup log PigDB with truncate_only
Then DBCC shrinkfile on the DB log.
>
> Question #3)
> There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
> want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
> Can I use a statement like
> Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
> '2006-10-14 23:59:59'
>
Certainly.
You can even do this in a loop with a SET ROWCOUNT and do backups of the log
in between.
> I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
> only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
> only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
Unfortunately, off the top of my head, I'm not 100% sure how to calculate
this (there are ways) but I'd start with that assumption.
Hope this helps.
> --
> Thanks for any help
> Paul
>
--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html|||I can't believe I didn't think to look in the logs, duh... Only 72 hours to
go, what a stinking pig
I have a follow up but it refers to code pruning it self. I will repost
Paul
http://www.pbbergs.com
Please no e-mails, any questions should be posted in the NewsGroup
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mooregr_deleteth1s@.greenms.com> wrote in message
news:%23RdOZD9dHHA.1240@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> "Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
>>watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
>>to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
>>completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy
>>for this issue.
>> So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down,
>> but that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on
>> the disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service
>> and figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding
>> the pointers.
>> Question #1)
>> Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
>> pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager
>> (EM) won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB
>> pig) via SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when
>> you gotta keep things up and running.
> Check the SQL Error log, but my guess is that DB is still in recovery
> mode.
> (sorry, I don't recall off the top of my head the command to get this via
> QA.
> I THINK
> select * from master.dbo.sysdatabases w
> will give the info, but I don't recall which status you need to look for.
>
>> Question #2)
>> If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
>> a) sp_detach_db
>> b) Delete the Log file
>> c) sp_attach_single_file_db
>> Will this work?
> It MIGHT. But don't do that. It's one of those, "99% of the time it'll
> work.. and 1% you're hosed.)
> You may want to do an actual transaction log backup (especially if up to
> now you have a consistent chain of backups.)
> Otherwise, do a backup log PigDB with truncate_only
> Then DBCC shrinkfile on the DB log.
>>
>> Question #3)
>> There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
>> want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
>> Can I use a statement like
>> Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
>> '2006-10-14 23:59:59'
> Certainly.
> You can even do this in a loop with a SET ROWCOUNT and do backups of the
> log in between.
>
>> I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
>> only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
>> only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
> Unfortunately, off the top of my head, I'm not 100% sure how to calculate
> this (there are ways) but I'd start with that assumption.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
>> --
>> Thanks for any help
>> Paul
> --
> Greg Moore
> SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
> Email: sql (at) greenms.com
> http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
>|||Paul Bergson [MVP-DS] wrote:
> I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
> watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
> to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
> completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy for
> this issue.
> So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down, but
> that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on the
> disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service and
> figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding the
> pointers.
> Question #1)
> Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
> pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager (EM)
> won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB pig) via
> SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when you gotta
> keep things up and running.
From Books Online
Table master..sysdatabases:
Field [status]:
=====Status bits, some of which can be set by the user with sp_dboption (read
only, dbo use only, single user, and so on):
1 = autoclose; set with sp_dboption.
4 = select into/bulkcopy; set with sp_dboption.
8 = trunc. log on chkpt; set with sp_dboption.
16 = torn page detection, set with sp_dboption.
32 = loading.
64 = pre recovery.
128 = recovering.
256 = not recovered.
512 = offline; set with sp_dboption.
1024 = read only; set with sp_dboption.
2048 = dbo use only; set with sp_dboption.
4096 = single user; set with sp_dboption.
32768 = emergency mode.
4194304 = autoshrink.
1073741824 = cleanly shutdown.
Multiple bits can be on at the same time.
=========field [status2]:
16384 = ANSI null default; set with sp_dboption.
65536 = concat null yields null , set with sp_dboption.
131072 = recursive triggers, set with sp_dboption.
1048576 = default to local cursor, set with sp_dboption.
8388608 = quoted identifier, set with
sp_dboption.
33554432 = cursor close on commit, set with sp_dboption.
67108864 = ANSI nulls, set with sp_dboption.
268435456 = ANSI warnings, set with sp_dboption.
536870912 = full text enabled, set with sp_fulltext_database.
> Question #2)
> If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
> a) sp_detach_db
> b) Delete the Log file
> c) sp_attach_single_file_db
> Will this work?
You better do the following:
backup log <dbname> with no_log
dbcc shrinkdatabase('<dbname>',TRUNCATEONLY)
> Question #3)
> There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
> want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
> Can I use a statement like
> Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
> '2006-10-14 23:59:59'
Yes
> I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
> only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
> only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.|||"Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OSMpANFeHHA.1244@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I can't believe I didn't think to look in the logs, duh... Only 72 hours
>to go, what a stinking pig
>
Yeah, I've done the same thing regarding forgetting ;-)
> I have a follow up but it refers to code pruning it self. I will repost
>
--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html

