A duplicate value cannot be inserted into a unique index

I'll first give the caveat that I've been away from this project for many
weeks (but at least it is my own creation). Having said that, I'm not sure
if this is a replication problem or exactly what I have on my hands here.
When I submit an Insert to a particular table, I can submit as many Inserts
as I would like with no exceptions -- until I replicate my changes back to
the server, then download that table again. It would appear that I have
identical data in both the SQLCE table and the SQL2k table, but for a reason
that I have yet to figure out, the downloaded table will no longer accept
Inserts. I get the message: "A duplicate value cannot be inserted into a
unique index. [,,,,,].
I do not have indexes on any of the columns. I do have a primary key. Any
advice would be appreciated.
It means you are trying to insert identical values into your PK.
"Earl" <brikshoe@.newsgroups.nospam> wrote in message
news:uXndNKDNFHA.2020@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I'll first give the caveat that I've been away from this project for many
> weeks (but at least it is my own creation). Having said that, I'm not sure
> if this is a replication problem or exactly what I have on my hands here.
> When I submit an Insert to a particular table, I can submit as many
> Inserts as I would like with no exceptions -- until I replicate my changes
> back to the server, then download that table again. It would appear that I
> have identical data in both the SQLCE table and the SQL2k table, but for a
> reason that I have yet to figure out, the downloaded table will no longer
> accept Inserts. I get the message: "A duplicate value cannot be inserted
> into a unique index. [,,,,,].
> I do not have indexes on any of the columns. I do have a primary key. Any
> advice would be appreciated.
>
|||Nope. Identical values into unique indexed columns. I just dropped the
indexes for now.
"ChrisR" <noemail@.bla.com> wrote in message
news:uFug$fHNFHA.576@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> It means you are trying to insert identical values into your PK.
> "Earl" <brikshoe@.newsgroups.nospam> wrote in message
> news:uXndNKDNFHA.2020@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>

A bug in SQL Server 2000?

Hi!
I'm running MS Windows 2000 SP4 + SQL Server 2000 SP3a.
I've got a SQL Server Assertion: File:
<p:\sql\ntdbms\storeng\drs\include\record.inl>, line=1447
Failed Assertion = 'm_SizeRec > 0 && m_SizeRec <=
MAXDATAROW'. Error: 3624, Severity: 20, State: 1. The
CHECKDB of every DB on that server came up clean (0
allocation and 0 consistency errors). Could this
effectively mean that I've discovered a bug in SQL Server?
Thanks,
Osk
As you alluded to, this typically indicates corruption in your database.
However, there is a potential for in-memory kinds of corruption events in
which the page in memory is corrupted, but the image on disk is not. That
is most often caused by hardware issues. I would recommend that you open a
case with Microsoft PSS (http://support.microsoft.com) after you have
verified that you have no hardware issues.
Ryan Stonecipher
Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine, DBCC
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Osk" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:243401c50d2a$2000fb90$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi!
> I'm running MS Windows 2000 SP4 + SQL Server 2000 SP3a.
> I've got a SQL Server Assertion: File:
> <p:\sql\ntdbms\storeng\drs\include\record.inl>, line=1447
> Failed Assertion = 'm_SizeRec > 0 && m_SizeRec <=
> MAXDATAROW'. Error: 3624, Severity: 20, State: 1. The
> CHECKDB of every DB on that server came up clean (0
> allocation and 0 consistency errors). Could this
> effectively mean that I've discovered a bug in SQL Server?
> --
> Thanks,
> Osk
>

800a0009 error

I've got this error showing up in my Symantec Quarantine
and it won't delete, in the interum my Quarantine is
filling fast.
Exact error is:
Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a0009' Subscript out
of range '[number:0]' /Quarantine.asp. Line 146
Help
Thanks
Hello
I'm not sure if this problem is related to SQL Server. Please post this
question in a relevant newsgroup.
Thank you for using Microsoft newsgroups.
Sincerely
Pankaj Agarwal
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|||http://tinyurl.com/5okkv
Solved my problem!!
George wrote:
> *I've got this error showing up in my Symantec Quarantine
> and it won't delete, in the interum my Quarantine is
> filling fast.
> Exact error is:
> Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a0009' Subscript out
> of range '[number:0]' /Quarantine.asp. Line 146
> Help
> Thanks *
dreyer
Posted via http://www.webservertalk.com
View this thread: http://www.webservertalk.com/message367817.html

