Hi,
:Every time I try to Deploy report I get this error
A connection could not be made to report server
http:// localhost/reports/pages/folder.aspx
I have already tried:
1. Define my user
2. I can see the report manager from the browser
3. change to asp.net 2
4. find out that the IIS user is not anonymous
!Please help me , I am trying to solve this problem for weeks
Thank you
AviIn the VS 2005 Report Project properties dialog what's the value for the
TargetServerURL property?
http://localhost/ReportServer?
Steve MunLeeuw
"AB" <savi176@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1160682021.955195.311490@.h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> :Every time I try to Deploy report I get this error
> A connection could not be made to report server
> http:// localhost/reports/pages/folder.aspx
> I have already tried:
> 1. Define my user
> 2. I can see the report manager from the browser
> 3. change to asp.net 2
> 4. find out that the IIS user is not anonymous
> !Please help me , I am trying to solve this problem for weeks
> Thank you
> Avi
>|||:the TargetServerURL property is
http:// localhost/reports/pages/folder.aspx
Steve MunLeeuw =D7=9B=D7=AA=D7=91:
> In the VS 2005 Report Project properties dialog what's the value for the
> TargetServerURL property?
> http://localhost/ReportServer?
> Steve MunLeeuw
> "AB" <savi176@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1160682021.955195.311490@.h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> > Hi,
> > :Every time I try to Deploy report I get this error
> >
> > A connection could not be made to report server
> > http:// localhost/reports/pages/folder.aspx
> >
> > I have already tried:
> > 1. Define my user
> > 2. I can see the report manager from the browser
> > 3. change to asp.net 2
> > 4. find out that the IIS user is not anonymous
> >
> > !Please help me , I am trying to solve this problem for weeks
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Avi
> >|||Try:
http:// localhost/reportserver
Steve MunLeeuw
"AB" <savi176@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1160684262.288244.239240@.i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
:the TargetServerURL property is
http:// localhost/reports/pages/folder.aspx
Steve MunLeeuw ?:
> In the VS 2005 Report Project properties dialog what's the value for the
> TargetServerURL property?
> http://localhost/ReportServer?
> Steve MunLeeuw
> "AB" <savi176@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1160682021.955195.311490@.h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> > Hi,
> > :Every time I try to Deploy report I get this error
> >
> > A connection could not be made to report server
> > http:// localhost/reports/pages/folder.aspx
> >
> > I have already tried:
> > 1. Define my user
> > 2. I can see the report manager from the browser
> > 3. change to asp.net 2
> > 4. find out that the IIS user is not anonymous
> >
> > !Please help me , I am trying to solve this problem for weeks
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Avi
> >|||!Thank you
.It was the problem.
Steve MunLeeuw =D7=9B=D7=AA=D7=91:
> Try:
> http:// localhost/reportserver
> Steve MunLeeuw
> "AB" <savi176@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1160684262.288244.239240@.i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> :the TargetServerURL property is
> http:// localhost/reports/pages/folder.aspx
>
> Steve MunLeeuw ?:
> > In the VS 2005 Report Project properties dialog what's the value for the
> > TargetServerURL property?
> > http://localhost/ReportServer?
> >
> > Steve MunLeeuw
> >
> > "AB" <savi176@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:1160682021.955195.311490@.h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> > > Hi,
> > > :Every time I try to Deploy report I get this error
> > >
> > > A connection could not be made to report server
> > > http:// localhost/reports/pages/folder.aspx
> > >
> > > I have already tried:
> > > 1. Define my user
> > > 2. I can see the report manager from the browser
> > > 3. change to asp.net 2
> > > 4. find out that the IIS user is not anonymous
> > >
> > > !Please help me , I am trying to solve this problem for weeks
> > >
> > > Thank you
> > >
> > > Avi
> > >sql
Showing posts with label pages. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pages. Show all posts
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Sunday, March 11, 2012
80k active rows when I run DBCC LOGINFO(XXX). Why?