Big Database needs pruning

I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy for
this issue.
So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down, but
that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on the
disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service and
figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding the
pointers.
Question #1)
Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager (EM)
won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB pig) via
SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when you gotta
keep things up and running.
Question #2)
If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
a) sp_detach_db
b) Delete the Log file
c) sp_attach_single_file_db
Will this work?
Question #3)
There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
Can I use a statement like
Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
'2006-10-14 23:59:59'
I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
Thanks for any help
Paul
"Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
>watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
>to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
>completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy
>for this issue.
> So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down,
> but that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on
> the disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service
> and figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding
> the pointers.
> Question #1)
> Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
> pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager
> (EM) won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB
> pig) via SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when
> you gotta keep things up and running.
> Question #2)
> If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
> a) sp_detach_db
> b) Delete the Log file
> c) sp_attach_single_file_db
> Will this work?
>
> Question #3)
> There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
> want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
> Can I use a statement like
> Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
> '2006-10-14 23:59:59'
> I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
> only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
> only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
> --
I've always used the following statements to shrink big logs.
backup log DBName with truncate_only
go
use DBName
go
dbcc shrinkfile(2, 100, TRUNCATEONLY)
go
You should also look into backing up the log file on a regular basis or
changing to the Simple recovery model if your model allows it.
|||This really isn't providing any answers to my questions. Do you know about
the Checkpoint, etc...?
Paul Bergson
MVP - Directory Services
MCT, MCSE, MCSA, Security+, BS CSci
2003, 2000 (Early Achiever), NT
http://www.pbbergs.com
Please no e-mails, any questions should be posted in the NewsGroup
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Isaac Alexander" <isaacNOSPAM@.goNOSPAMprocura.com> wrote in message
news:efbR2j8dHHA.2316@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> "Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> I've always used the following statements to shrink big logs.
> backup log DBName with truncate_only
> go
> use DBName
> go
> dbcc shrinkfile(2, 100, TRUNCATEONLY)
> go
> You should also look into backing up the log file on a regular basis or
> changing to the Simple recovery model if your model allows it.
>
|||"Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
>watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
>to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
>completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy
>for this issue.
> So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down,
> but that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on
> the disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service
> and figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding
> the pointers.
> Question #1)
> Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
> pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager
> (EM) won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB
> pig) via SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when
> you gotta keep things up and running.
> Question #2)
> If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
> a) sp_detach_db
> b) Delete the Log file
> c) sp_attach_single_file_db
> Will this work?
>
> Question #3)
> There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
> want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
> Can I use a statement like
> Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
> '2006-10-14 23:59:59'
> I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
> only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
> only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
> --
> Thanks for any help
> Paul
>
|||"Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
>watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
>to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
>completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy
>for this issue.
> So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down,
> but that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on
> the disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service
> and figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding
> the pointers.
> Question #1)
> Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
> pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager
> (EM) won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB
> pig) via SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when
> you gotta keep things up and running.
Check the SQL Error log, but my guess is that DB is still in recovery mode.
(sorry, I don't recall off the top of my head the command to get this via
QA.
I THINK
select * from master.dbo.sysdatabases w
will give the info, but I don't recall which status you need to look for.

> Question #2)
> If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
> a) sp_detach_db
> b) Delete the Log file
> c) sp_attach_single_file_db
> Will this work?
It MIGHT. But don't do that. It's one of those, "99% of the time it'll
work.. and 1% you're hosed.)
You may want to do an actual transaction log backup (especially if up to now
you have a consistent chain of backups.)
Otherwise, do a backup log PigDB with truncate_only
Then DBCC shrinkfile on the DB log.
>
> Question #3)
> There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
> want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
> Can I use a statement like
> Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
> '2006-10-14 23:59:59'
>
Certainly.
You can even do this in a loop with a SET ROWCOUNT and do backups of the log
in between.

> I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
> only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
> only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
Unfortunately, off the top of my head, I'm not 100% sure how to calculate
this (there are ways) but I'd start with that assumption.
Hope this helps.

> --
> Thanks for any help
> Paul
>
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
|||I can't believe I didn't think to look in the logs, duh... Only 72 hours to
go, what a stinking pig
I have a follow up but it refers to code pruning it self. I will repost

Paul
http://www.pbbergs.com
Please no e-mails, any questions should be posted in the NewsGroup
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mooregr_deleteth1s@.greenms.com> wrote in message
news:%23RdOZD9dHHA.1240@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> "Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Check the SQL Error log, but my guess is that DB is still in recovery
> mode.
> (sorry, I don't recall off the top of my head the command to get this via
> QA.
> I THINK
> select * from master.dbo.sysdatabases w
> will give the info, but I don't recall which status you need to look for.
>
> It MIGHT. But don't do that. It's one of those, "99% of the time it'll
> work.. and 1% you're hosed.)
> You may want to do an actual transaction log backup (especially if up to
> now you have a consistent chain of backups.)
> Otherwise, do a backup log PigDB with truncate_only
> Then DBCC shrinkfile on the DB log.
> Certainly.
> You can even do this in a loop with a SET ROWCOUNT and do backups of the
> log in between.
>
> Unfortunately, off the top of my head, I'm not 100% sure how to calculate
> this (there are ways) but I'd start with that assumption.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> --
> Greg Moore
> SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
> Email: sql (at) greenms.com
> http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
>
|||Paul Bergson [MVP-DS] wrote:
> I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
> watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
> to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
> completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy for
> this issue.
> So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down, but
> that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on the
> disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service and
> figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding the
> pointers.
> Question #1)
> Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
> pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager (EM)
> won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB pig) via
> SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when you gotta
> keep things up and running.
From Books Online
Table master..sysdatabases:
Field [status]:
=====
Status bits, some of which can be set by the user with sp_dboption (read
only, dbo use only, single user, and so on):
1 = autoclose; set with sp_dboption.
4 = select into/bulkcopy; set with sp_dboption.
8 = trunc. log on chkpt; set with sp_dboption.
16 = torn page detection, set with sp_dboption.
32 = loading.
64 = pre recovery.
128 = recovering.
256 = not recovered.
512 = offline; set with sp_dboption.
1024 = read only; set with sp_dboption.
2048 = dbo use only; set with sp_dboption.
4096 = single user; set with sp_dboption.
32768 = emergency mode.
4194304 = autoshrink.
1073741824 = cleanly shutdown.
Multiple bits can be on at the same time.
=========
field [status2]:
16384 = ANSI null default; set with sp_dboption.
65536 = concat null yields null , set with sp_dboption.
131072 = recursive triggers, set with sp_dboption.
1048576 = default to local cursor, set with sp_dboption.
8388608 = quoted identifier, set with
sp_dboption.
33554432 = cursor close on commit, set with sp_dboption.
67108864 = ANSI nulls, set with sp_dboption.
268435456 = ANSI warnings, set with sp_dboption.
536870912 = full text enabled, set with sp_fulltext_database.

