3G ram for SQL server: 32-bit

Showing posts with label 32-bit. Show all posts

Thursday, March 8, 2012

64-bit versus 32-bit

Is there a difference in SQL Server 2005 64-bit versus 32-bit from a
development or management point? I realize that there are differences in
the hardware requirements and that there is 32-bit, X64, and IA64 versions.
I wanted to know if sp's, back-ups, data types, queries and functions all
work and act the same.Hi,
There is no difference interms of development..The major differnece is in
handling the memory.
see this link to get the capacity specs for 32 and 64 bits:-
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Chris Ruggiero" <chris.ruggiero@.gaboing.com> wrote in message
news:edDAV1qxGHA.3500@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Is there a difference in SQL Server 2005 64-bit versus 32-bit from a
> development or management point? I realize that there are differences in
> the hardware requirements and that there is 32-bit, X64, and IA64
> versions. I wanted to know if sp's, back-ups, data types, queries and
> functions all work and act the same.
>|||Hi,
I'm new to SQL so any guidance is appreciated.
We have 3 MS SQL based applications currently running on SBS 2003 Premium.
As the data has grown so much, we will be purchasing a new server dedicated
to SQL alone. The new server will be 64 bit capable (Xeons not Itaniums).
Not understanding the mechanics of it all, my question is this :-
Will the current SQL databases run without modification if we purchased the
new server with 64bit Windows Server 2003 and 64bit SQL Server 2005 or are
32bit SQL databases not compatible with the 64bit SQL Server ?
and
If forced to, will the database (or SQL itself) run properly if we put in 64
bit Windows Server 2003 and 32 bit SQL Server 2005 ?
Thanks.
Kelvin
"Hari Prasad" wrote:
> Hi,
> There is no difference interms of development..The major differnece is in
> handling the memory.
> see this link to get the capacity specs for 32 and 64 bits:-
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
> "Chris Ruggiero" <chris.ruggiero@.gaboing.com> wrote in message
> news:edDAV1qxGHA.3500@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> > Is there a difference in SQL Server 2005 64-bit versus 32-bit from a
> > development or management point? I realize that there are differences in
> > the hardware requirements and that there is 32-bit, X64, and IA64
> > versions. I wanted to know if sp's, back-ups, data types, queries and
> > functions all work and act the same.
> >
>
>|||The database format is the same for 32 and 64 bit SQL Server. So you can both restore and attach a
database from 32 bit to 64 bit.
You can also run 32 bit SQL Server engine on 64 bit OS if x64. But I recommend pure 64 bit, of
course.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Kelvin" <Kelvin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8A8F125A-CA70-4312-93B3-E2ECAE0F7F44@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I'm new to SQL so any guidance is appreciated.
> We have 3 MS SQL based applications currently running on SBS 2003 Premium.
> As the data has grown so much, we will be purchasing a new server dedicated
> to SQL alone. The new server will be 64 bit capable (Xeons not Itaniums).
> Not understanding the mechanics of it all, my question is this :-
> Will the current SQL databases run without modification if we purchased the
> new server with 64bit Windows Server 2003 and 64bit SQL Server 2005 or are
> 32bit SQL databases not compatible with the 64bit SQL Server ?
> and
> If forced to, will the database (or SQL itself) run properly if we put in 64
> bit Windows Server 2003 and 32 bit SQL Server 2005 ?
> Thanks.
> Kelvin
> "Hari Prasad" wrote:
>> Hi,
>> There is no difference interms of development..The major differnece is in
>> handling the memory.
>> see this link to get the capacity specs for 32 and 64 bits:-
>> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
>> Thanks
>> Hari
>> SQL Server MVP
>> "Chris Ruggiero" <chris.ruggiero@.gaboing.com> wrote in message
>> news:edDAV1qxGHA.3500@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> > Is there a difference in SQL Server 2005 64-bit versus 32-bit from a
>> > development or management point? I realize that there are differences in
>> > the hardware requirements and that there is 32-bit, X64, and IA64
>> > versions. I wanted to know if sp's, back-ups, data types, queries and
>> > functions all work and act the same.
>> >
>>|||"Kelvin" <Kelvin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8A8F125A-CA70-4312-93B3-E2ECAE0F7F44@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I'm new to SQL so any guidance is appreciated.
> We have 3 MS SQL based applications currently running on SBS 2003 Premium.
> As the data has grown so much, we will be purchasing a new server
> dedicated
> to SQL alone. The new server will be 64 bit capable (Xeons not Itaniums).
> Not understanding the mechanics of it all, my question is this :-
> Will the current SQL databases run without modification if we purchased
> the
> new server with 64bit Windows Server 2003 and 64bit SQL Server 2005 or are
> 32bit SQL databases not compatible with the 64bit SQL Server ?
The database itself is compatible between 32-bit and 64-bit.
So you should have no problems.
> and
> If forced to, will the database (or SQL itself) run properly if we put in
> 64
> bit Windows Server 2003 and 32 bit SQL Server 2005 ?
> Thanks.
> Kelvin
> "Hari Prasad" wrote:
>> Hi,
>> There is no difference interms of development..The major differnece is in
>> handling the memory.
>> see this link to get the capacity specs for 32 and 64 bits:-
>> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
>> Thanks
>> Hari
>> SQL Server MVP
>> "Chris Ruggiero" <chris.ruggiero@.gaboing.com> wrote in message
>> news:edDAV1qxGHA.3500@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> > Is there a difference in SQL Server 2005 64-bit versus 32-bit from a
>> > development or management point? I realize that there are differences
>> > in
>> > the hardware requirements and that there is 32-bit, X64, and IA64
>> > versions. I wanted to know if sp's, back-ups, data types, queries and
>> > functions all work and act the same.
>> >
>>

64-bit versus 32-bit

Is there a difference in SQL Server 2005 64-bit versus 32-bit from a
development or management point? I realize that there are differences in
the hardware requirements and that there is 32-bit, X64, and IA64 versions.
I wanted to know if sp's, back-ups, data types, queries and functions all
work and act the same.Hi,
There is no difference interms of development..The major differnece is in
handling the memory.
see this link to get the capacity specs for 32 and 64 bits:-
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Chris Ruggiero" <chris.ruggiero@.gaboing.com> wrote in message
news:edDAV1qxGHA.3500@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Is there a difference in SQL Server 2005 64-bit versus 32-bit from a
> development or management point? I realize that there are differences in
> the hardware requirements and that there is 32-bit, X64, and IA64
> versions. I wanted to know if sp's, back-ups, data types, queries and
> functions all work and act the same.
>|||Hi,
I'm new to SQL so any guidance is appreciated.
We have 3 MS SQL based applications currently running on SBS 2003 Premium.
As the data has grown so much, we will be purchasing a new server dedicated
to SQL alone. The new server will be 64 bit capable (Xeons not Itaniums).
Not understanding the mechanics of it all, my question is this :-
Will the current SQL databases run without modification if we purchased the
new server with 64bit Windows Server 2003 and 64bit SQL Server 2005 or are
32bit SQL databases not compatible with the 64bit SQL Server ?
and
If forced to, will the database (or SQL itself) run properly if we put in 64
bit Windows Server 2003 and 32 bit SQL Server 2005 ?
Thanks.
Kelvin
"Hari Prasad" wrote:

