Change logfile location durring setup SQL 2000

Is there a possibility to change the default instalation directory for
the logfiles for sql server 2000? I would like the default database
files to be placed on teh d: drive and the logfiles on the e: drive?

Sjaak van Esdonksjaakvanesdonk@.hotmail.com (Sjaak van Esdonk) wrote in message news:<7479e65c.0311130551.56e84f0c@.posting.google.com>...
> Is there a possibility to change the default instalation directory for
> the logfiles for sql server 2000? I would like the default database
> files to be placed on teh d: drive and the logfiles on the e: drive?
> Sjaak van Esdonk

Setup doesn't have a separate path for the log files, however in
Enterprise Manager you can go into the Server Properties, and on the
Database Settings tab you can select a default location for new
database files. These values are saved in registry keys, so if you
need to do it programmatically, you can edit the registry directly:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\MSSQLServer\ MSSQLServer\DefaultData
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\MSSQLServer\ MSSQLServer\DefaultLog

Simon|||Thanks Simon, that seems to work !!

Change error logging for sys.sp_MSrepl_raiseerror

I have merge replication setup to a bunch of mobile subscribers. I want everything managed from the server and I want everything to run continuously. The reason we want this is that we want subscribers to automatically synchronize data within 60 seconds of plugging into the network from any location. We do not want to write anything to have to detect connectivity and initiate it. We do not want it initiated from a subscriber either. This creates a SEVERE logging issue and has halted a roll out at 2 different customers. We can't get beyond about 60 subscribers on a system that was running 3700 subscribers in SQL Server 2000. The server quite literally freezes and becomes non-responsive 1 - 2 times per day. We've tracked this back to the volume of logging into the Windows event log that is being caused by the replication engine.

When subscribers are disconnected, they throw constant errors, to the tune of 1 error every 2 minutes into the SQL Server error log as well as the Windows event log. This is because someone decided that these should be level 18 errors. There is no error. The publisher could not contact the subscriber, so I want it to simply log an error, shut up, go back to sleep, and then try again. I do NOT want a message in my SQL Server error log and I do NOT want a message in my Windows event log.

We are currently logging over 60,000 messages per day into both the Windows event log and the SQL Server error logs for something that we KNOW is a NORMAL operational state of the system. The merge agent doesn't have a parameter that I can feed it to ignore 14151 errors.

The culprit is in sys.sp_MSrepl_raiseerror. Since it is a system object, I can't override it and change the severity level of the error. So, right now we are stuck and the SQL Server error log as well as Windows event logs are being rendered quite useless on the system.

The offending code is:

raiserror (14151, 18, -1, @.agent, @.agent_name, @.message)

Does anyone have any idea how I can forcefully change sys.sp_MSrepl_raiseerror or in some other way suppress the logging of 14151 errors from the Windows and SQL Server logs?

More information.

We have continuous, push merge replication setup to a bunch of subscribers that routinely disconnect. It is merge replication, because we need to make changes at both publisher and subscriber in a disconnected model and this is exactly what merge replication was designed to do. It is setup as push, because we want all agents to be run from the distributor for centralized management and monitoring. It is continuous, because we want as low of latency as possible and for any subscriber that plugs in to begin synchronizing as soon as possible. In otherwords, we have a normal configuration, with very normal and reasonable requirements and we are using the merge engine in precisely the way it was designed and intended to be used.

However, it seems that running all of your agents at the distributor is absolutely incompatible with having disconnected subscribers with merge replication. It is quite literally impossible to run any architecture of any size with merge replication that has disconnected subscribers, unless you are running your agents at the subscriber and are then forced to manage them at the subscriber.

How did I reach this? Quite simply. replmerg.exe is the merge replication engine. It is coded to detect when a subscriber can not be contacted. (A normal state when a subscriber is disconnected.) When it detects one of these, it makes a call to sp_MSadd_merge_history90 and passes it a bunch of parameters, including a value of 6 for the run status. (This is coded directly into replmerg.exe and there is NO way to override this behavior.) When you pass a value of 6 for the run status to sp_MSadd_merge_history90, the last section of code makes a call to sp_MSrepl_raiserror and passes the value of 6 for the run status to it. When you pass a value of 6 to this procedure, it causes a level 18 error message of 14151 to be raised. Since anything level 16 and above is considered fatal, it writes to the SQL Server error log as well as the Windows event log.

Now, this is where the idiocy of this. The merge agent doesn't shut down when this error is thrown. It in fact goes to sleep, wakes up 1 minutes later, and goes through the same routine again. If the error was so fatal, why would the merge engine continue to run? Because, the NORMAL operational state of merge replication is to HAVE a subscriber disconnected.

So, we now have a situation where the merge engine is designed to run with disconnected subscribers as well as when those subscribers are disconnected, the merge engine throws level 18 error messages into the error log and Windows event log, and then goes to sleep so that it can continue to throw level 18 error messages for a situation that it was designed for. What does this mean? It means that as you add in several dozen subscribers, you get quite literally thousands of fatal error messages thrown into the event and error logs. Somewhere around the 60 subscriber mark, you throw fatal error messages at such as pace that the server itself quite literally freezes because of all of the error logging that it is forced to do based on a normal operational state.