> Question #2)
> If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
> a) sp_detach_db
> b) Delete the Log file
> c) sp_attach_single_file_db
> Will this work?
You better do the following:
backup log <dbname> with no_log
dbcc shrinkdatabase('<dbname>',TRUNCATEONLY)

> Question #3)
> There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
> want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
> Can I use a statement like
> Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
> '2006-10-14 23:59:59'
Yes

> I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
> only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
> only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
|||"Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OSMpANFeHHA.1244@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I can't believe I didn't think to look in the logs, duh... Only 72 hours
>to go, what a stinking pig
>
Yeah, I've done the same thing regarding forgetting ;-)

> I have a follow up but it refers to code pruning it self. I will repost
>
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html

Big Database needs pruning

I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy for
this issue.
So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down, but
that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on the
disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service and
figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding the
pointers.
Question #1)
Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager (EM)
won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB pig) via
SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when you gotta
keep things up and running.
Question #2)
If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
a) sp_detach_db
b) Delete the Log file
c) sp_attach_single_file_db
Will this work?
Question #3)
There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
Can I use a statement like
Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
'2006-10-14 23:59:59'
I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
Thanks for any help
Paul"Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
>watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
>to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
>completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy
>for this issue.
> So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down,
> but that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on
> the disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service
> and figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding
> the pointers.
> Question #1)
> Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
> pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager
> (EM) won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB
> pig) via SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when
> you gotta keep things up and running.
> Question #2)
> If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
> a) sp_detach_db
> b) Delete the Log file
> c) sp_attach_single_file_db
> Will this work?
>
> Question #3)
> There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
> want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
> Can I use a statement like
> Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
> '2006-10-14 23:59:59'
> I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
> only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
> only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
> --
I've always used the following statements to shrink big logs.
backup log DBName with truncate_only
go
use DBName
go
dbcc shrinkfile(2, 100, TRUNCATEONLY)
go
You should also look into backing up the log file on a regular basis or
changing to the Simple recovery model if your model allows it.|||This really isn't providing any answers to my questions. Do you know about
the Checkpoint, etc...?
Paul Bergson
MVP - Directory Services
MCT, MCSE, MCSA, Security+, BS CSci
2003, 2000 (Early Achiever), NT
http://www.pbbergs.com
Please no e-mails, any questions should be posted in the NewsGroup
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Isaac Alexander" <isaacNOSPAM@.goNOSPAMprocura.com> wrote in message
news:efbR2j8dHHA.2316@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> "Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> I've always used the following statements to shrink big logs.
> backup log DBName with truncate_only
> go
> use DBName
> go
> dbcc shrinkfile(2, 100, TRUNCATEONLY)
> go
> You should also look into backing up the log file on a regular basis or
> changing to the Simple recovery model if your model allows it.
>|||"Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
>watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
>to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
>completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy
>for this issue.
> So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down,
> but that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on
> the disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service
> and figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding
> the pointers.
> Question #1)
> Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
> pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager
> (EM) won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB
> pig) via SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when
> you gotta keep things up and running.
> Question #2)
> If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
> a) sp_detach_db
> b) Delete the Log file
> c) sp_attach_single_file_db
> Will this work?
>
> Question #3)
> There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
> want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
> Can I use a statement like
> Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
> '2006-10-14 23:59:59'
> I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
> only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
> only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
> --
> Thanks for any help
> Paul
>|||"Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
>watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
>to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
>completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy
>for this issue.
> So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down,
> but that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on
> the disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service
> and figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding
> the pointers.
> Question #1)
> Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
> pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager
> (EM) won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB
> pig) via SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when
> you gotta keep things up and running.
Check the SQL Error log, but my guess is that DB is still in recovery mode.
(sorry, I don't recall off the top of my head the command to get this via
QA.
I THINK
select * from master.dbo.sysdatabases w
will give the info, but I don't recall which status you need to look for.

> Question #2)
> If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
> a) sp_detach_db
> b) Delete the Log file
> c) sp_attach_single_file_db
> Will this work?
It MIGHT. But don't do that. It's one of those, "99% of the time it'll
work.. and 1% you're hosed.)
You may want to do an actual transaction log backup (especially if up to now
you have a consistent chain of backups.)
Otherwise, do a backup log PigDB with truncate_only
Then DBCC shrinkfile on the DB log.
>
> Question #3)
> There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
> want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
> Can I use a statement like
> Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
> '2006-10-14 23:59:59'
>
Certainly.
You can even do this in a loop with a SET ROWCOUNT and do backups of the log
in between.