Hello all,
I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
logs but the results remain the same.
I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
JohnnyYou probably created the file small and had bunch of autogrowths. Here's a r
eply to similar Q I
posted earlier today:
Log is emptied (2 to 0) then you backup log. Backup log, check if 2 at the e
nd. 2 at the end sets
limit of shrink. What you do is alternate backup log and shrink a few times.
Then you alter database
and pre-allocate a much as you probably need.
In addition, read about the virtual logfile concept in Books Online.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Johnny" <Johnny@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CC046CC3-867B-4CB7-AEF7-B81B3F622151@.microsoft.com...
> Hello all,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21G
B.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get ba
ck
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
> logs but the results remain the same.
> I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
> about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation
of
> this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
> Johnny|||Johnny,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21G
B.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get ba
ck
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
The active part of the transaction log (uncommitted transactions). This can
be caused by long running transactions and can be a problem even if the
databse is using simple recovery model. See "Checkpoints and the Active
Portion of the Log" in BOL.
Try executing "dbcc opentran" to check all active transactions.
AMB
"Johnny" wrote:
> Hello all,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21G
B.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get ba
ck
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
> logs but the results remain the same.
> I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
> about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation
of
> this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
> Johnny|||Sorry, forgot to mention that the active part of the transaction log should
be at the begining, if not sql server can not shrink the transaction log.
AMB
"Alejandro Mesa" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Johnny,
>
> The active part of the transaction log (uncommitted transactions). This ca
n
> be caused by long running transactions and can be a problem even if the
> databse is using simple recovery model. See "Checkpoints and the Active
> Portion of the Log" in BOL.
> Try executing "dbcc opentran" to check all active transactions.
>
> AMB
> "Johnny" wrote:
>
I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
logs but the results remain the same.
I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
JohnnyYou probably created the file small and had bunch of autogrowths. Here's a r
eply to similar Q I
posted earlier today:
Log is emptied (2 to 0) then you backup log. Backup log, check if 2 at the e
nd. 2 at the end sets
limit of shrink. What you do is alternate backup log and shrink a few times.
Then you alter database
and pre-allocate a much as you probably need.
In addition, read about the virtual logfile concept in Books Online.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Johnny" <Johnny@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CC046CC3-867B-4CB7-AEF7-B81B3F622151@.microsoft.com...
> Hello all,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21G
B.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get ba
ck
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
> logs but the results remain the same.
> I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
> about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation
of
> this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
> Johnny|||Johnny,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21G
B.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get ba
ck
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
The active part of the transaction log (uncommitted transactions). This can
be caused by long running transactions and can be a problem even if the
databse is using simple recovery model. See "Checkpoints and the Active
Portion of the Log" in BOL.
Try executing "dbcc opentran" to check all active transactions.
AMB
"Johnny" wrote:
> Hello all,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21G
B.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get ba
ck
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
> logs but the results remain the same.
> I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
> about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation
of
> this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
> Johnny|||Sorry, forgot to mention that the active part of the transaction log should
be at the begining, if not sql server can not shrink the transaction log.
AMB
"Alejandro Mesa" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Johnny,
>
> The active part of the transaction log (uncommitted transactions). This ca
n
> be caused by long running transactions and can be a problem even if the
> databse is using simple recovery model. See "Checkpoints and the Active
> Portion of the Log" in BOL.
> Try executing "dbcc opentran" to check all active transactions.
>
> AMB
> "Johnny" wrote:
>
80k active rows when I run DBCC LOGINFO(XXX). Why?
Hello all,
I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
logs but the results remain the same.
I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
JohnnyYou probably created the file small and had bunch of autogrowths. Here's a reply to similar Q I
posted earlier today:
Log is emptied (2 to 0) then you backup log. Backup log, check if 2 at the end. 2 at the end sets
limit of shrink. What you do is alternate backup log and shrink a few times. Then you alter database
and pre-allocate a much as you probably need.