So, from my testing thus far, using merge replication with push subscriptions is only suitable it you have 40 of fewer subscribers that are connected a majority of the time. If they are disconnected more than 50% of the time, I can only get about 30 subscribers running in a stable mode without causing the server to lock up. If I turn this around and run the agents at the subscriber where I lose any centralized management of replication, I can scale to well over 400 subscribers. Same publication, same subscription, same hosts. In both of these tests, I'm using multiple instances of SQL Server Express edition on a pool of 5 physical machines. I have ZERO data moving, the only activity happening is the replication engine simply trying to connect and poll for changes. In all of the push cases, the publisher locks up and becomes unresponsive requiring a reboot. The only discernable difference is that when agents are offloaded to subscribers, I don't throw level 18 errors into the event log and error log. Before someone says that it's also because I'm offloading the merge agent, I lock up the publisher in a push mode when I go beyond 30 subscribers who are mostly disconnected. However, I can also load up 100+ subscribers on a single machine in a pull mode (more than 3 times the number of agents as I could get in a push mode) without having a machine lock up. We've traced the cause of the server freeze back to the amount of error logging that is being forced on it and nearly 100% of the error logging is occuring from the single state of having a subscriber disconnected.

So, I've currently halted a couple of major customer upgrades of in excess of 5,000 processors, because this single issue would cause their environments to melt to the ground long before we ever go them upgraded. I have a deployment halted at another customer and one up in the air at a 4th customer. In all cases, I'm starting to evaluate 3rd party products to replace the replication engine, because it very clearly does NOT scale in a very normal configuration.

change email link in subscription

how can i change the link from http://servername/... to http://ipaddress/...
in the subscription email? Right now I don't have dns setup yet so I would
like to you ip address instead but the email sent out with the
http://servername/... link. Please adviceYou could try changing the urlroot element in RSReportServer.config.
Mike G.
"John R" <JohnR@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%238SXzDLFFHA.2052@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> how can i change the link from http://servername/... to
> http://ipaddress/... in the subscription email? Right now I don't have dns
> setup yet so I would like to you ip address instead but the email sent out
> with the http://servername/... link. Please advice
>

change distributor ?

Hi There

Ok i have the following setup.

Server 1 - OLTP publisher
Server 2 - Remote Distributor
Server 3 - Warehouse subscriber

Server 4 - New Server (new computer name etc, brand new).

I need Server 4 to be the new remote distributor for Server 1's publication.

I could disable replication and reconfigure from scratch with new server 4 as distributor.
Problem OLTP tons of data , downtime required for initial snapshot to long.

How can i do this without having to completely reconfigure replication , that is minimal downtime.

ThanxUnfortunately, there is not a way to just switch out the Distributor without reconfiguring. The good news, however, is that you can probably do this without too much fuss.

Since the Publisher and Subscriber will remain the same, you should not need to reinitialize the Subscriber; it already has all of the published data. The following should get you where you want to go:

1) Configure Server 4 as a Distributor and enable Server 1 as a Publisher.

2) Generate a script to create your publication(s) on Server 1.

3) Quiesce the old system by making sure that all replicated data has been distributed to the Subscriber.

4) Drop the subscription(s) on Server 3.

5) Disable replication on Server 1.

6) Reconfigure replication on Server 1 with Server 4 as the Distributor.

7) Run the scripts to recreate the publication(s).

8) Add the subscription(s) on Server 3, but use the no_sync option (which means that the Subscriber already has the data).

9) Start allowing changes to the replicated data.

Phillip Garding

|||Hi Phillip

Thank you very much for your input, sorry it has taken so long to reply.

The no_sync option is the trick, i will try test this scenario.

Thanx again

Change Default Langauge for a database

Hello All,
We have an SQL Server installation setup with US english as the default
language. Now we need that one of the databases use British english as the
default language for that database, but I have not been able to find an
option to do so in the SQL Server management interface, is there a way to do
that ? if so how can it be done.
Thanks a lot.
Imran.
Default language is set at the login level. If you don't specify a language for a login, then a
system default is used, which you can set using sp_configure. There is no such thing as default
language for a certain database.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Imran Aziz" <imran@.bindweb.com> wrote in message news:uGUhRRdsEHA.2560@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hello All,
> We have an SQL Server installation setup with US english as the default language. Now we need
> that one of the databases use British english as the default language for that database, but I
> have not been able to find an option to do so in the SQL Server management interface, is there a
> way to do that ? if so how can it be done.
> Thanks a lot.
> Imran.
>
|||Thanks a lot for the response, that sorted my problem
Imran.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OW5edVdsEHA.3412@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Default language is set at the login level. If you don't specify a
> language for a login, then a system default is used, which you can set
> using sp_configure. There is no such thing as default language for a
> certain database.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Imran Aziz" <imran@.bindweb.com> wrote in message
> news:uGUhRRdsEHA.2560@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>

Change Default Langauge for a database

Hello All,
We have an SQL Server installation setup with US english as the default
language. Now we need that one of the databases use British english as the
default language for that database, but I have not been able to find an
option to do so in the SQL Server management interface, is there a way to do
that ? if so how can it be done.
Thanks a lot.
Imran.Default language is set at the login level. If you don't specify a language for a login, then a
system default is used, which you can set using sp_configure. There is no such thing as default
language for a certain database.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Imran Aziz" <imran@.bindweb.com> wrote in message news:uGUhRRdsEHA.2560@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hello All,
> We have an SQL Server installation setup with US english as the default language. Now we need
> that one of the databases use British english as the default language for that database, but I
> have not been able to find an option to do so in the SQL Server management interface, is there a
> way to do that ? if so how can it be done.
> Thanks a lot.
> Imran.
>|||Thanks a lot for the response, that sorted my problem :)
Imran.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OW5edVdsEHA.3412@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Default language is set at the login level. If you don't specify a
> language for a login, then a system default is used, which you can set
> using sp_configure. There is no such thing as default language for a
> certain database.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Imran Aziz" <imran@.bindweb.com> wrote in message
> news:uGUhRRdsEHA.2560@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> Hello All,
>> We have an SQL Server installation setup with US english as the
>> default language. Now we need that one of the databases use British
>> english as the default language for that database, but I have not been
>> able to find an option to do so in the SQL Server management interface,
>> is there a way to do that ? if so how can it be done.
>> Thanks a lot.
>> Imran.
>sql