> I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
> only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
> only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.
Unfortunately, off the top of my head, I'm not 100% sure how to calculate
this (there are ways) but I'd start with that assumption.
Hope this helps.

> --
> Thanks for any help
> Paul
>
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html|||I can't believe I didn't think to look in the logs, duh... Only 72 hours to
go, what a stinking pig
I have a follow up but it refers to code pruning it self. I will repost
Paul
http://www.pbbergs.com
Please no e-mails, any questions should be posted in the NewsGroup
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mooregr_deleteth1s@.greenms.com> wrote in message
news:%23RdOZD9dHHA.1240@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> "Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:OD3Vvd8dHHA.2128@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Check the SQL Error log, but my guess is that DB is still in recovery
> mode.
> (sorry, I don't recall off the top of my head the command to get this via
> QA.
> I THINK
> select * from master.dbo.sysdatabases w
> will give the info, but I don't recall which status you need to look for.
>
> It MIGHT. But don't do that. It's one of those, "99% of the time it'll
> work.. and 1% you're hosed.)
> You may want to do an actual transaction log backup (especially if up to
> now you have a consistent chain of backups.)
> Otherwise, do a backup log PigDB with truncate_only
> Then DBCC shrinkfile on the DB log.
> Certainly.
> You can even do this in a loop with a SET ROWCOUNT and do backups of the
> log in between.
>
> Unfortunately, off the top of my head, I'm not 100% sure how to calculate
> this (there are ways) but I'd start with that assumption.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> --
> Greg Moore
> SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
> Email: sql (at) greenms.com
> http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
>|||Paul Bergson [MVP-DS] wrote:
> I have a big sql database running on sql server 2000. The manager wasn't
> watching the file sizes and the db made it up to 144 gig and the log is up
> to 80 gig. We have been working on pruning this pig but it just has
> completely consumed the disk. My expertise is not SQL, but I am the guy f
or
> this issue.
> So I am in a quandary. A Delete statement was run to prune the db down, b
ut
> that just caused the tlog to chew up the disk space that was left on the
> disk. So things got slow so we ended up restarting the sql service and
> figure the Checkpoint piece is running in the background rebuilding the
> pointers.
> Question #1)
> Is there a way to determine if Checkpointing is going on rebuilding the
> pointers,etc... ? Reason for the curiosity is that Enterprise Manager (EM
)
> won't respond right now. I can manage the DB's (except for the DB pig) vi
a
> SQL Analyzer. It is amazing how quick you can learn tsql when you gotta
> keep things up and running.
From Books Online
Table master..sysdatabases:
Field [status]:
=====
Status bits, some of which can be set by the user with sp_dboption (read
only, dbo use only, single user, and so on):
1 = autoclose; set with sp_dboption.
4 = select into/bulkcopy; set with sp_dboption.
8 = trunc. log on chkpt; set with sp_dboption.
16 = torn page detection, set with sp_dboption.
32 = loading.
64 = pre recovery.
128 = recovering.
256 = not recovered.
512 = offline; set with sp_dboption.
1024 = read only; set with sp_dboption.
2048 = dbo use only; set with sp_dboption.
4096 = single user; set with sp_dboption.
32768 = emergency mode.
4194304 = autoshrink.
1073741824 = cleanly shutdown.
Multiple bits can be on at the same time.
=========
field [status2]:
16384 = ANSI null default; set with sp_dboption.
65536 = concat null yields null , set with sp_dboption.
131072 = recursive triggers, set with sp_dboption.
1048576 = default to local cursor, set with sp_dboption.
8388608 = quoted identifier, set with
sp_dboption.
33554432 = cursor close on commit, set with sp_dboption.
67108864 = ANSI nulls, set with sp_dboption.
268435456 = ANSI warnings, set with sp_dboption.
536870912 = full text enabled, set with sp_fulltext_database.

> Question #2)
> If/When I get control back I want to chuck the Log via
> a) sp_detach_db
> b) Delete the Log file
> c) sp_attach_single_file_db
> Will this work?
You better do the following:
backup log <dbname> with no_log
dbcc shrinkdatabase('<dbname>',TRUNCATEONLY)

> Question #3)
> There are months and months of data that is easily purgable by date but I
> want to avoid making the log file large and clogging up the system again.
> Can I use a statement like
> Delete from tableA where date_time between '2006-10-01 00:00:00' and
> '2006-10-14 23:59:59'
Yes

> I am unsure how the SQL server will handle this statement. If there are
> only 5% of the records in the DB that match this query will the log file
> only grow by that amount? I assume it must for backout purposes.|||"Paul Bergson [MVP-DS]" <pbergson@.allete_nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OSMpANFeHHA.1244@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I can't believe I didn't think to look in the logs, duh... Only 72 hours
>to go, what a stinking pig
>
Yeah, I've done the same thing regarding forgetting ;-)

> I have a follow up but it refers to code pruning it self. I will repost
>
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html

BIDS abort

On several occasions I have experienced crashes while running an SSIS package in debug mode. It happens when I start process on Control Flow table and click on Data Flow tab to monitor progress. I have forwarded the error reports and have searched the boards for similar references. Is this problem going to be fixed?