> Hi,
> There is no difference interms of development..The major differnece is in
> handling the memory.
> see this link to get the capacity specs for 32 and 64 bits:-
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143432.aspx
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
> "Chris Ruggiero" <chris.ruggiero@.gaboing.com> wrote in message
> news:edDAV1qxGHA.3500@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
>|||The database format is the same for 32 and 64 bit SQL Server. So you can bot
h restore and attach a
database from 32 bit to 64 bit.
You can also run 32 bit SQL Server engine on 64 bit OS if x64. But I recomme
nd pure 64 bit, of
course.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Kelvin" <Kelvin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8A8F125A-CA70-4312-93B3-E2ECAE0F7F44@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> I'm new to SQL so any guidance is appreciated.
> We have 3 MS SQL based applications currently running on SBS 2003 Premium.
> As the data has grown so much, we will be purchasing a new server dedicate
d
> to SQL alone. The new server will be 64 bit capable (Xeons not Itaniums).
> Not understanding the mechanics of it all, my question is this :-
> Will the current SQL databases run without modification if we purchased th
e
> new server with 64bit Windows Server 2003 and 64bit SQL Server 2005 or are
> 32bit SQL databases not compatible with the 64bit SQL Server ?
> and
> If forced to, will the database (or SQL itself) run properly if we put in
64
> bit Windows Server 2003 and 32 bit SQL Server 2005 ?
> Thanks.
> Kelvin
> "Hari Prasad" wrote:
>|||"Kelvin" <Kelvin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8A8F125A-CA70-4312-93B3-E2ECAE0F7F44@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I'm new to SQL so any guidance is appreciated.
> We have 3 MS SQL based applications currently running on SBS 2003 Premium.
> As the data has grown so much, we will be purchasing a new server
> dedicated
> to SQL alone. The new server will be 64 bit capable (Xeons not Itaniums).
> Not understanding the mechanics of it all, my question is this :-
> Will the current SQL databases run without modification if we purchased
> the
> new server with 64bit Windows Server 2003 and 64bit SQL Server 2005 or are
> 32bit SQL databases not compatible with the 64bit SQL Server ?
The database itself is compatible between 32-bit and 64-bit.
So you should have no problems.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> and
> If forced to, will the database (or SQL itself) run properly if we put in
> 64
> bit Windows Server 2003 and 32 bit SQL Server 2005 ?
> Thanks.
> Kelvin
> "Hari Prasad" wrote:
>

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

64-bit SSIS

Newbie question on SSIS and 64-bit....Looking for pointers ...Thx in advance...
Can we develop SSIS pkgs on 32-bit machines and deploy to 64-bit?
Any software needed on 64-bit machine , like .NET 2.0 64-bit, etc...?
Any knobs/switches to do during deployment, to ensure pkg runs on 64-bit...?
Any gotchas...things to be aware of...?

If accessing SAP, SQL, Oracle, do OLE DB .NET drivers need to be 64-bit as well, if PKG is running on 64-bit machine...?

if developing SSIS pkgs on a 64-bit machine, any issues to be aware of?

Thx again

RCHINTH wrote:
Can we develop SSIS pkgs on 32-bit machines and deploy to 64-bit?

Yes, in fact that is the way you're supposed to do it for Itanium servers since VS isn't supported on IA64.

RCHINTH wrote:
Any software needed on 64-bit machine , like .NET 2.0 64-bit, etc...?

No, 64-bit .NET 2.0 will be installed by your SQL 2005 setup process.

RCHINTH wrote:
Any knobs/switches to do during deployment, to ensure pkg runs on 64-bit...?

Not really. Script tasks have to have PreCompile=true to run on 64-bit. This is the default setting.

RCHINTH wrote:
Any gotchas...things to be aware of...?

Maybe. In my experience the Excel OLE DB Provider doesn't work on X64 (haven't tried it on IA64). Also, debugging Control Flow script tasks doesn't work when PreCompile=true (which is req'd for 64-bit). You can't debug Data Flow script components on either platform.

RCHINTH wrote:
If accessing SAP, SQL, Oracle, do OLE DB .NET drivers need to be 64-bit as well, if PKG is running on 64-bit machine...?

I don't know for sure, but the Excel problem above is probably a decent indication. Might depend on the provider.

RCHINTH wrote:
if developing SSIS pkgs on a 64-bit machine, any issues to be aware of?

I've not had any platform-related problems developing packages on an X64 server. Again, Visual Studio isn't supported on IA64.

Jay|||The absence of the Jet OLE DB Provider (which means Excel too) and the requirement of precompiled scripts seem to be the 2 most obvious limitations that you're going to run into on 64-bit.

Please see the BOL topic, "Integration Services Considerations on 64-bit Computers," for a summary of other considerations, most of which were touched on above.

-Doug

64-bit SQL2000 on 32-bit OS

Will my SQL server work like 32-bit or 64-bit if I installed 64bit SQL2000 E
E on 32-bit Windows 2003 Enterprise server?Please do not multi-post. You cannot install a 64-bit app on a 32-bit
server.
Tom
---
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql
"Dipesh" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B3C23FBD-BE47-4F5E-B464-905A1B94000A@.microsoft.com...
Will my SQL server work like 32-bit or 64-bit if I installed 64bit SQL2000
EE on 32-bit Windows 2003 Enterprise server?|||It will work like a rock. It will sit there and do nothing.
To run 64-bit, you need 64-bit hardware, 64-bit OS, and 64-bit applications.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Dipesh" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B3C23FBD-BE47-4F5E-B464-905A1B94000A@.microsoft.com...
> Will my SQL server work like 32-bit or 64-bit if I installed 64bit SQL2000
EE on 32-bit Windows 2003 Enterprise server?
>

64-bit SQL Server, Any patches needed?