Change Default Langauge for a database

Hello All,
We have an SQL Server installation setup with US english as the default
language. Now we need that one of the databases use British english as the
default language for that database, but I have not been able to find an
option to do so in the SQL Server management interface, is there a way to do
that ? if so how can it be done.
Thanks a lot.
Imran.Default language is set at the login level. If you don't specify a language
for a login, then a
system default is used, which you can set using sp_configure. There is no su
ch thing as default
language for a certain database.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Imran Aziz" <imran@.bindweb.com> wrote in message news:uGUhRRdsEHA.2560@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl
..
> Hello All,
> We have an SQL Server installation setup with US english as the default
language. Now we need
> that one of the databases use British english as the default language for
that database, but I
> have not been able to find an option to do so in the SQL Server management
interface, is there a
> way to do that ? if so how can it be done.
> Thanks a lot.
> Imran.
>|||Thanks a lot for the response, that sorted my problem
Imran.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OW5edVdsEHA.3412@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Default language is set at the login level. If you don't specify a
> language for a login, then a system default is used, which you can set
> using sp_configure. There is no such thing as default language for a
> certain database.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Imran Aziz" <imran@.bindweb.com> wrote in message
> news:uGUhRRdsEHA.2560@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>

Change Data folder

Hi,
we have just set up a monster of a server and installes SQL Server 2000
on it.
The server has a RAID 5 setup and we want the data to be located on the
D-drive and have set "D:\Data" as the default database and logfile
folder.
Our databases has been moved to the server/folder an attached.
The question is - shoud we/can we move the master, model tmpdb and other
default databases to the "D:\Data" folder as well?
Thankful for any sound advice here...
Bent S. Lund
System Developer
MCP VB
*** Sent via Devdex http://www.devdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
Hi,
Yes, you can do that . MSDB and Model database can detached , move the MDF
to new locaton and attach it back. For master database using the enterprise
manager -- use the Startup Parameters button and you will see the entries
for master.mdf and mastlog.ldf files. There you can specify the new
location, stop sql server service, copy tboth the files to new location and
start the SQL Server service.
Details are given in the below link:-
Moving SQL Server databases to a new location with Detach/Attach
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;EN-US;224071
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Bent Lund" <bstlu@.online.no> wrote in message
news:OOoJJbmYEHA.4092@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> we have just set up a monster of a server and installes SQL Server 2000
> on it.
> The server has a RAID 5 setup and we want the data to be located on the
> D-drive and have set "D:\Data" as the default database and logfile
> folder.
> Our databases has been moved to the server/folder an attached.
> The question is - shoud we/can we move the master, model tmpdb and other
> default databases to the "D:\Data" folder as well?
>
> Thankful for any sound advice here...
> Bent S. Lund
> System Developer
> MCP VB
> *** Sent via Devdex http://www.devdex.com ***
> Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
|||On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 01:05:05 -0700, Bent Lund <bstlu@.online.no> wrote:

>Hi,
>we have just set up a monster of a server and installes SQL Server 2000
>on it.
>The server has a RAID 5 setup and we want the data to be located on the
>D-drive and have set "D:\Data" as the default database and logfile
>folder.
>Our databases has been moved to the server/folder an attached.
>The question is - shoud we/can we move the master, model tmpdb and other
>default databases to the "D:\Data" folder as well?
>
>Thankful for any sound advice here...
>
There are different procedures for master, model, tempdb and user
databases see this article
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;224071
Regards
Chris
|||would definately think about where tempdb is depending on what your usage
patterns are - used heavily for GROUP BY , sorting etc . You may benefit
from keeping tempdb I/O seperate to other I/O (ie your D: drive). KB
article below talks about tempdb usage as well as a hotfix that reduces
contention (only apply if you see issues). Also see Books Online "Optimizing
tempdb performance"
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;328551
Webcast
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;834846
cheers,
Andy.
"Bent Lund" <bstlu@.online.no> wrote in message
news:OOoJJbmYEHA.4092@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> we have just set up a monster of a server and installes SQL Server 2000
> on it.
> The server has a RAID 5 setup and we want the data to be located on the
> D-drive and have set "D:\Data" as the default database and logfile
> folder.
> Our databases has been moved to the server/folder an attached.
> The question is - shoud we/can we move the master, model tmpdb and other
> default databases to the "D:\Data" folder as well?
>
> Thankful for any sound advice here...
> Bent S. Lund
> System Developer
> MCP VB
> *** Sent via Devdex http://www.devdex.com ***
> Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
|||Thanks all!
The server is now running with all databases on the raid-disk setup.
One thing - when using Query Analyzer to detach/attach databases I ouf
course made a typing error...
I was happy to find out that startup parameters could be changed in the
registry:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\MSSQLServer\ MSSQLServer\Parameters
Thanks again!
regards
Bent S. Lund
System Developer
MCP VB
*** Sent via Devdex http://www.devdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!