SSIS Data Sources

Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 (Intel X86)

Dec 17 2002 14:22:05

Standard Edition on Windows NT 5.0 (Build 2195: Service Pack 4)

Microsoft SQL Server 2005 - 9.00.3054.00 (Intel X86)

Mar 23 2007 16:28:52

Standard Edition on Windows NT 5.2 (Build 3790: Service Pack 1)

Visiual Studio 2005 Professional SP1 SP.050727-7600

.NET Framework 2.0.50727

Any specific error? That might help us.

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Better to backup up all server databases or backup system databases separately from databa

Gurus,
Running SQL Server 2005 SP2 and using named instances. I am having lots of
important application databases on my server these days. My question is
this. Is it better to back up all server databases in one maintenance plan
or backup system databases separately from databases?
Spin
I don't think it matters one way or another. But then it depends on what
issues you may be struggling with.
If you have scheduling issues running a single maintenance plan, break it up
into multiple plans. Personally, I prefer dealing system databases
separately. In particular, when you are dealing relatively large user
databases, you may not want to use the MS maintenance plans and may choose to
schedule their backups in your own schduler for better flexibility.
Linchi
Linchi
"Spin" wrote:

> Gurus,
> Running SQL Server 2005 SP2 and using named instances. I am having lots of
> important application databases on my server these days. My question is
> this. Is it better to back up all server databases in one maintenance plan
> or backup system databases separately from databases?
> --
> Spin
>

Better to backup up all server databases or backup system databases separately from databa

Gurus,
Running SQL Server 2005 SP2 and using named instances. I am having lots of
important application databases on my server these days. My question is
this. Is it better to back up all server databases in one maintenance plan
or backup system databases separately from databases?
--
SpinI don't think it matters one way or another. But then it depends on what
issues you may be struggling with.
If you have scheduling issues running a single maintenance plan, break it up
into multiple plans. Personally, I prefer dealing system databases
separately. In particular, when you are dealing relatively large user
databases, you may not want to use the MS maintenance plans and may choose to
schedule their backups in your own schduler for better flexibility.
Linchi
Linchi
"Spin" wrote:
> Gurus,
> Running SQL Server 2005 SP2 and using named instances. I am having lots of
> important application databases on my server these days. My question is
> this. Is it better to back up all server databases in one maintenance plan
> or backup system databases separately from databases?
> --
> Spin
>

Friday, February 24, 2012

Best way to upgrade for SQLServer2000 standard to Enterprice

Hi all.
One of our customers need SQL to run on more than 2GB of memory. They are
running on SQL2000 standard edition and therefor need to upgrade to
Enterprice edition. Is it just to install then new CD's over the old system
or do we need to do it as a reinstall of the server and some backup/restore
of the database? Our customers talked about some wizards to do this. Any
"best practice" advice anyone?
Thanx
GeirGeir ,
it's really simple. Just run the setup select the option upgrade and if
necessary add some (new) components. It shouldn't take more tha 2
minutes and if I there's no need to reapply service packs.
But as always, make sure you have a backup of all your databases
including the system databases before you start.
Markus|||Hi
The amount of memory you can use also depends on the version of the OS you
are using, which you haven't specified.
If you haven't already check out
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_ts_8dbn.asp
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274750
You should be able to install over your existing system, make sure that you
have backups of all your databases and a recovery plan for each stage in the
process, so that you know exactly how to get your system back up and running
in the event of problems being encountered.
John
"Geir Holme" wrote:
> Hi all.
> One of our customers need SQL to run on more than 2GB of memory. They are
> running on SQL2000 standard edition and therefor need to upgrade to
> Enterprice edition. Is it just to install then new CD's over the old system
> or do we need to do it as a reinstall of the server and some backup/restore
> of the database? Our customers talked about some wizards to do this. Any
> "best practice" advice anyone?
> Thanx
> Geir
>
>

Best way to upgrade

Hi all,
I currently have sql 2000 running under instance name TIMENSQL.
We are setting ourselves to upgrade but obviously need to test etc
etc.
I was thinking of installing 2005 alongside 2000 and migrating db's
across and then testing apps against them. Then one weekend (of
course!) clearing all off 2005 then migrate the lot from 2000 and we
would have fresh data.
I wuld love to then change the instance name to original 2000 name to
fix all issues with ODBC and connection strings etc.
Anyone gone through this senario? Any thoughts
Many thanks
Scott
Look in BOL - estimating the size of a table (indexed under "estimating
table size")
|||On 14 Jun, 17:00, "Scott Morris" <b...@.bogus.com> wrote:
> Look in BOL - estimating the size of a table (indexed under "estimating
> table size")
that for me Scott?
|||> I wuld love to then change the instance name to original 2000 name to
> fix all issues with ODBC and connection strings etc.
Can't change instance name, I'm afraid...
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Sanpedro" <Scottsanpedro@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1181835331.902393.232510@.q19g2000prn.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi all,
> I currently have sql 2000 running under instance name TIMENSQL.
> We are setting ourselves to upgrade but obviously need to test etc
> etc.
> I was thinking of installing 2005 alongside 2000 and migrating db's
> across and then testing apps against them. Then one weekend (of
> course!) clearing all off 2005 then migrate the lot from 2000 and we
> would have fresh data.
> I wuld love to then change the instance name to original 2000 name to
> fix all issues with ODBC and connection strings etc.
> Anyone gone through this senario? Any thoughts
> Many thanks
> Scott
>