Is there a specific service pack for the 64-bit version of
SQL 2000? Should I apply the SP3a or is that only for the
32-bit version? I can't find any info about SP3a with
respect to applying it to the 64-bit version.
Karl Renaut, CIO
FDN Communications.I'd like to know this as well. I just downloaded the
MSDN Version and need to know if there are any
precautions to protect SQL Server from Slammer, etc.
Thanks,
Mike
>--Original Message--
>Is there a specific service pack for the 64-bit version
of
>SQL 2000? Should I apply the SP3a or is that only for
the
>32-bit version? I can't find any info about SP3a with
>respect to applying it to the 64-bit version.
>Karl Renaut, CIO
>FDN Communications.
>.
>

64-bit server deployment from 32-bit workstations

Our workstations (XP SP2) and development servers (2003 R2) are all 32-bit.Our Staging and Production SQL Servers are 64-bit (2003 R2 x64).We have some VB SQLCLR assemblies we've developed.

My question is: Do we have to do anything special when deploying a CLR Assembly to a 64-bit box when it has been compiled on a 32-bit box?Are there any advantages to setting the Target CPU from "AnyCPU" to "x64"?Documentation and testing seems to indicate that the assembly will run in 64-bit mode if compiled to "AnyCPU".

Will it run "better" in 64-bit mode with the "x64" Target CPU type?

Thanks!
There is nothing special you have to for assemblies to run on both 32-bit and 64-bit without any changes. You just need to be sure you have not made the assemblies architecture specific accidentally. By default, assemblies are MSIL unless the user specifies an architecture, runs ngen on them, or uses PInvoke.

To verify what architecture your assemblies are, do select * from sys.assemblies in your database, and look at the clr_name for the assembly. If you see processorarchitecture=msil or it is missing, then the assembly is architecture independent.

In your case, there is no advantage to specifing Target CPU as x64 because it will make deployment more complicated as you will have compile different assemblies for development and production. The "x64" Target CPU type is only useful if you were using PInvoke or some other CLR feature that made your binary architecture specific. The JIT will optimize the code just fine for each archiecture from the MSIL version.|||Thanks!

64-bit restore with error

Hi all,
I am testing SQL Server 2000 64-bit on Itanium2 and have hit a problem.
Our current production system is running SQL Server 2000 32-bit SP3a. I
backed up the database (about 200+ GB) and restored it on SQL Server 2000
64-bit. After the restore was completed, I did a dbcc_checkdb and it came
back with various errors (see below for sample). I repeated the restore from
the same backup on another 32-bit box and dbcc checkdb came out clean. Any
idea what's causing the errors in dbcc checkdb on the 64-bit restore?
They're fixable using the repair option but it takes a long time and it
isn't really inspiring confidence in our management.
Btw, OS on both is Windows Server 2003 Enterprise SP1.
Any help will be much appreciated.
Thanks!
aK.
Small snippet of error messages:
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4242635:76) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833475 and
WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = NULL) points to the
data row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4242635:77) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833476 and
WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = NULL) points to the
data row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4242635:78) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833477 and
WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = 1) points to the data
row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4242635:79) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833478 and
WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = 1) points to the data
row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
(ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4447340:155) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = NULL) points to the
data row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
(ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4447340:160) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = 1) points to the
data row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8945, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1218103380, index ID 5 will be rebuilt.
Hi
This looks like:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;884856
You may want to upgrade the 32 bit edition to SP4 and then migrate (to the
same version).
John
"Angie" <NoSpam_angie_kong@.hotmail.NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:OPpLxmYwFHA.908@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi all,
> I am testing SQL Server 2000 64-bit on Itanium2 and have hit a problem.
> Our current production system is running SQL Server 2000 32-bit SP3a. I
> backed up the database (about 200+ GB) and restored it on SQL Server 2000
> 64-bit. After the restore was completed, I did a dbcc_checkdb and it came
> back with various errors (see below for sample). I repeated the restore
> from the same backup on another 32-bit box and dbcc checkdb came out
> clean. Any idea what's causing the errors in dbcc checkdb on the 64-bit
> restore? They're fixable using the repair option but it takes a long time
> and it isn't really inspiring confidence in our management.
> Btw, OS on both is Windows Server 2003 Enterprise SP1.
> Any help will be much appreciated.
> Thanks!
> aK.
>
> Small snippet of error messages:
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:76) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833475 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = NULL) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:77) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833476 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = NULL) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:78) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833477 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = 1) points to the data
> row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:79) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833478 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = 1) points to the data
> row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
> (ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4447340:155) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
> and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = NULL) points to
> the data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
> (ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4447340:160) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
> and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = 1) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8945, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1218103380, index ID 5 will be rebuilt.
>
|||This should process should work fine. What builds are the servers on? SP3a
or above and having the same build number on both servers will probably make
these go away.
"Angie" <NoSpam_angie_kong@.hotmail.NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:OPpLxmYwFHA.908@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi all,
> I am testing SQL Server 2000 64-bit on Itanium2 and have hit a problem.
> Our current production system is running SQL Server 2000 32-bit SP3a. I
> backed up the database (about 200+ GB) and restored it on SQL Server 2000
> 64-bit. After the restore was completed, I did a dbcc_checkdb and it came
> back with various errors (see below for sample). I repeated the restore
> from the same backup on another 32-bit box and dbcc checkdb came out
> clean. Any idea what's causing the errors in dbcc checkdb on the 64-bit
> restore? They're fixable using the repair option but it takes a long time
> and it isn't really inspiring confidence in our management.
> Btw, OS on both is Windows Server 2003 Enterprise SP1.
> Any help will be much appreciated.
> Thanks!
> aK.
>
> Small snippet of error messages:
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:76) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833475 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = NULL) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:77) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833476 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = NULL) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:78) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833477 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = 1) points to the data
> row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:79) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833478 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = 1) points to the data
> row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
> (ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4447340:155) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
> and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = NULL) points to
> the data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
> (ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4447340:160) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
> and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = 1) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8945, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1218103380, index ID 5 will be rebuilt.
>