Change Data folder

Hi,
we have just set up a monster of a server and installes SQL Server 2000
on it.
The server has a RAID 5 setup and we want the data to be located on the
D-drive and have set "D:\Data" as the default database and logfile
folder.
Our databases has been moved to the server/folder an attached.
The question is - shoud we/can we move the master, model tmpdb and other
default databases to the "D:\Data" folder as well?
Thankful for any sound advice here...
Bent S. Lund
System Developer
MCP VB
*** Sent via Devdex http://www.devdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!Hi,
Yes, you can do that . MSDB and Model database can detached , move the MDF
to new locaton and attach it back. For master database using the enterprise
manager -- use the Startup Parameters button and you will see the entries
for master.mdf and mastlog.ldf files. There you can specify the new
location, stop sql server service, copy tboth the files to new location and
start the SQL Server service.
Details are given in the below link:-
Moving SQL Server databases to a new location with Detach/Attach
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;224071
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Bent Lund" <bstlu@.online.no> wrote in message
news:OOoJJbmYEHA.4092@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> we have just set up a monster of a server and installes SQL Server 2000
> on it.
> The server has a RAID 5 setup and we want the data to be located on the
> D-drive and have set "D:\Data" as the default database and logfile
> folder.
> Our databases has been moved to the server/folder an attached.
> The question is - shoud we/can we move the master, model tmpdb and other
> default databases to the "D:\Data" folder as well?
>
> Thankful for any sound advice here...
> Bent S. Lund
> System Developer
> MCP VB
> *** Sent via Devdex http://www.devdex.com ***
> Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!|||On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 01:05:05 -0700, Bent Lund <bstlu@.online.no> wrote:
>Hi,
>we have just set up a monster of a server and installes SQL Server 2000
>on it.
>The server has a RAID 5 setup and we want the data to be located on the
>D-drive and have set "D:\Data" as the default database and logfile
>folder.
>Our databases has been moved to the server/folder an attached.
>The question is - shoud we/can we move the master, model tmpdb and other
>default databases to the "D:\Data" folder as well?
>
>Thankful for any sound advice here...
>
There are different procedures for master, model, tempdb and user
databases see this article
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;224071
Regards
Chris|||would definately think about where tempdb is depending on what your usage
patterns are - used heavily for GROUP BY , sorting etc . You may benefit
from keeping tempdb I/O seperate to other I/O (ie your D: drive). KB
article below talks about tempdb usage as well as a hotfix that reduces
contention (only apply if you see issues). Also see Books Online "Optimizing
tempdb performance"
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;328551
Webcast
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;834846
cheers,
Andy.
"Bent Lund" <bstlu@.online.no> wrote in message
news:OOoJJbmYEHA.4092@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> we have just set up a monster of a server and installes SQL Server 2000
> on it.
> The server has a RAID 5 setup and we want the data to be located on the
> D-drive and have set "D:\Data" as the default database and logfile
> folder.
> Our databases has been moved to the server/folder an attached.
> The question is - shoud we/can we move the master, model tmpdb and other
> default databases to the "D:\Data" folder as well?
>
> Thankful for any sound advice here...
> Bent S. Lund
> System Developer
> MCP VB
> *** Sent via Devdex http://www.devdex.com ***
> Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!

Change Data folder

Hi,
we have just set up a monster of a server and installes SQL Server 2000
on it.
The server has a RAID 5 setup and we want the data to be located on the
D-drive and have set "D:\Data" as the default database and logfile
folder.
Our databases has been moved to the server/folder an attached.
The question is - shoud we/can we move the master, model tmpdb and other
default databases to the "D:\Data" folder as well?
Thankful for any sound advice here...
Bent S. Lund
System Developer
MCP VB
*** Sent via Devdex http://www.devdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!Hi,
Yes, you can do that . MSDB and Model database can detached , move the MDF
to new locaton and attach it back. For master database using the enterprise
manager -- use the Startup Parameters button and you will see the entries
for master.mdf and mastlog.ldf files. There you can specify the new
location, stop sql server service, copy tboth the files to new location and
start the SQL Server service.
Details are given in the below link:-
Moving SQL Server databases to a new location with Detach/Attach
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;EN-US;224071
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Bent Lund" <bstlu@.online.no> wrote in message
news:OOoJJbmYEHA.4092@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> we have just set up a monster of a server and installes SQL Server 2000
> on it.
> The server has a RAID 5 setup and we want the data to be located on the
> D-drive and have set "D:\Data" as the default database and logfile
> folder.
> Our databases has been moved to the server/folder an attached.
> The question is - shoud we/can we move the master, model tmpdb and other
> default databases to the "D:\Data" folder as well?
>
> Thankful for any sound advice here...
> Bent S. Lund
> System Developer
> MCP VB
> *** Sent via Devdex http://www.devdex.com ***
> Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!|||On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 01:05:05 -0700, Bent Lund <bstlu@.online.no> wrote:

>Hi,
>we have just set up a monster of a server and installes SQL Server 2000
>on it.
>The server has a RAID 5 setup and we want the data to be located on the
>D-drive and have set "D:\Data" as the default database and logfile
>folder.
>Our databases has been moved to the server/folder an attached.
>The question is - shoud we/can we move the master, model tmpdb and other
>default databases to the "D:\Data" folder as well?
>
>Thankful for any sound advice here...
>
There are different procedures for master, model, tempdb and user
databases see this article
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;224071
Regards
Chris|||would definately think about where tempdb is depending on what your usage
patterns are - used heavily for GROUP BY , sorting etc . You may benefit
from keeping tempdb I/O seperate to other I/O (ie your D: drive). KB
article below talks about tempdb usage as well as a hotfix that reduces
contention (only apply if you see issues). Also see Books Online "Optimizing
tempdb performance"
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;328551
Webcast
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;834846
cheers,
Andy.
"Bent Lund" <bstlu@.online.no> wrote in message
news:OOoJJbmYEHA.4092@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> we have just set up a monster of a server and installes SQL Server 2000
> on it.
> The server has a RAID 5 setup and we want the data to be located on the
> D-drive and have set "D:\Data" as the default database and logfile
> folder.
> Our databases has been moved to the server/folder an attached.
> The question is - shoud we/can we move the master, model tmpdb and other
> default databases to the "D:\Data" folder as well?
>
> Thankful for any sound advice here...
> Bent S. Lund
> System Developer
> MCP VB
> *** Sent via Devdex http://www.devdex.com ***
> Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!|||Thanks all!
The server is now running with all databases on the raid-disk setup.
One thing - when using Query Analyzer to detach/attach databases I ouf
course made a typing error...
I was happy to find out that startup parameters could be changed in the
registry:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\MS
SQLServer\MSSQLServer\Parameters
Thanks again!
regards
Bent S. Lund
System Developer
MCP VB
*** Sent via Devdex http://www.devdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!