Best way to upgrade

Hi all,
I currently have sql 2000 running under instance name TIMENSQL.
We are setting ourselves to upgrade but obviously need to test etc
etc.
I was thinking of installing 2005 alongside 2000 and migrating db's
across and then testing apps against them. Then one weekend (of
course!) clearing all off 2005 then migrate the lot from 2000 and we
would have fresh data.
I wuld love to then change the instance name to original 2000 name to
fix all issues with ODBC and connection strings etc.
Anyone gone through this senario? Any thoughts
Many thanks
ScottLook in BOL - estimating the size of a table (indexed under "estimating
table size")|||On 14 Jun, 17:00, "Scott Morris" <b...@.bogus.com> wrote:
> Look in BOL - estimating the size of a table (indexed under "estimating
> table size")
that for me Scott'|||> I wuld love to then change the instance name to original 2000 name to
> fix all issues with ODBC and connection strings etc.
Can't change instance name, I'm afraid...
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Sanpedro" <Scottsanpedro@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1181835331.902393.232510@.q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> Hi all,
> I currently have sql 2000 running under instance name TIMENSQL.
> We are setting ourselves to upgrade but obviously need to test etc
> etc.
> I was thinking of installing 2005 alongside 2000 and migrating db's
> across and then testing apps against them. Then one weekend (of
> course!) clearing all off 2005 then migrate the lot from 2000 and we
> would have fresh data.
> I wuld love to then change the instance name to original 2000 name to
> fix all issues with ODBC and connection strings etc.
> Anyone gone through this senario? Any thoughts
> Many thanks
> Scott
>

Best way to upgrade

Hi all,
I currently have sql 2000 running under instance name TIMENSQL.
We are setting ourselves to upgrade but obviously need to test etc
etc.
I was thinking of installing 2005 alongside 2000 and migrating db's
across and then testing apps against them. Then one weekend (of
course!) clearing all off 2005 then migrate the lot from 2000 and we
would have fresh data.
I wuld love to then change the instance name to original 2000 name to
fix all issues with ODBC and connection strings etc.
Anyone gone through this senario? Any thoughts
Many thanks
ScottLook in BOL - estimating the size of a table (indexed under "estimating
table size")|||On 14 Jun, 17:00, "Scott Morris" <b...@.bogus.com> wrote:
> Look in BOL - estimating the size of a table (indexed under "estimating
> table size")
that for me Scott'|||> I wuld love to then change the instance name to original 2000 name to
> fix all issues with ODBC and connection strings etc.
Can't change instance name, I'm afraid...
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Sanpedro" <Scottsanpedro@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1181835331.902393.232510@.q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> Hi all,
> I currently have sql 2000 running under instance name TIMENSQL.
> We are setting ourselves to upgrade but obviously need to test etc
> etc.
> I was thinking of installing 2005 alongside 2000 and migrating db's
> across and then testing apps against them. Then one weekend (of
> course!) clearing all off 2005 then migrate the lot from 2000 and we
> would have fresh data.
> I wuld love to then change the instance name to original 2000 name to
> fix all issues with ODBC and connection strings etc.
> Anyone gone through this senario? Any thoughts
> Many thanks
> Scott
>