64-bit restore with error

Hi all,
I am testing SQL Server 2000 64-bit on Itanium2 and have hit a problem.
Our current production system is running SQL Server 2000 32-bit SP3a. I
backed up the database (about 200+ GB) and restored it on SQL Server 2000
64-bit. After the restore was completed, I did a dbcc_checkdb and it came
back with various errors (see below for sample). I repeated the restore from
the same backup on another 32-bit box and dbcc checkdb came out clean. Any
idea what's causing the errors in dbcc checkdb on the 64-bit restore?
They're fixable using the repair option but it takes a long time and it
isn't really inspiring confidence in our management.
Btw, OS on both is Windows Server 2003 Enterprise SP1.
Any help will be much appreciated.
Thanks!
aK.
Small snippet of error messages:
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4242635:76) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833475 and
WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = NULL) points to the
data row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4242635:77) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833476 and
WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = NULL) points to the
data row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4242635:78) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833477 and
WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = 1) points to the data
row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4242635:79) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833478 and
WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = 1) points to the data
row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
(ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4447340:155) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = NULL) points to the
data row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
(ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4447340:160) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = 1) points to the
data row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8945, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1218103380, index ID 5 will be rebuilt.Hi
This looks like:
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;884856
You may want to upgrade the 32 bit edition to SP4 and then migrate (to the
same version).
John
"Angie" <NoSpam_angie_kong@.hotmail.NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:OPpLxmYwFHA.908@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi all,
> I am testing SQL Server 2000 64-bit on Itanium2 and have hit a problem.
> Our current production system is running SQL Server 2000 32-bit SP3a. I
> backed up the database (about 200+ GB) and restored it on SQL Server 2000
> 64-bit. After the restore was completed, I did a dbcc_checkdb and it came
> back with various errors (see below for sample). I repeated the restore
> from the same backup on another 32-bit box and dbcc checkdb came out
> clean. Any idea what's causing the errors in dbcc checkdb on the 64-bit
> restore? They're fixable using the repair option but it takes a long time
> and it isn't really inspiring confidence in our management.
> Btw, OS on both is Windows Server 2003 Enterprise SP1.
> Any help will be much appreciated.
> Thanks!
> aK.
>
> Small snippet of error messages:
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:76) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833475 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = NULL) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:77) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833476 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = NULL) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:78) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833477 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = 1) points to the data
> row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:79) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833478 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = 1) points to the data
> row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
> (ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4447340:155) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
> and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = NULL) points to
> the data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
> (ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4447340:160) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
> and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = 1) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8945, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1218103380, index ID 5 will be rebuilt.
>|||This should process should work fine. What builds are the servers on? SP3a
or above and having the same build number on both servers will probably make
these go away.
"Angie" <NoSpam_angie_kong@.hotmail.NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:OPpLxmYwFHA.908@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi all,
> I am testing SQL Server 2000 64-bit on Itanium2 and have hit a problem.
> Our current production system is running SQL Server 2000 32-bit SP3a. I
> backed up the database (about 200+ GB) and restored it on SQL Server 2000
> 64-bit. After the restore was completed, I did a dbcc_checkdb and it came
> back with various errors (see below for sample). I repeated the restore
> from the same backup on another 32-bit box and dbcc checkdb came out
> clean. Any idea what's causing the errors in dbcc checkdb on the 64-bit
> restore? They're fixable using the repair option but it takes a long time
> and it isn't really inspiring confidence in our management.
> Btw, OS on both is Windows Server 2003 Enterprise SP1.
> Any help will be much appreciated.
> Thanks!
> aK.
>
> Small snippet of error messages:
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:76) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833475 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = NULL) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:77) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833476 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = NULL) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:78) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833477 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = 1) points to the data
> row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:79) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833478 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = 1) points to the data
> row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
> (ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4447340:155) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
> and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = NULL) points to
> the data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
> (ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4447340:160) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
> and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = 1) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8945, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1218103380, index ID 5 will be rebuilt.
>

64-bit restore with error

Hi all,
I am testing SQL Server 2000 64-bit on Itanium2 and have hit a problem.
Our current production system is running SQL Server 2000 32-bit SP3a. I
backed up the database (about 200+ GB) and restored it on SQL Server 2000
64-bit. After the restore was completed, I did a dbcc_checkdb and it came
back with various errors (see below for sample). I repeated the restore from
the same backup on another 32-bit box and dbcc checkdb came out clean. Any
idea what's causing the errors in dbcc checkdb on the 64-bit restore?
They're fixable using the repair option but it takes a long time and it
isn't really inspiring confidence in our management.
Btw, OS on both is Windows Server 2003 Enterprise SP1.
Any help will be much appreciated.
Thanks!
aK.
Small snippet of error messages:
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4242635:76) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833475 and
WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = NULL) points to the
data row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4242635:77) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833476 and
WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = NULL) points to the
data row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4242635:78) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833477 and
WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = 1) points to the data
row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4242635:79) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833478 and
WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = 1) points to the data
row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
(ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4447340:155) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = NULL) points to the
data row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
(ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Index row (1:4447340:160) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = 1) points to the
data row identified by ().
Server: Msg 8945, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1218103380, index ID 5 will be rebuilt.Hi
This looks like:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;884856
You may want to upgrade the 32 bit edition to SP4 and then migrate (to the
same version).
John
"Angie" <NoSpam_angie_kong@.hotmail.NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:OPpLxmYwFHA.908@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi all,
> I am testing SQL Server 2000 64-bit on Itanium2 and have hit a problem.
> Our current production system is running SQL Server 2000 32-bit SP3a. I
> backed up the database (about 200+ GB) and restored it on SQL Server 2000
> 64-bit. After the restore was completed, I did a dbcc_checkdb and it came
> back with various errors (see below for sample). I repeated the restore
> from the same backup on another 32-bit box and dbcc checkdb came out
> clean. Any idea what's causing the errors in dbcc checkdb on the 64-bit
> restore? They're fixable using the repair option but it takes a long time
> and it isn't really inspiring confidence in our management.
> Btw, OS on both is Windows Server 2003 Enterprise SP1.
> Any help will be much appreciated.
> Thanks!
> aK.
>
> Small snippet of error messages:
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:76) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833475 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = NULL) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:77) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833476 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = NULL) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:78) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833477 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = 1) points to the data
> row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:79) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833478 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = 1) points to the data
> row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
> (ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4447340:155) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
> and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = NULL) points to
> the data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
> (ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4447340:160) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
> and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = 1) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8945, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1218103380, index ID 5 will be rebuilt.
>|||This should process should work fine. What builds are the servers on? SP3a
or above and having the same build number on both servers will probably make
these go away.
"Angie" <NoSpam_angie_kong@.hotmail.NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:OPpLxmYwFHA.908@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi all,
> I am testing SQL Server 2000 64-bit on Itanium2 and have hit a problem.
> Our current production system is running SQL Server 2000 32-bit SP3a. I
> backed up the database (about 200+ GB) and restored it on SQL Server 2000
> 64-bit. After the restore was completed, I did a dbcc_checkdb and it came
> back with various errors (see below for sample). I repeated the restore
> from the same backup on another 32-bit box and dbcc checkdb came out
> clean. Any idea what's causing the errors in dbcc checkdb on the 64-bit
> restore? They're fixable using the repair option but it takes a long time
> and it isn't really inspiring confidence in our management.
> Btw, OS on both is Windows Server 2003 Enterprise SP1.
> Any help will be much appreciated.
> Thanks!
> aK.
>
> Small snippet of error messages:
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:76) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833475 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = NULL) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:77) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833476 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = NULL) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:78) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833477 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4869 and ? = 1) points to the data
> row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index
> 'DetailActivityCur.pkDetailActivityCur_ID' (ID 1218103380) (index ID 2).
> Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4242635:79) with values (DetailActivityCurID = 55833478 and
> WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4870 and ? = 1) points to the data
> row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
> (ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4447340:155) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
> and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = NULL) points to
> the data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8952, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Database 'RSTBL1', index 'DetailActivityCur.akActivityDtime'
> (ID 1218103380) (index ID 4). Extra or invalid key for the keys:
> Server: Msg 8956, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Index row (1:4447340:160) with values (ActivityDtime = Jul 14 2005 4:47PM
> and WorkorderCurID = 316630 and SetTypeID = 4868 and ? = 1) points to the
> data row identified by ().
> Server: Msg 8945, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1218103380, index ID 5 will be rebuilt.
>