change a named instance to the default instance

We have a SQL 7 that I want to upgrade to SQL 2000 but
the setup wizard does not allow it to do so. The only
option that I'm allowed is to create a named instance.
If I do this and copy all of the databases to the SQL
2000 named instance, can I uninstall SQL 7 and change the
named instance to the default instance?You cannot make a named instance to a default or change name of an instance.
You have do use backup/restore or detach/attach.
Some of the below articles *might* be of help:
Moving SQL Server Databases
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=224071
Moving Databases between Servers
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=314546
Using WITH MOVE in a Restore to a New Location with Detach/Attach
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=221465
How To Transfer Logins and Passwords Between SQL Servers
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=246133
Mapping Logins & SIDs after a Restore
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=298897
Utility to map users to the correct login
http://www.dbmaint.com/SyncSqlLogins.asp
How to Resolve Permission Issues When a Database Is Moved Between SQL
Servers
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=240872
User Logon and/or Permission Errors After Restoring Dump
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=168001
Disaster Recovery Articles for SQL Server
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=307775
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at:
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"Jim" <jim.abel@.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:047801c3aa2a$3cd905f0$a101280a@.phx.gbl...
> We have a SQL 7 that I want to upgrade to SQL 2000 but
> the setup wizard does not allow it to do so. The only
> option that I'm allowed is to create a named instance.
> If I do this and copy all of the databases to the SQL
> 2000 named instance, can I uninstall SQL 7 and change the
> named instance to the default instance?|||Hi Jim,
Thank you for using MSDN Newsgroup! It's my pleasure to assist you with
your issue.
First of all, I would like to confirm my understanding of your issue.
From your description, I understand that you'd like to upgrade SQL 7 to SQL
2000. However, I'm unsure of the meaning "The only option that I'm allowed
is to create a named instance." When upgrading, SQL Server 7.0
automatically becomes the default instance of SQL Server 2000.
As we known, you can overwrite the existing installation of SQL Server 7.0
by installing a default instance of SQL Server 2000. You can also keep the
installation of SQL Server 7.0 intact by installing a named instance of SQL
Server 2000. Both operations are performed using the following procedure.
To upgrade SQL Server 7.0 to SQL Server 2000
1. Insert the Microsoft SQL Server 2000 compact disc for the edition to
which you want to upgrade into your CD-ROM drive. If the compact disc does
not autorun, double-click Autorun.exe in the root directory of the compact
disc.
2. Select SQL Server 2000 Components, select Install Database Server, and
then setup prepares the SQL Server Installation Wizard. At the Welcome
screen, click Next.
3. In Computer Name dialog box, Local Computer is the default option and
the local computer name appears in the edit box. Click Next.
4. In the Installation Selection dialog box, click Upgrade, remove, or add
components to an existing instance of SQL Server, and then click Next.
5. In the Instance Name dialog box, Default will be selected. Click Next.
# Note # When upgrading, SQL Server 7.0 automatically becomes the
default instance of SQL Server 2000.
6. In the Existing Installation dialog box, click Upgrade your existing
installation, and then click Next.
7. In the Upgrade dialog box, you are prompted as to whether you want to
proceed with the requested upgrade. Click Yes, upgrade my <text specific to
the upgrade> to start the upgrade process, and then click Next. The upgrade
runs until finished.
8. In the Connect to Server dialog box, select an authentication mode, and
then click Next.
If you are not sure which mode to use, accept the default: The Windows
account information I use to log on to my computer with (Windows).
9. In Start Copying Files dialog box, click Next.
10. In the Setup Complete dialog box, click Yes, I want to restart my
computer now, and then click Finish.
Additionally, instead of a full upgrade from SQL Server 7.0 to SQL Server
2000, which overwrites SQL Server 7.0, you can upgrade SQL Server 7.0
databases and associated meta data. To upgrade a SQL Server 7.0 database to
a SQL Server 2000 database, please use the following procedure:
1. Expand a server group, and then expand a server.
2. Right-click the server, point to All Tasks, and then click Copy Database
Wizard.
3. Complete the steps in the wizard.
After upgrading databases from SQL Server 7.0, run sp_updatestats (update
statistics) against the database on the destination server to ensure
optimal performance of the copied database.
Jim, does this answer your question? Please feel free to let me know if
this help solves your problem. If there is anything more I can still
assist you with, please feel free to post it in the group.
Best regards,
Billy Yao
Microsoft Online Support
----
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.|||You are correct in that I want to upgrade my SQL 7 to SQL
2000. I followed the steps you have below But when I get
to step 5 the wizard comes up with an empty instance text
box and will not allow me to use the word Default. It
says that there is an error in the current SQL 7 install
that the Client tools or the registry may have been
modified and only gives me the option to install a named
instance.
I need the upgrade to be the default instance because
there is a large number of programs that call the
database with the default instance. I am thinking that I
might be able to detach all of the databases then
uninstall SQL 7 and install SQL 2000 and finish up by
reattahing the databases.
I am conserned that I will lose scheduled jobs,
maintenace programs and DTS packages by doing the detach
attach method. Is there a way to ensute that I can bring
these other objects to the new SQ: 2000?
>--Original Message--
>Hi Jim,
>Thank you for using MSDN Newsgroup! It's my pleasure to
assist you with
>your issue.
>First of all, I would like to confirm my understanding
of your issue.
>From your description, I understand that you'd like to
upgrade SQL 7 to SQL
>2000. However, I'm unsure of the meaning "The only
option that I'm allowed
>is to create a named instance." When upgrading, SQL
Server 7.0
>automatically becomes the default instance of SQL Server
2000.
>As we known, you can overwrite the existing installation
of SQL Server 7.0
>by installing a default instance of SQL Server 2000. You
can also keep the
>installation of SQL Server 7.0 intact by installing a
named instance of SQL
>Server 2000. Both operations are performed using the
following procedure.
>To upgrade SQL Server 7.0 to SQL Server 2000
>1. Insert the Microsoft SQL Server 2000 compact disc
for the edition to
>which you want to upgrade into your CD-ROM drive. If the
compact disc does
>not autorun, double-click Autorun.exe in the root
directory of the compact
>disc.
>2. Select SQL Server 2000 Components, select Install
Database Server, and
>then setup prepares the SQL Server Installation Wizard.
At the Welcome
>screen, click Next.
>3. In Computer Name dialog box, Local Computer is
the default option and
>the local computer name appears in the edit box. Click
Next.
>4. In the Installation Selection dialog box, click
Upgrade, remove, or add
>components to an existing instance of SQL Server, and
then click Next.
>5. In the Instance Name dialog box, Default will be
selected. Click Next.
> # Note # When upgrading, SQL Server 7.0
automatically becomes the
>default instance of SQL Server 2000.
>6. In the Existing Installation dialog box, click
Upgrade your existing
>installation, and then click Next.
>7. In the Upgrade dialog box, you are prompted as to
whether you want to
>proceed with the requested upgrade. Click Yes, upgrade
my <text specific to
>the upgrade> to start the upgrade process, and then
click Next. The upgrade
>runs until finished.
>8. In the Connect to Server dialog box, select an
authentication mode, and
>then click Next.
>If you are not sure which mode to use, accept the
default: The Windows
>account information I use to log on to my computer with
(Windows).
>9. In Start Copying Files dialog box, click Next.
>10. In the Setup Complete dialog box, click Yes, I
want to restart my
>computer now, and then click Finish.
>
>Additionally, instead of a full upgrade from SQL Server
7.0 to SQL Server
>2000, which overwrites SQL Server 7.0, you can upgrade
SQL Server 7.0
>databases and associated meta data. To upgrade a SQL