64-bit problem

Hi,
I have an issue with a 64-bit clustered installation that I've just
completed, obviously the management tools can run on the itaniums and
I've put them on a 32-bit server on the same LAN.
My problem concerns creating the full-text indexes that I used to have
on a database. In a nutshell the MMC keeps telling me that the
Full-Text Search service must be running in order to do it (and the
MMC icon does show itself as being RED) but when I click on the
properties for it I get the correct response back that it is really
active. Everything to do with Full-Text is greyed out.
I know that I could script it but ideally I'll like to know if there's
some sort of hack available to make this work properly instead.
Thanks in advance for your help,
Mike
Mike,
Can you post the full output from -- SELECT @.@.version -- from your 64-bit
server? I'm assuming you're using the SQL Server 2000 (64-bit) EE version,
but need to confirm this. Additionally, what account ("System
account"/LocalSystem or DOMAIN\account) are you using for the MSSQLServer
account?
I've some experience with 64-bit SQL Server as I did some benchmarking tests
with Unisys at their lab in L.A. and the MSSearch service was functional,
however I didn't have the time to do FTS testing as we were busy testing
64-bit vs. 32-bit performance comparisons.
Since this is a clustered environment, this issue most likely is related to
either what account you have MSSQLServer running under or perhaps an
installation of the FTS components problem.
Thanks,
John
"Mike" <mike.metcalf@.4projects.com> wrote in message
news:678e073d.0411170818.5ae2e5f3@.posting.google.c om...
> Hi,
> I have an issue with a 64-bit clustered installation that I've just
> completed, obviously the management tools can run on the itaniums and
> I've put them on a 32-bit server on the same LAN.
> My problem concerns creating the full-text indexes that I used to have
> on a database. In a nutshell the MMC keeps telling me that the
> Full-Text Search service must be running in order to do it (and the
> MMC icon does show itself as being RED) but when I click on the
> properties for it I get the correct response back that it is really
> active. Everything to do with Full-Text is greyed out.
> I know that I could script it but ideally I'll like to know if there's
> some sort of hack available to make this work properly instead.
> Thanks in advance for your help,
> Mike
|||Hi John,
it turns out that it was just a blip in the installation and wasnt that
much of a one at that.
It's all working properly now and I for one am really impressed with the
performance increase we're getting across the board.
Thanks for helping,
Mike
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
|||You're welcome, Mike,
Sometimes, all it takes to solve a problem, is to either wait long enough
(for it to solve itself) or reboot! :-)
John
"Mike Metcalf" <mike.metcalf@.4projects.com> wrote in message
news:OBPjpoizEHA.1292@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi John,
> it turns out that it was just a blip in the installation and wasnt that
> much of a one at that.
> It's all working properly now and I for one am really impressed with the
> performance increase we're getting across the board.
> Thanks for helping,
> Mike
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
> Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!

64-bit MSDE?