64-bit Restore via 32-bit GUI

Hello all,
I'm trying to use the 32-bit GUI, on a remote server, to restore a database
on one of our 64-bit servers. The GUI returns a prompt that the restore was
successful but the GUI indicates that the database is in a Loading mode. I
tried to issue a recovery command but it fails saying that some of the files
were partially restored.
I figured that there is a problem using the 32-bit client utility so I used
OSQL, via SQL Server Agent, on the 64-bit to ensure that I was using a
compatible 64-bit utility. By doing so, I was able to restore the database
successfully.
So my question is, is not being able to restore a 64-bit database via a
32-bit GUI, on a remote server, a known issue?
Thanks...Not that I'm aware of. EM is simply building the restore command and
sending it to the server. Try it again with EM but capture the command with
profiler. You can then determine if the command generated is good. Did you
change the recovery to Leave database nonoperational?
"BATMAN" <BATMAN@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CA08652F-A880-48E8-A03B-1567EE5145A6@.microsoft.com...
> Hello all,
> I'm trying to use the 32-bit GUI, on a remote server, to restore a
> database
> on one of our 64-bit servers. The GUI returns a prompt that the restore
> was
> successful but the GUI indicates that the database is in a Loading mode.
> I
> tried to issue a recovery command but it fails saying that some of the
> files
> were partially restored.
> I figured that there is a problem using the 32-bit client utility so I
> used
> OSQL, via SQL Server Agent, on the 64-bit to ensure that I was using a
> compatible 64-bit utility. By doing so, I was able to restore the
> database
> successfully.
> So my question is, is not being able to restore a 64-bit database via a
> 32-bit GUI, on a remote server, a known issue?
> Thanks...
>

64-bit Restore via 32-bit GUI

Hello all,
I'm trying to use the 32-bit GUI, on a remote server, to restore a database
on one of our 64-bit servers. The GUI returns a prompt that the restore was
successful but the GUI indicates that the database is in a Loading mode. I
tried to issue a recovery command but it fails saying that some of the files
were partially restored.
I figured that there is a problem using the 32-bit client utility so I used
OSQL, via SQL Server Agent, on the 64-bit to ensure that I was using a
compatible 64-bit utility. By doing so, I was able to restore the database
successfully.
So my question is, is not being able to restore a 64-bit database via a
32-bit GUI, on a remote server, a known issue?
Thanks...
Not that I'm aware of. EM is simply building the restore command and
sending it to the server. Try it again with EM but capture the command with
profiler. You can then determine if the command generated is good. Did you
change the recovery to Leave database nonoperational?
"BATMAN" <BATMAN@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CA08652F-A880-48E8-A03B-1567EE5145A6@.microsoft.com...
> Hello all,
> I'm trying to use the 32-bit GUI, on a remote server, to restore a
> database
> on one of our 64-bit servers. The GUI returns a prompt that the restore
> was
> successful but the GUI indicates that the database is in a Loading mode.
> I
> tried to issue a recovery command but it fails saying that some of the
> files
> were partially restored.
> I figured that there is a problem using the 32-bit client utility so I
> used
> OSQL, via SQL Server Agent, on the 64-bit to ensure that I was using a
> compatible 64-bit utility. By doing so, I was able to restore the
> database
> successfully.
> So my question is, is not being able to restore a 64-bit database via a
> 32-bit GUI, on a remote server, a known issue?
> Thanks...
>

64-bit Restore via 32-bit GUI

64-bit Replication

In SQL Server 2000 replication, is it possible to have 64-bit SQL Server 2000 Publisher and 32-bit SQL Server 2000 as distributor and subscriber? If, it's possible will there be any performance impact?

Thanks,
Ritesh

If you have the latest service pack SP4, then I believe you should be able to replicate without any performance impact.