Server 7.0 database to
>a SQL Server 2000 database, please use the following
procedure:
>1. Expand a server group, and then expand a server.
>2. Right-click the server, point to All Tasks, and
then click Copy Database
>Wizard.
>3. Complete the steps in the wizard.
>After upgrading databases from SQL Server 7.0, run
sp_updatestats (update
>statistics) against the database on the destination
server to ensure
>optimal performance of the copied database.
>
>Jim, does this answer your question? Please feel free to
let me know if
>this help solves your problem. If there is anything
more I can still
>assist you with, please feel free to post it in the
group.
>Best regards,
>Billy Yao
>Microsoft Online Support
>----
>Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
>This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and
confers no rights.
>Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.
>
>.
>|||> I am conserned that I will lose scheduled jobs,
> maintenace programs and DTS packages by doing the detach
> attach method. Is there a way to ensute that I can bring
> these other objects to the new SQ: 2000?
You can't restore msdb. But you can script the jobs alerts etc (EM, Management, Agent ... Script).
But I very much doubt it'll work for maint wiz. However, that shouldn't be too much work to redo
through the wizard. Also, don't forget stuff in master.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"Jim" <jim.abel@.lmco.com> wrote in message news:017801c3af8f$a20b0080$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> You are correct in that I want to upgrade my SQL 7 to SQL
> 2000. I followed the steps you have below But when I get
> to step 5 the wizard comes up with an empty instance text
> box and will not allow me to use the word Default. It
> says that there is an error in the current SQL 7 install
> that the Client tools or the registry may have been
> modified and only gives me the option to install a named
> instance.
> I need the upgrade to be the default instance because
> there is a large number of programs that call the
> database with the default instance. I am thinking that I
> might be able to detach all of the databases then
> uninstall SQL 7 and install SQL 2000 and finish up by
> reattahing the databases.
> I am conserned that I will lose scheduled jobs,
> maintenace programs and DTS packages by doing the detach
> attach method. Is there a way to ensute that I can bring
> these other objects to the new SQ: 2000?
> >--Original Message--
> >Hi Jim,
> >
> >Thank you for using MSDN Newsgroup! It's my pleasure to
> assist you with
> >your issue.
> >
> >First of all, I would like to confirm my understanding
> of your issue.
> >
> >From your description, I understand that you'd like to
> upgrade SQL 7 to SQL
> >2000. However, I'm unsure of the meaning "The only
> option that I'm allowed
> >is to create a named instance." When upgrading, SQL
> Server 7.0
> >automatically becomes the default instance of SQL Server
> 2000.
> >
> >As we known, you can overwrite the existing installation
> of SQL Server 7.0
> >by installing a default instance of SQL Server 2000. You
> can also keep the
> >installation of SQL Server 7.0 intact by installing a
> named instance of SQL
> >Server 2000. Both operations are performed using the
> following procedure.
> >
> >To upgrade SQL Server 7.0 to SQL Server 2000
> >1. Insert the Microsoft SQL Server 2000 compact disc
> for the edition to
> >which you want to upgrade into your CD-ROM drive. If the
> compact disc does
> >not autorun, double-click Autorun.exe in the root
> directory of the compact
> >disc.
> >2. Select SQL Server 2000 Components, select Install
> Database Server, and
> >then setup prepares the SQL Server Installation Wizard.
> At the Welcome
> >screen, click Next.
> >3. In Computer Name dialog box, Local Computer is
> the default option and
> >the local computer name appears in the edit box. Click
> Next.
> >4. In the Installation Selection dialog box, click
> Upgrade, remove, or add
> >components to an existing instance of SQL Server, and
> then click Next.
> >5. In the Instance Name dialog box, Default will be
> selected. Click Next.
> > # Note # When upgrading, SQL Server 7.0
> automatically becomes the
> >default instance of SQL Server 2000.
> >
> >6. In the Existing Installation dialog box, click
> Upgrade your existing
> >installation, and then click Next.
> >7. In the Upgrade dialog box, you are prompted as to
> whether you want to
> >proceed with the requested upgrade. Click Yes, upgrade
> my <text specific to
> >the upgrade> to start the upgrade process, and then
> click Next. The upgrade
> >runs until finished.
> >8. In the Connect to Server dialog box, select an
> authentication mode, and
> >then click Next.
> >If you are not sure which mode to use, accept the
> default: The Windows
> >account information I use to log on to my computer with
> (Windows).
> >9. In Start Copying Files dialog box, click Next.
> >10. In the Setup Complete dialog box, click Yes, I
> want to restart my
> >computer now, and then click Finish.
> >
> >
> >Additionally, instead of a full upgrade from SQL Server
> 7.0 to SQL Server
> >2000, which overwrites SQL Server 7.0, you can upgrade
> SQL Server 7.0
> >databases and associated meta data. To upgrade a SQL
> Server 7.0 database to
> >a SQL Server 2000 database, please use the following
> procedure:
> >
> >1. Expand a server group, and then expand a server.
> >2. Right-click the server, point to All Tasks, and
> then click Copy Database
> >Wizard.
> >3. Complete the steps in the wizard.
> >After upgrading databases from SQL Server 7.0, run
> sp_updatestats (update
> >statistics) against the database on the destination
> server to ensure
> >optimal performance of the copied database.
> >
> >
> >Jim, does this answer your question? Please feel free to
> let me know if
> >this help solves your problem. If there is anything
> more I can still
> >assist you with, please feel free to post it in the
> group.
> >
> >Best regards,
> >
> >Billy Yao
> >Microsoft Online Support
> >----
> >Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> >This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and
> confers no rights.
> >Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.
> >
> >
> >.
> >|||Hi Jim,
The following step by step KB guide you move the DTS packages and Scheduled Jobs.
314546 HOW TO: Move Databases Between Computers That Are Running SQL Server
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=314546
Additionally, if you want to move the database diagrams, please following the following article
to separately move them (otherwise they will be lost):
320125 HOW TO: Move a Database Diagram
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=320125
Best regards,
Billy Yao
Microsoft Online Support
----
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.
=====================
The issue is not resolved. I'm trying to decide the next steps to take to get the 7.0 Database
upgraded to 2000.
I'm upgrading a Standard edition to a Standard edition. As stated in the thread I need to find
out
what other objects that I need to migrate, and how, that won't be done when I detach and
reattach
the databases. Mainly what comes to mind is the DTS packages, Scheduled Jobs and not
so
important backups and maintenance plans.
A lost of the items and links of where to find How to's would be great.|||Billy,
Thanks for your help. This did the trick. I now have
all the information that I need to do the upgrade this
Saturday. Once again thank you for digging up all of the
articales. They have given me the necessary information
to complete the task.
Take Care
>--Original Message--
>Hi Jim,
>The following step by step KB guide you move the DTS
packages and Scheduled Jobs.
>314546 HOW TO: Move Databases Between Computers That Are
Running SQL Server
>http://support.microsoft.com/?id=314546
>Additionally, if you want to move the database diagrams,
please following the following article
>to separately move them (otherwise they will be lost):
>320125 HOW TO: Move a Database Diagram
>http://support.microsoft.com/?id=320125
>
>Best regards,
>Billy Yao
>Microsoft Online Support
>----
>Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
>This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and
confers no rights.
>Please reply to newsgroups only. Thanks.
>
>
>=====================>The issue is not resolved. I'm trying to decide the
next steps to take to get the 7.0 Database
>upgraded to 2000.
>I'm upgrading a Standard edition to a Standard edition.
As stated in the thread I need to find
>out
>what other objects that I need to migrate, and how, that
won't be done when I detach and
>reattach
>the databases. Mainly what comes to mind is the DTS
packages, Scheduled Jobs and not
>so
>important backups and maintenance plans.
>A lost of the items and links of where to find How to's
would be great.
>.
>