In addition, read about the virtual logfile concept in Books Online.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Johnny" <Johnny@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CC046CC3-867B-4CB7-AEF7-B81B3F622151@.microsoft.com...
> Hello all,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
> logs but the results remain the same.
> I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
> about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
> this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
> Johnny|||Johnny,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
The active part of the transaction log (uncommitted transactions). This can
be caused by long running transactions and can be a problem even if the
databse is using simple recovery model. See "Checkpoints and the Active
Portion of the Log" in BOL.
Try executing "dbcc opentran" to check all active transactions.
AMB
"Johnny" wrote:
> Hello all,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
> logs but the results remain the same.
> I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
> about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
> this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
> Johnny|||Sorry, forgot to mention that the active part of the transaction log should
be at the begining, if not sql server can not shrink the transaction log.
AMB
"Alejandro Mesa" wrote:
> Johnny,
> > I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> > I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> > status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> > approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> The active part of the transaction log (uncommitted transactions). This can
> be caused by long running transactions and can be a problem even if the
> databse is using simple recovery model. See "Checkpoints and the Active
> Portion of the Log" in BOL.
> Try executing "dbcc opentran" to check all active transactions.
>
> AMB
> "Johnny" wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> > I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> > status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> > approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> >
> > I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
> > logs but the results remain the same.
> >
> > I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
> > about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
> > this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
> >
> > Johnny
I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
logs but the results remain the same.
I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
JohnnyYou probably created the file small and had bunch of autogrowths. Here's a reply to similar Q I
posted earlier today:
Log is emptied (2 to 0) then you backup log. Backup log, check if 2 at the end. 2 at the end sets
limit of shrink. What you do is alternate backup log and shrink a few times. Then you alter database
and pre-allocate a much as you probably need.
In addition, read about the virtual logfile concept in Books Online.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Johnny" <Johnny@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CC046CC3-867B-4CB7-AEF7-B81B3F622151@.microsoft.com...
> Hello all,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
> logs but the results remain the same.
> I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
> about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
> this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
> Johnny|||Johnny,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
The active part of the transaction log (uncommitted transactions). This can
be caused by long running transactions and can be a problem even if the
databse is using simple recovery model. See "Checkpoints and the Active
Portion of the Log" in BOL.
Try executing "dbcc opentran" to check all active transactions.
AMB
"Johnny" wrote:
> Hello all,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
> logs but the results remain the same.
> I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
> about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
> this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
> Johnny|||Sorry, forgot to mention that the active part of the transaction log should
be at the begining, if not sql server can not shrink the transaction log.
AMB
"Alejandro Mesa" wrote:
> Johnny,
> > I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> > I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> > status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> > approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> The active part of the transaction log (uncommitted transactions). This can
> be caused by long running transactions and can be a problem even if the
> databse is using simple recovery model. See "Checkpoints and the Active
> Portion of the Log" in BOL.
> Try executing "dbcc opentran" to check all active transactions.
>
> AMB
> "Johnny" wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> > I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> > status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> > approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> >
> > I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
> > logs but the results remain the same.
> >
> > I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
> > about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
> > this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
> >
> > Johnny
80k active rows when I run DBCC LOGINFO(XXX). Why?
Hello all,
I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
logs but the results remain the same.
I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
Johnny
You probably created the file small and had bunch of autogrowths. Here's a reply to similar Q I
posted earlier today:
Log is emptied (2 to 0) then you backup log. Backup log, check if 2 at the end. 2 at the end sets
limit of shrink. What you do is alternate backup log and shrink a few times. Then you alter database
and pre-allocate a much as you probably need.
In addition, read about the virtual logfile concept in Books Online.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Johnny" <Johnny@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CC046CC3-867B-4CB7-AEF7-B81B3F622151@.microsoft.com...
> Hello all,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
> logs but the results remain the same.
> I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
> about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
> this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
> Johnny
|||Johnny,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
The active part of the transaction log (uncommitted transactions). This can
be caused by long running transactions and can be a problem even if the
databse is using simple recovery model. See "Checkpoints and the Active
Portion of the Log" in BOL.
Try executing "dbcc opentran" to check all active transactions.
AMB
"Johnny" wrote:
> Hello all,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
> logs but the results remain the same.
> I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
> about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
> this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
> Johnny
|||Sorry, forgot to mention that the active part of the transaction log should
be at the begining, if not sql server can not shrink the transaction log.
AMB
"Alejandro Mesa" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Johnny,
>
> The active part of the transaction log (uncommitted transactions). This can
> be caused by long running transactions and can be a problem even if the
> databse is using simple recovery model. See "Checkpoints and the Active
> Portion of the Log" in BOL.
> Try executing "dbcc opentran" to check all active transactions.
>
> AMB
> "Johnny" wrote:
I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
logs but the results remain the same.
I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
Johnny
You probably created the file small and had bunch of autogrowths. Here's a reply to similar Q I
posted earlier today:
Log is emptied (2 to 0) then you backup log. Backup log, check if 2 at the end. 2 at the end sets
limit of shrink. What you do is alternate backup log and shrink a few times. Then you alter database
and pre-allocate a much as you probably need.
In addition, read about the virtual logfile concept in Books Online.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Johnny" <Johnny@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CC046CC3-867B-4CB7-AEF7-B81B3F622151@.microsoft.com...
> Hello all,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
> logs but the results remain the same.
> I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
> about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
> this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
> Johnny
|||Johnny,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
The active part of the transaction log (uncommitted transactions). This can
be caused by long running transactions and can be a problem even if the
databse is using simple recovery model. See "Checkpoints and the Active
Portion of the Log" in BOL.
Try executing "dbcc opentran" to check all active transactions.
AMB
"Johnny" wrote:
> Hello all,
> I am having some trouble shrinking my logs which are currently approx. 21GB.
> I did some research and found some pages that say the rows should have a
> status of 0, not 2. When I run the "DBCC LOGINFO(XXX)" statement, I get back
> approx 80k rows which all have a status of 2. What does this mean?
> I already made a full backup of the database, and a separate backup of the
> logs but the results remain the same.
> I would appreciate if someone can explain what this means, what can I do
> about, and why do I have 80k active rows. Where can I find an explanation of
> this so I can learn about it? Thanks!
> Johnny
|||Sorry, forgot to mention that the active part of the transaction log should
be at the begining, if not sql server can not shrink the transaction log.
AMB
"Alejandro Mesa" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Johnny,
>
> The active part of the transaction log (uncommitted transactions). This can
> be caused by long running transactions and can be a problem even if the
> databse is using simple recovery model. See "Checkpoints and the Active
> Portion of the Log" in BOL.
> Try executing "dbcc opentran" to check all active transactions.
>
> AMB
> "Johnny" wrote:
Monday, February 13, 2012
40000 Pages /day with SQL Express
I can some on tell why I can or I cannot run a 40000 Pages /day with SQL Express.
Thanks
Easily|||The reponse is not.
I did the test and the performance limitation from msde makes it impossible to run properly
Erez
|||You asked about SQL Express, not MSDE. But even MSDE should be able to handle 40,000 pages/day easily, so I would take a look at what you are doing wrong that's causing the performance issue.
With an average response time of serving a page of 2 seconds or less, you could serve 40,000 pages in a day. If you can't get your average page response to be below 2 seconds, you've got other problems, cause that's painfully slow. That's with a single page request being presented in a serial fashion, which isn't likely. With overlapping requests even with a 2 second response you should be able to handle a LOT more than 40,000 pages under most circumstances (Depends where the 2 second response bottleneck is).
Now that's assuming a consistant load for 24 hours, perhaps you wanted to know some other metric? Like can I handle a peak load of x pages/sec, or some such.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)