I've seen references in Microsoft online material to a 64-bit
edition of MSDE - the description of Windows XP 64-bit
Edition Version 2003 refers to it, for example. However,
I haven't been able to find any more information about the
existence, if any, and availability of 64-bit MSDE. I'm
specifically intererested in determining whether it's
available for the server operating system editions .
Can anyone help?
Thanks,
Peter Hornby
Unisys Corporation
Mission Viejo
hi Peter,
"Pete Hornby" <peter.hornby@.unisys.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:umltR66KEHA.644@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> I've seen references in Microsoft online material to a 64-bit
> edition of MSDE - the description of Windows XP 64-bit
> Edition Version 2003 refers to it, for example. However,
> I haven't been able to find any more information about the
> existence, if any, and availability of 64-bit MSDE. I'm
> specifically intererested in determining whether it's
> available for the server operating system editions .
AFAIK, only the Enterprise Edition is available in the 64bit flavour..
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluat...ew/default.asp and
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/64bit/default.asp
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.7.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.53.0
(my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
interface)
-- remove DMO to reply
|||"Andrea Montanari" <andrea.sqlDMO@.virgilio.it> wrote in message
news:c6jga9$cocpm$1@.ID-207518.news.uni-berlin.de...
> hi Peter,
> "Pete Hornby" <peter.hornby@.unisys.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
> news:umltR66KEHA.644@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> AFAIK, only the Enterprise Edition is available in the 64bit flavour..
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluat...ew/default.asp and
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/64bit/default.asp
Andrea,
Many thanks for your quick response. I accept what you say, but I
remain confused by the statement - admittedly a year old - in
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/6...uation/faq.asp
where the answer to "What's New In Windows XP 64-Bit Edition
Version 2003" includes the line "Microsoft SQL Server Desktop
Engine (MSDE)".
Peter
|||hi Peter,
"Pete Hornby" <peter.hornby@.unisys.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:c6jll6$17ca$1@.si05.rsvl.unisys.com...
> Many thanks for your quick response. I accept what you say, but I
> remain confused by the statement - admittedly a year old - in
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/6...uation/faq.asp
> where the answer to "What's New In Windows XP 64-Bit Edition
> Version 2003" includes the line "Microsoft SQL Server Desktop
> Engine (MSDE)".
as IIS 6.0, I think that MSDE 2000 will be (or is) provided in the 32bit
flavour =:-)
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.7.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.53.0
(my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
interface)
-- remove DMO to reply

4G table's delete uses 20G log

I've a table with a size of ~4G and 6million rows in SQL server 2005.
Shen deleting all rows from it it takes closer to an hour and uses
~20G of transaction log. I wasn't able to truncate it due to FK's, but
should I not be able to truncat it by disabling FKs - how can I do
that? Or how can I expedite this delete because it;s annoying to let
server use 20G log for 4G table. My DB recovery model is set to SIMPLE
(for minimum logging)
TIA,
DataDealer
Do not delete with one big batch, instead , divide it into small batches
SET ROWCOUNT 1000
delete_more:
DELETE .....
IF @.@.ROWCOUNT > 0 GOTO delete_more
SET ROWCOUNT 0
<Nasir111@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4285be79-87e3-4711-8fe6-344db8f3d77b@.s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> I've a table with a size of ~4G and 6million rows in SQL server 2005.
> Shen deleting all rows from it it takes closer to an hour and uses
> ~20G of transaction log. I wasn't able to truncate it due to FK's, but
> should I not be able to truncat it by disabling FKs - how can I do
> that? Or how can I expedite this delete because it;s annoying to let
> server use 20G log for 4G table. My DB recovery model is set to SIMPLE
> (for minimum logging)
> TIA,
> DataDealer
|||Recovery model do not affect the amount of logging for a DELETE operation.
You cannot TRUNCATE TABLE as long as a FK is referencing that table. It doesn't help if you disable
that constraint. How about dropping the constraint, TRUNCATE TABLE and then adding it back? That
will by far be the quickest way. If that doesn't suit you, follow Uri's advice to delete in batches
so not all is in one large transaction.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
<Nasir111@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4285be79-87e3-4711-8fe6-344db8f3d77b@.s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> I've a table with a size of ~4G and 6million rows in SQL server 2005.
> Shen deleting all rows from it it takes closer to an hour and uses
> ~20G of transaction log. I wasn't able to truncate it due to FK's, but
> should I not be able to truncat it by disabling FKs - how can I do
> that? Or how can I expedite this delete because it;s annoying to let
> server use 20G log for 4G table. My DB recovery model is set to SIMPLE
> (for minimum logging)
> TIA,
> DataDealer