Change "Report is being generated" text

Is there a way to modify or suppress the "Report is being generated" text and
image? I am trying to setup reports in the Report Viewer webpart on a
Sharepoint site (Sharepoint 2007, SQL Server 2005 SP2, Reporting Services in
Sharepoint integrated mode), but do not want the user to see that message.
Any suggestions?
Thanks!
dawI think that I answered my own question in this scenario. There is an
Asynchronous Rendering checkbox in the properties of the webpart. That seems
to solve it.
I would be interested to know if there is a way to do this outside of
Sharepoint. I'm not a programmer, so it may be something obvious.
Thanks!
daw
"daw" wrote:
> Is there a way to modify or suppress the "Report is being generated" text and
> image? I am trying to setup reports in the Report Viewer webpart on a
> Sharepoint site (Sharepoint 2007, SQL Server 2005 SP2, Reporting Services in
> Sharepoint integrated mode), but do not want the user to see that message.
> Any suggestions?
> Thanks!
> daw

cdonts send mail T-SQL - IIS SMTP setup

hello,

I would like to send mail from sql server using CDONTS.

I have the sql code for this and it works for internal addresses.

I get an error/warning saying that it cannot relay for external addresses when I try an outside domain.

Is there settings in IIS for the SMTP service that I can change to allow it to relay to the external domains?

I have everything running on the SQL Server, and I do not have access to the exchange server.

ThanksCDONTS sends email to the Local SMTP server. You can specify a "smart host" that the local server can forward any email it can't deliver.