64-bit performance vs 32-bit performance

Hi
Does anybody know of any official documents comparing 64-bit SQL Server
performance against 32-bit on a similar hardware platform? Apologies for
any cross posting that may have occurred only I need answer ASAP. Ideally I
need OLAP & OLTP benchmarks.
Regards.greedo wrote:
> Hi
> Does anybody know of any official documents comparing 64-bit SQL
> Server performance against 32-bit on a similar hardware platform?
> Apologies for any cross posting that may have occurred only I need
> answer ASAP. Ideally I need OLAP & OLTP benchmarks.
See TPC benchmarks for SQL Server at
http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_results.asp?orderby=dbms
There are some 64-bit systems over there to compare against.
sincerely,
--
Sebastian K. Zaklada
Skilled Software
http://www.skilledsoftware.com
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.|||Thanks for the quick response but unfortunately these systems vary wildly to
make true comparisons. What I'm looking for is case study where it shows
the true differences between 64-bit and 32-bit SQL Server rather than
numerous hardware configurations.
"Sebastian K. Zaklada" <szaklada-dont-like-spam@.skilledsoftware.com> wrote
in message news:uycl5KIAEHA.3400@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> greedo wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Does anybody know of any official documents comparing 64-bit SQL
> > Server performance against 32-bit on a similar hardware platform?
> > Apologies for any cross posting that may have occurred only I need
> > answer ASAP. Ideally I need OLAP & OLTP benchmarks.
> See TPC benchmarks for SQL Server at
> http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_results.asp?orderby=dbms
> There are some 64-bit systems over there to compare against.
> sincerely,
> --
> Sebastian K. Zaklada
> Skilled Software
> http://www.skilledsoftware.com
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
>|||How can you compare them on a "similar hardware platform"? The hardware (at
least CPU etc) is completely different. You can't run 64 bit sql on a 32
bit machine.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"greedo" <me@.there.com> wrote in message
news:eeb9kNIAEHA.1608@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for the quick response but unfortunately these systems vary wildly
to
> make true comparisons. What I'm looking for is case study where it shows
> the true differences between 64-bit and 32-bit SQL Server rather than
> numerous hardware configurations.
>
> "Sebastian K. Zaklada" <szaklada-dont-like-spam@.skilledsoftware.com> wrote
> in message news:uycl5KIAEHA.3400@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > greedo wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > Does anybody know of any official documents comparing 64-bit SQL
> > > Server performance against 32-bit on a similar hardware platform?
> > > Apologies for any cross posting that may have occurred only I need
> > > answer ASAP. Ideally I need OLAP & OLTP benchmarks.
> >
> > See TPC benchmarks for SQL Server at
> > http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_results.asp?orderby=dbms
> > There are some 64-bit systems over there to compare against.
> >
> > sincerely,
> > --
> > Sebastian K. Zaklada
> > Skilled Software
> > http://www.skilledsoftware.com
> > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
> >
> >
>|||Sorry I should have been more specific. The results at www.tpc.org do no
have comparable results in that I am looking for a 4 x 64 bit CPU + 8 Gig
Ram against 4x32 bit CPU + 8 Gig Ram. Typically I'm finding 16 ways against
8 ways with differing Ram configurations which isn't really helpful!!
Hopefully someone can steer me in the right direction.
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnoooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23G8ae$KAEHA.212@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> How can you compare them on a "similar hardware platform"? The hardware
(at
> least CPU etc) is completely different. You can't run 64 bit sql on a 32
> bit machine.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "greedo" <me@.there.com> wrote in message
> news:eeb9kNIAEHA.1608@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > Thanks for the quick response but unfortunately these systems vary
wildly
> to
> > make true comparisons. What I'm looking for is case study where it
shows
> > the true differences between 64-bit and 32-bit SQL Server rather than
> > numerous hardware configurations.
> >
> >
> > "Sebastian K. Zaklada" <szaklada-dont-like-spam@.skilledsoftware.com>
wrote
> > in message news:uycl5KIAEHA.3400@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > greedo wrote:
> > > > Hi
> > > >
> > > > Does anybody know of any official documents comparing 64-bit SQL
> > > > Server performance against 32-bit on a similar hardware platform?
> > > > Apologies for any cross posting that may have occurred only I need
> > > > answer ASAP. Ideally I need OLAP & OLTP benchmarks.
> > >
> > > See TPC benchmarks for SQL Server at
> > > http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_results.asp?orderby=dbms
> > > There are some 64-bit systems over there to compare against.
> > >
> > > sincerely,
> > > --
> > > Sebastian K. Zaklada
> > > Skilled Software
> > > http://www.skilledsoftware.com
> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> > rights.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>|||I see now what your after. I don't have a specific link but this has a
lotof info:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/64bit/productinfo/newsandreviews.asp
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"greedo" <me@.there.com> wrote in message
news:OcrA5PLAEHA.392@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Sorry I should have been more specific. The results at www.tpc.org do no
> have comparable results in that I am looking for a 4 x 64 bit CPU + 8 Gig
> Ram against 4x32 bit CPU + 8 Gig Ram. Typically I'm finding 16 ways
against
> 8 ways with differing Ram configurations which isn't really helpful!!
> Hopefully someone can steer me in the right direction.
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnoooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23G8ae$KAEHA.212@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > How can you compare them on a "similar hardware platform"? The hardware
> (at
> > least CPU etc) is completely different. You can't run 64 bit sql on a
32
> > bit machine.
> >
> > --
> > Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> >
> >
> > "greedo" <me@.there.com> wrote in message
> > news:eeb9kNIAEHA.1608@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > > Thanks for the quick response but unfortunately these systems vary
> wildly
> > to
> > > make true comparisons. What I'm looking for is case study where it
> shows
> > > the true differences between 64-bit and 32-bit SQL Server rather than
> > > numerous hardware configurations.
> > >
> > >
> > > "Sebastian K. Zaklada" <szaklada-dont-like-spam@.skilledsoftware.com>
> wrote
> > > in message news:uycl5KIAEHA.3400@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > > greedo wrote:
> > > > > Hi
> > > > >
> > > > > Does anybody know of any official documents comparing 64-bit SQL
> > > > > Server performance against 32-bit on a similar hardware platform?
> > > > > Apologies for any cross posting that may have occurred only I need
> > > > > answer ASAP. Ideally I need OLAP & OLTP benchmarks.
> > > >
> > > > See TPC benchmarks for SQL Server at
> > > > http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_results.asp?orderby=dbms
> > > > There are some 64-bit systems over there to compare against.
> > > >
> > > > sincerely,
> > > > --
> > > > Sebastian K. Zaklada
> > > > Skilled Software
> > > > http://www.skilledsoftware.com
> > > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> > > rights.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>|||not sure if this helps you -
in evaluating 64bit for our purposes the one thing that stood out to us is
the olap piece. analysis services ability to address more than 3gig of ram
should seal the deal for you if you are working on a dw project that will
utilize large cubes. that process is memory intensive and loves to eat up
the ram.
as for the oltp piece - that seems to be a little tougher to quantify.
basically, any applications that are memory intensive should yield better
performance from the 64bit platform.
my rec, and i know time is important right now, is to contact both your
local microsoft office and speak to the sql server technology specialist and
ask them if they have any 64bit machines in their labs.
the local office should have a demo machine or access to a demo machine via
hp that you can use and test. personally, that would be the best way to test
your apps in deciding if 64bit is right for you. i have worked with several
customers and that was the route they went to help them make a decision.
hth -
Sal
"greedo" <me@.there.com> wrote in message
news:O8e5WFIAEHA.2432@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> Does anybody know of any official documents comparing 64-bit SQL Server
> performance against 32-bit on a similar hardware platform? Apologies for
> any cross posting that may have occurred only I need answer ASAP. Ideally
I
> need OLAP & OLTP benchmarks.
>
> Regards.
>
>|||I can't help with your specific question, but there's an interesting
database performance comparison of Intel Xeons vs. AMD Opterons at
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.html?i=1982 .
Mike Kruchten
"greedo" <me@.there.com> wrote in message
news:OcrA5PLAEHA.392@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Sorry I should have been more specific. The results at www.tpc.org do no
> have comparable results in that I am looking for a 4 x 64 bit CPU + 8 Gig
> Ram against 4x32 bit CPU + 8 Gig Ram. Typically I'm finding 16 ways
against
> 8 ways with differing Ram configurations which isn't really helpful!!
> Hopefully someone can steer me in the right direction.
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnoooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23G8ae$KAEHA.212@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > How can you compare them on a "similar hardware platform"? The hardware
> (at
> > least CPU etc) is completely different. You can't run 64 bit sql on a
32
> > bit machine.
> >
> > --
> > Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> >
> >
> > "greedo" <me@.there.com> wrote in message
> > news:eeb9kNIAEHA.1608@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > > Thanks for the quick response but unfortunately these systems vary
> wildly
> > to
> > > make true comparisons. What I'm looking for is case study where it
> shows
> > > the true differences between 64-bit and 32-bit SQL Server rather than
> > > numerous hardware configurations.
> > >
> > >
> > > "Sebastian K. Zaklada" <szaklada-dont-like-spam@.skilledsoftware.com>
> wrote
> > > in message news:uycl5KIAEHA.3400@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > > greedo wrote:
> > > > > Hi
> > > > >
> > > > > Does anybody know of any official documents comparing 64-bit SQL
> > > > > Server performance against 32-bit on a similar hardware platform?
> > > > > Apologies for any cross posting that may have occurred only I need
> > > > > answer ASAP. Ideally I need OLAP & OLTP benchmarks.
> > > >
> > > > See TPC benchmarks for SQL Server at
> > > > http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_results.asp?orderby=dbms
> > > > There are some 64-bit systems over there to compare against.
> > > >
> > > > sincerely,
> > > > --
> > > > Sebastian K. Zaklada
> > > > Skilled Software
> > > > http://www.skilledsoftware.com
> > > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> > > rights.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

Saturday, February 25, 2012

64-bit linked server to Sybase

Hi,
From my research, it appears that it is not possible to have a linked server
created in SQL Server 2005 x64 use a 32-bit DSN (i.e. created with a 32 bit
driver). The answer is that I need to create a 64-bit DSN in order to
create a linked server in SQL Server 2005 x64. The problem is that many
vendors (i.e. Sybase) do not have a 64-bit driver.
Looks like our migration is SQL Server 2005 x64 will have to wait unless we
can get this to work with perhaps a third party vendore such as Data Direct.
Any one using Data Direct to connect to Sybase from SQL Server 2005 x64?
Thanks,
Rocco M.
(posted in microsoft.public.sqlserver.odbc,
microsoft.public.sqlserver.clients and microsoft.public.sqlserver.connect)Hi,
I've just ran into the same problem linking to Oracle 8i.
MSDAORA, OraOLEDB.Oracle and ODBC drivers do not work.
64 bit drivers have not been released yet... Any workaround except returning
to sqlserver 32bit?
Davide
"Rocco M" <rocco.mastrangelo@.hp.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:AHYeg.1209$cY3.584@.news.cpqcorp.net...
> Hi,
> From my research, it appears that it is not possible to have a linked
> server created in SQL Server 2005 x64 use a 32-bit DSN (i.e. created with
> a 32 bit driver). The answer is that I need to create a 64-bit DSN in
> order to create a linked server in SQL Server 2005 x64. The problem is
> that many vendors (i.e. Sybase) do not have a 64-bit driver.
> Looks like our migration is SQL Server 2005 x64 will have to wait unless
> we can get this to work with perhaps a third party vendore such as Data
> Direct. Any one using Data Direct to connect to Sybase from SQL Server
> 2005 x64?
> Thanks,
> Rocco M.
> (posted in microsoft.public.sqlserver.odbc,
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.clients and microsoft.public.sqlserver.connect)
>

64-Bit Edition for RS Database

I am attempting to install Reporting Services on a 32-bit application server
with the database on another box running SQL Server 2000 "Enterprise Edition
(64-bit)" . I am receiving the following error:
"This edition of the Report Server Database is not supported on the edition
of SQL Server 2000 you have chosen. Please choose ..."
The version I am attempting to install is "Reporting Services Enterprise
Edition". I've verified in the install window that it is the Enterprise
Edition of Reporting Services that I am trying to install. I have verified
that I can connect to the 64-bit server from my application server and my SQL
Login Account has SysAdmin permissions. I ran the SELECT
SERVERPROPERTY('productversion'), SERVERPROPERTY ('productlevel'),
SERVERPROPERTY ('edition') command that I read in another thread and it
returned the following information:
8.00.760 SP3 Enterprise Edition (64-bit)
I'm suspect that the "Enterprise Edition (64-bit)" is the culprit. Has
anyone installed Reporting Services using 64-bit SQL Server 2000 for the
database repository?
Thanks in advance...Setup will not allow you to install using a 64 bit version of SQL. There
are manual steps you can perform to get this to work, but it would require a
32 bit version of SQL.
1) Install RS pointing to the 32 bit version of SQL.
2) move both the ReportServer DB and the ReportServerTemp DB to the 64 bit
version (I don't know what the exact steps are to move a database from a 32
bit to a 64 bit sql, you would have to investigate this)
3) use rsconfig.exe to point RS to the 64 bit version of the catalog
-Daniel
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Malinda Jepsen" <Malinda Jepsen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E3DE691A-4A16-46CD-BE89-9964EE0FDCBA@.microsoft.com...
> I am attempting to install Reporting Services on a 32-bit application
server
> with the database on another box running SQL Server 2000 "Enterprise
Edition
> (64-bit)" . I am receiving the following error:
> "This edition of the Report Server Database is not supported on the
edition
> of SQL Server 2000 you have chosen. Please choose ..."
> The version I am attempting to install is "Reporting Services Enterprise
> Edition". I've verified in the install window that it is the Enterprise
> Edition of Reporting Services that I am trying to install. I have
verified
> that I can connect to the 64-bit server from my application server and my
SQL
> Login Account has SysAdmin permissions. I ran the SELECT
> SERVERPROPERTY('productversion'), SERVERPROPERTY ('productlevel'),
> SERVERPROPERTY ('edition') command that I read in another thread and it
> returned the following information:
> 8.00.760 SP3 Enterprise Edition (64-bit)
> I'm suspect that the "Enterprise Edition (64-bit)" is the culprit. Has
> anyone installed Reporting Services using 64-bit SQL Server 2000 for the
> database repository?
> Thanks in advance...|||Finally success!
What I found was that I couldn't pull a database from another install of
Reporting Services. Since I had already installed it in our lab environment
on a 32-bit server, I first tried to attach that database. But when I did
that, Reporting Services thought I wanted to join a web farm. Then when I
tried to install it with the .ini file with SQL authentication to create the
database (RSSETUPACCOUNT/RSSETUPPASSWORD), it was not creating the database
(even though the SQL user I was using had SysAdmin permissions). I finally
gave my NT account SysAdmin rights and then it would create the database
(using the default install without an .ini file). Once that was complete,
sure enough, I could just move it to the 64-bit server (using standard
detach/attach). One final step was to give the SQL (or NT) user permissions
in the database (I started with datareader and datawriter).
"Daniel Reib [MSFT]" wrote:
> Setup will not allow you to install using a 64 bit version of SQL. There
> are manual steps you can perform to get this to work, but it would require a
> 32 bit version of SQL.
> 1) Install RS pointing to the 32 bit version of SQL.
> 2) move both the ReportServer DB and the ReportServerTemp DB to the 64 bit
> version (I don't know what the exact steps are to move a database from a 32
> bit to a 64 bit sql, you would have to investigate this)
> 3) use rsconfig.exe to point RS to the 64 bit version of the catalog
>
> --
> -Daniel
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>
> "Malinda Jepsen" <Malinda Jepsen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:E3DE691A-4A16-46CD-BE89-9964EE0FDCBA@.microsoft.com...
> > I am attempting to install Reporting Services on a 32-bit application
> server
> > with the database on another box running SQL Server 2000 "Enterprise
> Edition
> > (64-bit)" . I am receiving the following error:
> > "This edition of the Report Server Database is not supported on the
> edition
> > of SQL Server 2000 you have chosen. Please choose ..."
> >
> > The version I am attempting to install is "Reporting Services Enterprise
> > Edition". I've verified in the install window that it is the Enterprise
> > Edition of Reporting Services that I am trying to install. I have
> verified
> > that I can connect to the 64-bit server from my application server and my
> SQL
> > Login Account has SysAdmin permissions. I ran the SELECT
> > SERVERPROPERTY('productversion'), SERVERPROPERTY ('productlevel'),
> > SERVERPROPERTY ('edition') command that I read in another thread and it
> > returned the following information:
> > 8.00.760 SP3 Enterprise Edition (64-bit)
> >
> > I'm suspect that the "Enterprise Edition (64-bit)" is the culprit. Has
> > anyone installed Reporting Services using 64-bit SQL Server 2000 for the
> > database repository?
> >
> > Thanks in advance...
>
>

64 bit(part II)

In a recent post, I've read that Jet Provider is only provided with 32-bit.

I wonder, is there any problem if you run a SSIS package 32-bit which read from Access and then call another SSIS package 64 bit? We've got quite 2000 dts which pulling data from MDB and within a time it'll disappear in favour 2005 environment .

Another question, what sort of Providers don't offer us 64-bit versions?

Any link or thought will be as usual welcomed

It will work - you can run first package in 32-bit mode, move data to staging table or flat file, then call second package in 64-bit mode and do further processing of the data.|||The msdaora drivers also don't function in 64bit. This is a bit of a hassle since the oracle provided 64bit drivers don't work correctly. ODBC is also a bit tricky since you have to create dsn's for 32 bit and 64 bit since the desinger is 32 and the runtime is 64.|||Thanks to both for the info provided.

64 bit(part II)

In a recent post, I've read that Jet Provider is only provided with 32-bit.

Another question, what sort of Providers don't offer us 64-bit versions?

Any link or thought will be as usual welcomed

64 Bit SQL Server try to access 32-Bit

Hi All,

I have a scenario where today we are migrating the existing code to new production server which is 64 Bit server.

The SSIS packages are put on new server and we are trying to run.

I tried to run a simple select query to fetch data from a 32bit remote server from cmd prompt usings a .sql file and it gives me error.

But this is the known issue of

‘a 64-bit SQL server trying to communicate to a 32-bit sql server’ and the error message is

The error message is similar to the following:

The stored procedure required to complete this operation could not be found on the server. Please contact your system administrator.
Msg 7311, Level 16, State 2, Line 1
Cannot obtain the schema rowset "DBSCHEMA_TABLES_INFO" for OLE DB provider "SQLNCLI" for linked server "<LinkedServerName>". The provider supports the interface, but returns a failure code when it is used

I saw the help for this in support.microsoft and it is suggested the resolution is

‘To resolve this problem, install SQL Server 2000 SP3 or SQL Server 2000 SP4 on the 32-bit SQL Server 2000 server. Then, manually run the Instcat.sql script that is included with SQL Server 2000 SP3 or SP4 on the 32-bit SQL Server 2000 server.’

I cannot do this as the remote server which am trying to access is not under my control and other issues.

Please suggest me what is the work around and what modifications do I need to do for my SSIS packages?

Help much appreciated.

Thanks and Regards

Sai

Hello,

I’ve just had the same problem. I was trying to access a SQL2K from a SQL2K5 64bits server. Although I had it a as a linked server, I had the same error.

Reading information, I found the patch to solve this problem here

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/906954

But, maybe if you don’t have the SQL2K server under your control, you won’t be able to execute the patch.

There is another way to make this, using OPENQUERY

select * from openquery([RemoteServer],'select * from DB.dbo.table')

And you won’t have the error. I tried it before install the patch and it worked for me.

Krgrds

Thursday, March 8, 2012

64-bit versus 32-bit

64-bit versus 32-bit

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

64-bit SSIS

64-bit SQL2000 on 32-bit OS

64-bit SQL Server, Any patches needed?

64-bit server deployment from 32-bit workstations

64-bit restore with error

64-bit restore with error

64-bit restore with error

64-bit Restore via 32-bit GUI

64-bit Restore via 32-bit GUI

64-bit Restore via 32-bit GUI

64-bit Replication

64-bit performance vs 32-bit performance

64-bit performance vs 32-bit performance

Saturday, February 25, 2012

64-bit linked server to Sybase

64-Bit Edition for RS Database

64 bit(part II)

64 bit(part II)

64 Bit SQL Server try to access 32-Bit

3G ram for SQL server

Blog Archive

About Me