Sunday, February 19, 2012

Best way to rename a server

Running SQL 7.0 and need to change the server name. What is the best way to
accomplish this?"Timothy Ross" <ross_timothy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uOE8IFVhEHA.1156@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Running SQL 7.0 and need to change the server name. What is the best way
to
> accomplish this?
>
As I recall, it's exactly the same as SQL Server 2000, from BOL, "renaming a
server"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You can connect to SQL Server using the new computer name after you have
restarted the server. However, to correct the sysservers system table, you
should manually run these procedures:
sp_dropserver old_name
GO
sp_addserver new_name, local
GO
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Be aware that if are using replication there
will be additional steps involved.Steve|||Steve,
Thank you for these instructions - we are not using replicaton and we have
manual backups of all the databases - I will use your instructions.
TR
"Steve Thompson" <stevethompson@.nomail.please> wrote in message
news:e9sYzQVhEHA.1356@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> "Timothy Ross" <ross_timothy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uOE8IFVhEHA.1156@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > Running SQL 7.0 and need to change the server name. What is the best
way
> to
> > accomplish this?
> >
> As I recall, it's exactly the same as SQL Server 2000, from BOL, "renaming
a
> server"
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> You can connect to SQL Server using the new computer name after you have
> restarted the server. However, to correct the sysservers system table, you
> should manually run these procedures:
> sp_dropserver old_name
> GO
> sp_addserver new_name, local
> GO
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Be aware that if are using replication there
> will be additional steps involved.Steve
>|||You might want to check my article at:
http://www.karaszi.com/SQLServer/info_change_server_name.asp
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Timothy Ross" <ross_timothy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:eZSyPiVhEHA.1652@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Steve,
> Thank you for these instructions - we are not using replicaton and we have
> manual backups of all the databases - I will use your instructions.
> TR
> "Steve Thompson" <stevethompson@.nomail.please> wrote in message
> news:e9sYzQVhEHA.1356@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > "Timothy Ross" <ross_timothy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:uOE8IFVhEHA.1156@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > Running SQL 7.0 and need to change the server name. What is the best
> way
> > to
> > > accomplish this?
> > >
> >
> > As I recall, it's exactly the same as SQL Server 2000, from BOL, "renaming
> a
> > server"
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > You can connect to SQL Server using the new computer name after you have
> > restarted the server. However, to correct the sysservers system table, you
> > should manually run these procedures:
> > sp_dropserver old_name
> > GO
> > sp_addserver new_name, local
> > GO
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Be aware that if are using replication there
> > will be additional steps involved.Steve
> >
> >
>|||Thanks Tibor -- far more complete!
Steve
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OVnhWDWhEHA.1356@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> You might want to check my article at:
> http://www.karaszi.com/SQLServer/info_change_server_name.asp
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Timothy Ross" <ross_timothy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eZSyPiVhEHA.1652@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > Steve,
> >
> > Thank you for these instructions - we are not using replicaton and we
have
> > manual backups of all the databases - I will use your instructions.
> >
> > TR
> >
> > "Steve Thompson" <stevethompson@.nomail.please> wrote in message
> > news:e9sYzQVhEHA.1356@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > > "Timothy Ross" <ross_timothy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:uOE8IFVhEHA.1156@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > > Running SQL 7.0 and need to change the server name. What is the
best
> > way
> > > to
> > > > accomplish this?
> > > >
> > >
> > > As I recall, it's exactly the same as SQL Server 2000, from BOL,
"renaming
> > a
> > > server"
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > You can connect to SQL Server using the new computer name after you
have
> > > restarted the server. However, to correct the sysservers system table,
you
> > > should manually run these procedures:
> > > sp_dropserver old_name
> > > GO
> > > sp_addserver new_name, local
> > > GO
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Be aware that if are using replication
there
> > > will be additional steps involved.Steve
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>|||Thank you Tibor
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OVnhWDWhEHA.1356@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> You might want to check my article at:
> http://www.karaszi.com/SQLServer/info_change_server_name.asp
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Timothy Ross" <ross_timothy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eZSyPiVhEHA.1652@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > Steve,
> >
> > Thank you for these instructions - we are not using replicaton and we
have
> > manual backups of all the databases - I will use your instructions.
> >
> > TR
> >
> > "Steve Thompson" <stevethompson@.nomail.please> wrote in message
> > news:e9sYzQVhEHA.1356@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > > "Timothy Ross" <ross_timothy@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:uOE8IFVhEHA.1156@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > > Running SQL 7.0 and need to change the server name. What is the
best
> > way
> > > to
> > > > accomplish this?
> > > >
> > >
> > > As I recall, it's exactly the same as SQL Server 2000, from BOL,
"renaming
> > a
> > > server"
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > You can connect to SQL Server using the new computer name after you
have
> > > restarted the server. However, to correct the sysservers system table,
you
> > > should manually run these procedures:
> > > sp_dropserver old_name
> > > GO
> > > sp_addserver new_name, local
> > > GO
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Be aware that if are using replication
there
> > > will be additional steps involved.Steve
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

Thursday, February 16, 2012

best way to optimize certain tables

I have a SqlServer 2000 running 7 databases. One in particular is slower
than the rest specificaly on certain tables. It seems the problem comes
from the volume of data, but I don't think 3000 lines can be considered a
big table. I have indexes on the principal keys, but it did not help.
thank you
Hi,
Identify the stored procedures , Queries taking more time / CPU. Use the
profiler tuning templace to identify this. After that save the
file as a workload table or file. Use the workload file as the input file
for index tning wizard.
I feel that this slow responce is due to the lack of proper indexes.
You could also use the Execution plans to tune your queries.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Fernand St-Georges" <fernand.st-georges@.videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:Ethwe.79344$Yu4.927653@.wagner.videotron.net.. .
>I have a SqlServer 2000 running 7 databases. One in particular is slower
> than the rest specificaly on certain tables. It seems the problem comes
> from the volume of data, but I don't think 3000 lines can be considered a
> big table. I have indexes on the principal keys, but it did not help.
> thank you
>
|||Tables are not slow. They are just data containers.
Queries can be slow, if they are not written properly, or when the
underlying tables are not properly indexed. You could follow Hari's
advice to analyse where and why they are slow.
You could also give the Index Tuning Wizard a try.
HTH,
Gert-Jan
Fernand St-Georges wrote:
> I have a SqlServer 2000 running 7 databases. One in particular is slower
> than the rest specificaly on certain tables. It seems the problem comes
> from the volume of data, but I don't think 3000 lines can be considered a
> big table. I have indexes on the principal keys, but it did not help.
> thank you
|||Check the queries and use index tuning wizard.
Are you re-indexing the tables frequently?
Thanks
Ravi
"Fernand St-Georges" wrote:

> I have a SqlServer 2000 running 7 databases. One in particular is slower
> than the rest specificaly on certain tables. It seems the problem comes
> from the volume of data, but I don't think 3000 lines can be considered a
> big table. I have indexes on the principal keys, but it did not help.
> thank you
>
>

best way to optimize certain tables

thank youFernand St-Georges (fernand.st-georges@.videotron.ca) writes:
> I have a SqlServer 2000 running 7 databases. One in particular is slower
> than the rest specificaly on certain tables. It seems the problem comes
> from the volume of data, but I don't think 3000 lines can be considered a
> big table. I have indexes on the principal keys, but it did not help.

3000 rows is indeed a fairly small table. But a weird enough query and
make even that table slow to work with.

You need to find out more of what is going on. One way is to run Profiler,
and capture the SP:StmtCompleted, SQL:StatementCompleted, SP:Completed
and RPC:Completed events with some good filter on Duration, so you can
locate the slow queries. If there are any slow queries. The problem could
be blocking as well.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp|||Please post DDL, so that people do not have to guess what the keys,
constraints, Declarative Referential Integrity, data types, etc. in
your schema are. Sample data is also a good idea, along with clear
specifications. It is very hard to debug code when you do not let us
see it.

best way to optimize certain tables

I have a SqlServer 2000 running 7 databases. One in particular is slower
than the rest specificaly on certain tables. It seems the problem comes
from the volume of data, but I don't think 3000 lines can be considered a
big table. I have indexes on the principal keys, but it did not help.
thank youHi,
Identify the stored procedures , Queries taking more time / CPU. Use the
profiler tuning templace to identify this. After that save the
file as a workload table or file. Use the workload file as the input file
for index tning wizard.
I feel that this slow responce is due to the lack of proper indexes.
You could also use the Execution plans to tune your queries.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Fernand St-Georges" <fernand.st-georges@.videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:Ethwe.79344$Yu4.927653@.wagner.videotron.net...
>I have a SqlServer 2000 running 7 databases. One in particular is slower
> than the rest specificaly on certain tables. It seems the problem comes
> from the volume of data, but I don't think 3000 lines can be considered a
> big table. I have indexes on the principal keys, but it did not help.
> thank you
>|||Tables are not slow. They are just data containers.
Queries can be slow, if they are not written properly, or when the
underlying tables are not properly indexed. You could follow Hari's
advice to analyse where and why they are slow.
You could also give the Index Tuning Wizard a try.
HTH,
Gert-Jan
Fernand St-Georges wrote:
> I have a SqlServer 2000 running 7 databases. One in particular is slower
> than the rest specificaly on certain tables. It seems the problem comes
> from the volume of data, but I don't think 3000 lines can be considered a
> big table. I have indexes on the principal keys, but it did not help.
> thank you|||Check the queries and use index tuning wizard.
Are you re-indexing the tables frequently?
--
Thanks
Ravi
"Fernand St-Georges" wrote:
> I have a SqlServer 2000 running 7 databases. One in particular is slower
> than the rest specificaly on certain tables. It seems the problem comes
> from the volume of data, but I don't think 3000 lines can be considered a
> big table. I have indexes on the principal keys, but it did not help.
> thank you
>
>

best way to optimize certain tables

I have a SqlServer 2000 running 7 databases. One in particular is slower
than the rest specificaly on certain tables. It seems the problem comes
from the volume of data, but I don't think 3000 lines can be considered a
big table. I have indexes on the principal keys, but it did not help.
thank youHi,
Identify the stored procedures , Queries taking more time / CPU. Use the
profiler tuning templace to identify this. After that save the
file as a workload table or file. Use the workload file as the input file
for index tning wizard.
I feel that this slow responce is due to the lack of proper indexes.
You could also use the Execution plans to tune your queries.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Fernand St-Georges" <fernand.st-georges@.videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:Ethwe.79344$Yu4.927653@.wagner.videotron.net...
>I have a SqlServer 2000 running 7 databases. One in particular is slower
> than the rest specificaly on certain tables. It seems the problem comes
> from the volume of data, but I don't think 3000 lines can be considered a
> big table. I have indexes on the principal keys, but it did not help.
> thank you
>|||Tables are not slow. They are just data containers.
Queries can be slow, if they are not written properly, or when the
underlying tables are not properly indexed. You could follow Hari's
advice to analyse where and why they are slow.
You could also give the Index Tuning Wizard a try.
HTH,
Gert-Jan
Fernand St-Georges wrote:
> I have a SqlServer 2000 running 7 databases. One in particular is slower
> than the rest specificaly on certain tables. It seems the problem comes
> from the volume of data, but I don't think 3000 lines can be considered a
> big table. I have indexes on the principal keys, but it did not help.
> thank you|||Check the queries and use index tuning wizard.
Are you re-indexing the tables frequently?
Thanks
Ravi
"Fernand St-Georges" wrote:

> I have a SqlServer 2000 running 7 databases. One in particular is slower
> than the rest specificaly on certain tables. It seems the problem comes
> from the volume of data, but I don't think 3000 lines can be considered a
> big table. I have indexes on the principal keys, but it did not help.
> thank you
>
>

Thursday, March 22, 2012

bigint problem

bigint problem

bigint problem

Monday, March 19, 2012

Big Database needs pruning

Big Database needs pruning

Big Database needs pruning

BIDS abort

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Better to backup up all server databases or backup system databases separately from databa

Better to backup up all server databases or backup system databases separately from databa

Friday, February 24, 2012

Best way to upgrade for SQLServer2000 standard to Enterprice

Best way to upgrade

Best way to upgrade

Best way to upgrade

Sunday, February 19, 2012

Best way to rename a server

Best way to rename a server

Best way to rename a server

Thursday, February 16, 2012

best way to optimize certain tables

best way to optimize certain tables

best way to optimize certain tables

best way to optimize certain tables

Best way to copy database

Blog Archive

About Me