Search the help for the IIS SMTP Virtual Server. It's likely the network blocks any unapproved system from using the smtp port, and it's also likely the approved ones will need to allow your system to relay through them.

Jay Grubb
Technical Consultant
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com:
Product Weblogs:
Virtuoso: http://www.openlinksw.com/weblogs/virtuoso
UDA: http://www.openlinksw.com/weblogs/uda
Universal Data Access & Virtual Database Technology Providers

Cause INSERT statements without column lists to fail

Hi Hilary, Paul....
I have another real problem I hope you can help with.
Setup replication now with no problems but one!
The database tables fail from the application thats using them because of
the ROWQUID column.
I noticed that JUST before the articles are created it shows this;
SQL Server requires that all merge articles contain a uniqueidentifier
column with a unique index and the ROWGUIDCOL property. SQL Server will add a
uniqueidentifier column to published tables that do not have one when the
first snapshot is generated.
Adding a new column will:
? Cause INSERT statements without column lists to fail
? Increase the size of the table
? Increase the time required to generate the first snapshot
So is there ANY way of getting round this bug because my developer said that
they will not alter their software and the way the tables are accessed.
So, any ideas.
First you have to find out if the code does do something like this
Insert into tablename
select * from anothertablename
This is what will break with merge replication. Ask him specifically about
this. Personally good developers would never do anything like this. They
would also access the database through stored procedures which would allow
you, the dba, to modify something like this.
Another method is to have the application talk to a view which only contains
the non rowguid column. This isn't very scalable.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
""confused"" <confused@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:53394C5B-05FA-418C-99CA-FB8A8FF5769A@.microsoft.com...
> Hi Hilary, Paul....
> I have another real problem I hope you can help with.
> Setup replication now with no problems but one!
> The database tables fail from the application thats using them because of
> the ROWQUID column.
> I noticed that JUST before the articles are created it shows this;
> SQL Server requires that all merge articles contain a uniqueidentifier
> column with a unique index and the ROWGUIDCOL property. SQL Server will
> add a
> uniqueidentifier column to published tables that do not have one when the
> first snapshot is generated.
> Adding a new column will:
> Cause INSERT statements without column lists to fail
> Increase the size of the table
> Increase the time required to generate the first snapshot
> So is there ANY way of getting round this bug because my developer said
> that
> they will not alter their software and the way the tables are accessed.
> So, any ideas.
|||Hi,
No it looks like they have hard coded this one particluar SQL statement.
So what acutally changes in the database that affects the table INSERT
commands?.
Is their a way round this. If there isnt then its back to square one for
me...
Thanks
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> First you have to find out if the code does do something like this
> Insert into tablename
> select * from anothertablename
> This is what will break with merge replication. Ask him specifically about
> this. Personally good developers would never do anything like this. They
> would also access the database through stored procedures which would allow
> you, the dba, to modify something like this.
> Another method is to have the application talk to a view which only contains
> the non rowguid column. This isn't very scalable.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> ""confused"" <confused@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:53394C5B-05FA-418C-99CA-FB8A8FF5769A@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||You say one particular SQL Statement - is it in a stored procedure? If so,
just modify the stored procedure so it contains all the column name except
the rowguid column.
ie before
insert into mytable
select * from myothertable
after
insert into mytable
select col1,col2, col3, col4,... from myothertable.
If this can't be done change the table the app writes to so it is now a
view. So if the app wrote to Mytable rename mytable as mytable and create a
view called mytable. This view will look like this create view mytable as
select col1, col2, col3, col4,... from mytable1
This doesn't scale well. How many nodes in your system? You might want to
look at bi-directional transactional replication.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
""confused"" <confused@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8DEDF1FC-8926-4072-9D22-91715B8FEE3D@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> No it looks like they have hard coded this one particluar SQL statement.
> So what acutally changes in the database that affects the table INSERT
> commands?.
> Is their a way round this. If there isnt then its back to square one for
> me...
> Thanks
> "Hilary Cotter" wrote:
|||Hi Hilary,
I think I found the problem but I dont know how to get to it.
The dependencies show 3 objects that have a green plus sign next to them.
These objects are PHONE_ADD, PHONE_DELETE, PHONE_AMEND but I cant see these
anywhere in the database?.
Any ideas?
TIM
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> You say one particular SQL Statement - is it in a stored procedure? If so,
> just modify the stored procedure so it contains all the column name except
> the rowguid column.
> ie before
> insert into mytable
> select * from myothertable
> after
> insert into mytable
> select col1,col2, col3, col4,... from myothertable.
> If this can't be done change the table the app writes to so it is now a
> view. So if the app wrote to Mytable rename mytable as mytable and create a
> view called mytable. This view will look like this create view mytable as
> select col1, col2, col3, col4,... from mytable1
> This doesn't scale well. How many nodes in your system? You might want to
> look at bi-directional transactional replication.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> ""confused"" <confused@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:8DEDF1FC-8926-4072-9D22-91715B8FEE3D@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Where are you seeing these green arrows?
Can you do the following for me?
select name from sysobjects where name in (PHONE_ADD, PHONE_DELETE,
PHONE_AMEND) and type='u'
GO
select object_name(id),name from syscolumns where name in (PHONE_ADD,
PHONE_DELETE, PHONE_AMEND)
GO
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
""confused"" <confused@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:ACD9DC12-A2C2-4E65-83C8-3D4E39EE8109@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Hilary,
> I think I found the problem but I dont know how to get to it.
> The dependencies show 3 objects that have a green plus sign next to them.
> These objects are PHONE_ADD, PHONE_DELETE, PHONE_AMEND but I cant see
> these
> anywhere in the database?.
> Any ideas?
> TIM
> "Hilary Cotter" wrote: