837 patch and MS03-031

Hello
We're about to apply the MS03-031 security rollup patch to upgrade our 90
SQL Servers from SP3a (760) to (818).
Problem is we have applied a hotfix already to a couple of boxes which
ugraded SQL to version (837).
What will happen when we apply MS03-031 to these boxes with the hotfix? Will
it fail and if so whats the solution?
thank you
-- cranfield, DBA
Hi
It will run, but is clever enough not to run older scripts against the newer
build. It does binary file version checking so it won't overwrite newer
binaries.
Have you considered hotfix 878?
When I tried to run 818 against a 952 server, I got the following:
=== Version check on sqlservr.exe 8.0.952 shows different major build of
sqlservr.exe than hotfix build number 8.00.818
=== NOT RUNNING SCRIPTS
The build number of SQLSERVR.EXE and HotFix package did not match. This
happens
when SQLSERVR.EXE was not replaced because the version was higher than the
Hotfix build.
In these cases Hotfix will not run any scripts and return error code
ERROR_BAD_ENVIRONMENT
Error message: Error running SQL script. Please view the log file for details.
INSTALL FAILURE: Hotfix failed to apply the patches on instance MSSQLSERVER,
the error code returned was: 10
<EndFunc Name='DoSQLHotFix' Return='10' GetLastError='0'>
Regards
Mike
"cranfield" wrote:

> Hello
> We're about to apply the MS03-031 security rollup patch to upgrade our 90
> SQL Servers from SP3a (760) to (818).
> Problem is we have applied a hotfix already to a couple of boxes which
> ugraded SQL to version (837).
> What will happen when we apply MS03-031 to these boxes with the hotfix? Will
> it fail and if so whats the solution?
> thank you
> -- cranfield, DBA
|||Hi Mike
Why do you ask if I have considered hotfix 878? We applied the 837 hotfix i
an attempt to sort out some Exception errors we were having on our 4-node
cluster.
We're just looking at bringing up our servers to an accepted level and our
testers have only tested up to 818, MS02-031.
regards
Alan Cranfield
DBA Support
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi
> It will run, but is clever enough not to run older scripts against the newer
> build. It does binary file version checking so it won't overwrite newer
> binaries.
> Have you considered hotfix 878?
> When I tried to run 818 against a 952 server, I got the following:
> === Version check on sqlservr.exe 8.0.952 shows different major build of
> sqlservr.exe than hotfix build number 8.00.818
>
> === NOT RUNNING SCRIPTS
> The build number of SQLSERVR.EXE and HotFix package did not match. This
> happens
> when SQLSERVR.EXE was not replaced because the version was higher than the
> Hotfix build.
> In these cases Hotfix will not run any scripts and return error code
> ERROR_BAD_ENVIRONMENT
> Error message: Error running SQL script. Please view the log file for details.
> INSTALL FAILURE: Hotfix failed to apply the patches on instance MSSQLSERVER,
> the error code returned was: 10
> <EndFunc Name='DoSQLHotFix' Return='10' GetLastError='0'>
> Regards
> Mike
> "cranfield" wrote:
|||Hi
878 is the highest publicly available hotfix, that is fully supported by PSS.
We encountered quite a few problems with hotfixes in the 820 to 850 range,
and those issues were fixed after 850.
(regression bugs etc)
Regards
Mike
"Cranfield" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Mike
> Why do you ask if I have considered hotfix 878? We applied the 837 hotfix i
> an attempt to sort out some Exception errors we were having on our 4-node
> cluster.
> We're just looking at bringing up our servers to an accepted level and our
> testers have only tested up to 818, MS02-031.
> regards
> Alan Cranfield
> DBA Support
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
|||I suspect applying MS03-031 to the servers that are already at
8.00.837 will do nothing - it shouldn't overwrite files with
earlier versions, and you can compare the file information in the KB
article http://support.microsoft.com/kb/821277 with what's on your
servers.
Is there a reason you think MS03-31 contains something that is
not already installed as part of the 837 hotfix on the hotfixed boxes?
Usually these things are cumulative, and especially since 818 was a
security issue, I'd be surprised if MSFT gave out something numbered
8.00.837 that didn't fix prior security issues.
Steve Kass
Drew University
cranfield wrote:

>Hello
>We're about to apply the MS03-031 security rollup patch to upgrade our 90
>SQL Servers from SP3a (760) to (818).
>Problem is we have applied a hotfix already to a couple of boxes which
>ugraded SQL to version (837).
>What will happen when we apply MS03-031 to these boxes with the hotfix? Will
>it fail and if so whats the solution?
>thank you
>-- cranfield, DBA
>
|||This is exactly what i want to know. Can I safely assume that I don't have to
patch the 837 servers as they will already be up to 818 level?
thanks
alan
"Steve Kass" wrote:

> I suspect applying MS03-031 to the servers that are already at
> 8.00.837 will do nothing - it shouldn't overwrite files with
> earlier versions, and you can compare the file information in the KB
> article http://support.microsoft.com/kb/821277 with what's on your
> servers.
> Is there a reason you think MS03-31 contains something that is
> not already installed as part of the 837 hotfix on the hotfixed boxes?
> Usually these things are cumulative, and especially since 818 was a
> security issue, I'd be surprised if MSFT gave out something numbered
> 8.00.837 that didn't fix prior security issues.
> Steve Kass
> Drew University
> cranfield wrote:
>

837 patch and MS03-031

Hello
We're about to apply the MS03-031 security rollup patch to upgrade our 90
SQL Servers from SP3a (760) to (818).
Problem is we have applied a hotfix already to a couple of boxes which
ugraded SQL to version (837).
What will happen when we apply MS03-031 to these boxes with the hotfix? Will
it fail and if so whats the solution?
thank you
-- cranfield, DBAHi
It will run, but is clever enough not to run older scripts against the newer
build. It does binary file version checking so it won't overwrite newer
binaries.
Have you considered hotfix 878?
When I tried to run 818 against a 952 server, I got the following:
=== Version check on sqlservr.exe 8.0.952 shows different major build of
sqlservr.exe than hotfix build number 8.00.818
=== NOT RUNNING SCRIPTS
The build number of SQLSERVR.EXE and HotFix package did not match. This
happens
when SQLSERVR.EXE was not replaced because the version was higher than the
Hotfix build.
In these cases Hotfix will not run any scripts and return error code
ERROR_BAD_ENVIRONMENT
Error message: Error running SQL script. Please view the log file for detail
s.
INSTALL FAILURE: Hotfix failed to apply the patches on instance MSSQLSERVER,
the error code returned was: 10
<EndFunc Name='DoSQLHotFix' Return='10' GetLastError='0'>
Regards
Mike
"cranfield" wrote:

> Hello
> We're about to apply the MS03-031 security rollup patch to upgrade our 90
> SQL Servers from SP3a (760) to (818).
> Problem is we have applied a hotfix already to a couple of boxes which
> ugraded SQL to version (837).
> What will happen when we apply MS03-031 to these boxes with the hotfix? Wi
ll
> it fail and if so whats the solution?
> thank you
> -- cranfield, DBA|||Hi Mike
Why do you ask if I have considered hotfix 878? We applied the 837 hotfix i
an attempt to sort out some Exception errors we were having on our 4-node
cluster.
We're just looking at bringing up our servers to an accepted level and our
testers have only tested up to 818, MS02-031.
regards
Alan Cranfield
DBA Support
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi
> It will run, but is clever enough not to run older scripts against the new
er
> build. It does binary file version checking so it won't overwrite newer
> binaries.
> Have you considered hotfix 878?
> When I tried to run 818 against a 952 server, I got the following:
> === Version check on sqlservr.exe 8.0.952 shows different major build of
> sqlservr.exe than hotfix build number 8.00.818
>
> === NOT RUNNING SCRIPTS
> The build number of SQLSERVR.EXE and HotFix package did not match. This
> happens
> when SQLSERVR.EXE was not replaced because the version was higher than the
> Hotfix build.
> In these cases Hotfix will not run any scripts and return error code
> ERROR_BAD_ENVIRONMENT
> Error message: Error running SQL script. Please view the log file for deta
ils.
> INSTALL FAILURE: Hotfix failed to apply the patches on instance MSSQLSERVE
R,
> the error code returned was: 10
> <EndFunc Name='DoSQLHotFix' Return='10' GetLastError='0'>
> Regards
> Mike
> "cranfield" wrote:
>|||Hi
878 is the highest publicly available hotfix, that is fully supported by PSS
.
We encountered quite a few problems with hotfixes in the 820 to 850 range,
and those issues were fixed after 850.
(regression bugs etc)
Regards
Mike
"Cranfield" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Mike
> Why do you ask if I have considered hotfix 878? We applied the 837 hotfix
i
> an attempt to sort out some Exception errors we were having on our 4-node
> cluster.
> We're just looking at bringing up our servers to an accepted level and our
> testers have only tested up to 818, MS02-031.
> regards
> Alan Cranfield
> DBA Support
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
>|||I suspect applying MS03-031 to the servers that are already at
8.00.837 will do nothing - it shouldn't overwrite files with
earlier versions, and you can compare the file information in the KB
article http://support.microsoft.com/kb/821277 with what's on your
servers.
Is there a reason you think MS03-31 contains something that is
not already installed as part of the 837 hotfix on the hotfixed boxes?
Usually these things are cumulative, and especially since 818 was a
security issue, I'd be surprised if MSFT gave out something numbered
8.00.837 that didn't fix prior security issues.
Steve Kass
Drew University
cranfield wrote:

>Hello
>We're about to apply the MS03-031 security rollup patch to upgrade our 90
>SQL Servers from SP3a (760) to (818).
>Problem is we have applied a hotfix already to a couple of boxes which
>ugraded SQL to version (837).
>What will happen when we apply MS03-031 to these boxes with the hotfix? Wil
l
>it fail and if so whats the solution?
>thank you
>-- cranfield, DBA
>|||This is exactly what i want to know. Can I safely assume that I don't have t
o
patch the 837 servers as they will already be up to 818 level?
thanks
alan
"Steve Kass" wrote:

> I suspect applying MS03-031 to the servers that are already at
> 8.00.837 will do nothing - it shouldn't overwrite files with
> earlier versions, and you can compare the file information in the KB
> article http://support.microsoft.com/kb/821277 with what's on your
> servers.
> Is there a reason you think MS03-31 contains something that is
> not already installed as part of the 837 hotfix on the hotfixed boxes?
> Usually these things are cumulative, and especially since 818 was a
> security issue, I'd be surprised if MSFT gave out something numbered
> 8.00.837 that didn't fix prior security issues.
> Steve Kass
> Drew University
> cranfield wrote:
>
>

837 patch and MS03-031

Hello
We're about to apply the MS03-031 security rollup patch to upgrade our 90
SQL Servers from SP3a (760) to (818).
Problem is we have applied a hotfix already to a couple of boxes which
ugraded SQL to version (837).
What will happen when we apply MS03-031 to these boxes with the hotfix? Will
it fail and if so whats the solution?
thank you
-- cranfield, DBAHi
It will run, but is clever enough not to run older scripts against the newer
build. It does binary file version checking so it won't overwrite newer
binaries.
Have you considered hotfix 878?
When I tried to run 818 against a 952 server, I got the following:
=== Version check on sqlservr.exe 8.0.952 shows different major build of
sqlservr.exe than hotfix build number 8.00.818
=== NOT RUNNING SCRIPTS
The build number of SQLSERVR.EXE and HotFix package did not match. This
happens
when SQLSERVR.EXE was not replaced because the version was higher than the
Hotfix build.
In these cases Hotfix will not run any scripts and return error code
ERROR_BAD_ENVIRONMENT
Error message: Error running SQL script. Please view the log file for details.
INSTALL FAILURE: Hotfix failed to apply the patches on instance MSSQLSERVER,
the error code returned was: 10
<EndFunc Name='DoSQLHotFix' Return='10' GetLastError='0'>
Regards
Mike
"cranfield" wrote:
> Hello
> We're about to apply the MS03-031 security rollup patch to upgrade our 90
> SQL Servers from SP3a (760) to (818).
> Problem is we have applied a hotfix already to a couple of boxes which
> ugraded SQL to version (837).
> What will happen when we apply MS03-031 to these boxes with the hotfix? Will
> it fail and if so whats the solution?
> thank you
> -- cranfield, DBA|||Hi Mike
Why do you ask if I have considered hotfix 878? We applied the 837 hotfix i
an attempt to sort out some Exception errors we were having on our 4-node
cluster.
We're just looking at bringing up our servers to an accepted level and our
testers have only tested up to 818, MS02-031.
regards
Alan Cranfield
DBA Support
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
> Hi
> It will run, but is clever enough not to run older scripts against the newer
> build. It does binary file version checking so it won't overwrite newer
> binaries.
> Have you considered hotfix 878?
> When I tried to run 818 against a 952 server, I got the following:
> === Version check on sqlservr.exe 8.0.952 shows different major build of
> sqlservr.exe than hotfix build number 8.00.818
>
> === NOT RUNNING SCRIPTS
> The build number of SQLSERVR.EXE and HotFix package did not match. This
> happens
> when SQLSERVR.EXE was not replaced because the version was higher than the
> Hotfix build.
> In these cases Hotfix will not run any scripts and return error code
> ERROR_BAD_ENVIRONMENT
> Error message: Error running SQL script. Please view the log file for details.
> INSTALL FAILURE: Hotfix failed to apply the patches on instance MSSQLSERVER,
> the error code returned was: 10
> <EndFunc Name='DoSQLHotFix' Return='10' GetLastError='0'>
> Regards
> Mike
> "cranfield" wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > We're about to apply the MS03-031 security rollup patch to upgrade our 90
> > SQL Servers from SP3a (760) to (818).
> >
> > Problem is we have applied a hotfix already to a couple of boxes which
> > ugraded SQL to version (837).
> >
> > What will happen when we apply MS03-031 to these boxes with the hotfix? Will
> > it fail and if so whats the solution?
> >
> > thank you
> >
> > -- cranfield, DBA|||Hi
878 is the highest publicly available hotfix, that is fully supported by PSS.
We encountered quite a few problems with hotfixes in the 820 to 850 range,
and those issues were fixed after 850.
(regression bugs etc)
Regards
Mike
"Cranfield" wrote:
> Hi Mike
> Why do you ask if I have considered hotfix 878? We applied the 837 hotfix i
> an attempt to sort out some Exception errors we were having on our 4-node
> cluster.
> We're just looking at bringing up our servers to an accepted level and our
> testers have only tested up to 818, MS02-031.
> regards
> Alan Cranfield
> DBA Support
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > It will run, but is clever enough not to run older scripts against the newer
> > build. It does binary file version checking so it won't overwrite newer
> > binaries.
> >
> > Have you considered hotfix 878?
> >
> > When I tried to run 818 against a 952 server, I got the following:
> >
> > === Version check on sqlservr.exe 8.0.952 shows different major build of
> > sqlservr.exe than hotfix build number 8.00.818
> >
> >
> > === NOT RUNNING SCRIPTS
> > The build number of SQLSERVR.EXE and HotFix package did not match. This
> > happens
> > when SQLSERVR.EXE was not replaced because the version was higher than the
> > Hotfix build.
> > In these cases Hotfix will not run any scripts and return error code
> > ERROR_BAD_ENVIRONMENT
> >
> > Error message: Error running SQL script. Please view the log file for details.
> > INSTALL FAILURE: Hotfix failed to apply the patches on instance MSSQLSERVER,
> > the error code returned was: 10
> > <EndFunc Name='DoSQLHotFix' Return='10' GetLastError='0'>
> >
> > Regards
> > Mike
> >
> > "cranfield" wrote:
> >
> > > Hello
> > >
> > > We're about to apply the MS03-031 security rollup patch to upgrade our 90
> > > SQL Servers from SP3a (760) to (818).
> > >
> > > Problem is we have applied a hotfix already to a couple of boxes which
> > > ugraded SQL to version (837).
> > >
> > > What will happen when we apply MS03-031 to these boxes with the hotfix? Will
> > > it fail and if so whats the solution?
> > >
> > > thank you
> > >
> > > -- cranfield, DBA|||I suspect applying MS03-031 to the servers that are already at
8.00.837 will do nothing - it shouldn't overwrite files with
earlier versions, and you can compare the file information in the KB
article http://support.microsoft.com/kb/821277 with what's on your
servers.
Is there a reason you think MS03-31 contains something that is
not already installed as part of the 837 hotfix on the hotfixed boxes?
Usually these things are cumulative, and especially since 818 was a
security issue, I'd be surprised if MSFT gave out something numbered
8.00.837 that didn't fix prior security issues.
Steve Kass
Drew University
cranfield wrote:
>Hello
>We're about to apply the MS03-031 security rollup patch to upgrade our 90
>SQL Servers from SP3a (760) to (818).
>Problem is we have applied a hotfix already to a couple of boxes which
>ugraded SQL to version (837).
>What will happen when we apply MS03-031 to these boxes with the hotfix? Will
>it fail and if so whats the solution?
>thank you
>-- cranfield, DBA
>|||This is exactly what i want to know. Can I safely assume that I don't have to
patch the 837 servers as they will already be up to 818 level?
thanks
alan
"Steve Kass" wrote:
> I suspect applying MS03-031 to the servers that are already at
> 8.00.837 will do nothing - it shouldn't overwrite files with
> earlier versions, and you can compare the file information in the KB
> article http://support.microsoft.com/kb/821277 with what's on your
> servers.
> Is there a reason you think MS03-31 contains something that is
> not already installed as part of the 837 hotfix on the hotfixed boxes?
> Usually these things are cumulative, and especially since 818 was a
> security issue, I'd be surprised if MSFT gave out something numbered
> 8.00.837 that didn't fix prior security issues.
> Steve Kass
> Drew University
> cranfield wrote:
> >Hello
> >
> >We're about to apply the MS03-031 security rollup patch to upgrade our 90
> >SQL Servers from SP3a (760) to (818).
> >
> >Problem is we have applied a hotfix already to a couple of boxes which
> >ugraded SQL to version (837).
> >
> >What will happen when we apply MS03-031 to these boxes with the hotfix? Will
> >it fail and if so whats the solution?
> >
> >thank you
> >
> >-- cranfield, DBA
> >
> >
>

701 error

We are experiencing the same errors and same "lock out" behavior. We have the same version/patch level of SQL installed but are in a 32 bit env. The box has 32GB of memory. Nether the bPool or VAS show any pressure when the "out of system memory error" occurs. Since this error usually indicates a VAS problem we tried increasing VAS to 1GB w/the -g flag. It made no difference. PSS has been working on the case for 3 weeks. They dont seem to be finding any evidince of memory pressure either. When I last spole to the escalation engineer yesterday it seemed that they are going to recommend reducing the number of databases on the server. I asked for clarification as to whether we are hitting a 32 bit barrior, an instance limitation, or both. I am awaiting the answer. How many databases do you have on your server? We had between 1700 and 1900 (the number varies) at times when the error occured. We are now at 1500, and have not had the error in the 2 days since reducing the number of databases...
EggHeadCafe.com - .NET Developer Portal of Choice
http://www.eggheadcafe.com
Steve,
Further comment.
I have been having the problem about once a month for several months and
have not had any joy in discovering what to do about it. Other notes on my
case:
- Once this starts, my CPU utilization will go to very close to 100%. If I
log out some heavy users, my CPU will dip to 70% or 80% for about 20
seconds, then climb back to near 100%.
- At this point, spid 1 is the busiest of the spids. (Which makes it seem
that the SQL Server is eating up its resources trying to find resources for
users.)
- Very Strange Discovery. One time I found that one workstation which had
been running a very large transaction, would, if turned off, drop the server
CPU to normal. But if I turned that workstation back on, even though I did
not access the server, the server workload would go back to 100%. It was as
if the SQL Server remembered the workstation and would try to do something
for it. (The next day this workstation did not have such an effect.) As I
said, Very Strange.
We also are on 32-bit using AWE memory, but only 12 GB. (We also only have
about 60 databases on the machine, nothing like your 1500+.) This weekend,
we are upgrading to 64-bit Windows 2003/SQL Server 2005. We will see if
this recurs, or whether it is an AWE flaw.
This thread from a Red Gate user suggests the problem is not free memory,
but free contiguous memory.
[url]http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/viewtopic.php?p=15220&sid=9c1df0b8ddef4fc6745b1ce1 33f1e6b1[/url]
So, if very large queries and cursor usage are responsible for fragmenting
memory (per something I read elsewhere) I don't know what to do except to
schedule periodic restarts of the the SQL Server.
RLF
<steve> wrote in message news:200722311948sgoodwin@.autotask.com...
> We are experiencing the same errors and same "lock out" behavior. We have
> the same version/patch level of SQL installed but are in a 32 bit env. The
> box has 32GB of memory. Nether the bPool or VAS show any pressure when the
> "out of system memory error" occurs. Since this error usually indicates a
> VAS problem we tried increasing VAS to 1GB w/the -g flag. It made no
> difference. PSS has been working on the case for 3 weeks. They dont seem
> to be finding any evidince of memory pressure either. When I last spole to
> the escalation engineer yesterday it seemed that they are going to
> recommend reducing the number of databases on the server. I asked for
> clarification as to whether we are hitting a 32 bit barrior, an instance
> limitation, or both. I am awaiting the answer. How many databases do you
> have on your server? We had between 1700 and 1900 (the number varies) at
> times when the error occured. We are now at 1500, and have not had the
> error in the 2 days since reducing the number of databases...
> EggHeadCafe.com - .NET Developer Portal of Choice
> http://www.eggheadcafe.com

701 error

We are experiencing the same errors and same "lock out" behavior. We have th
e same version/patch level of SQL installed but are in a 32 bit env. The box
has 32GB of memory. Nether the bPool or VAS show any pressure when the "out
of system memory error" oc
curs. Since this error usually indicates a VAS problem we tried increasing V
AS to 1GB w/the -g flag. It made no difference. PSS has been working on the
case for 3 weeks. They dont seem to be finding any evidince of memory pressu
re either. When I last spol
e to the escalation engineer yesterday it seemed that they are going to reco
mmend reducing the number of databases on the server. I asked for clarificat
ion as to whether we are hitting a 32 bit barrior, an instance limitation, o
r both. I am awaiting the a
nswer. How many databases do you have on your server? We had between 1700 an
d 1900 (the number varies) at times when the error occured. We are now at 15
00, and have not had the error in the 2 days since reducing the number of da
tabases...
EggHeadCafe.com - .NET Developer Portal of Choice
http://www.eggheadcafe.comSteve,
Further comment.
I have been having the problem about once a month for several months and
have not had any joy in discovering what to do about it. Other notes on my
case:
- Once this starts, my CPU utilization will go to very close to 100%. If I
log out some heavy users, my CPU will dip to 70% or 80% for about 20
seconds, then climb back to near 100%.
- At this point, spid 1 is the busiest of the spids. (Which makes it seem
that the SQL Server is eating up its resources trying to find resources for
users.)
- Very Strange Discovery. One time I found that one workstation which had
been running a very large transaction, would, if turned off, drop the server
CPU to normal. But if I turned that workstation back on, even though I did
not access the server, the server workload would go back to 100%. It was as
if the SQL Server remembered the workstation and would try to do something
for it. (The next day this workstation did not have such an effect.) As I
said, Very Strange.
We also are on 32-bit using AWE memory, but only 12 GB. (We also only have
about 60 databases on the machine, nothing like your 1500+.) This weekend,
we are upgrading to 64-bit Windows 2003/SQL Server 2005. We will see if
this recurs, or whether it is an AWE flaw.
This thread from a Red Gate user suggests the problem is not free memory,
but free contiguous memory.
http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoar...
b1ce133f1e6b1
So, if very large queries and cursor usage are responsible for fragmenting
memory (per something I read elsewhere) I don't know what to do except to
schedule periodic restarts of the the SQL Server.
RLF
<steve> wrote in message news:200722311948sgoodwin@.autotask.com...
> We are experiencing the same errors and same "lock out" behavior. We have
> the same version/patch level of SQL installed but are in a 32 bit env. The
> box has 32GB of memory. Nether the bPool or VAS show any pressure when the
> "out of system memory error" occurs. Since this error usually indicates a
> VAS problem we tried increasing VAS to 1GB w/the -g flag. It made no
> difference. PSS has been working on the case for 3 weeks. They dont seem
> to be finding any evidince of memory pressure either. When I last spole to
> the escalation engineer yesterday it seemed that they are going to
> recommend reducing the number of databases on the server. I asked for
> clarification as to whether we are hitting a 32 bit barrior, an instance
> limitation, or both. I am awaiting the answer. How many databases do you
> have on your server? We had between 1700 and 1900 (the number varies) at
> times when the error occured. We are now at 1500, and have not had the
> error in the 2 days since reducing the number of databases...
> EggHeadCafe.com - .NET Developer Portal of Choice
> http://www.eggheadcafe.com

7.00.1078_enu.exe on msde

Hello does anyone know how to apply this patch on msde. I am getting
the rootkit.h in some of my servers and this patch requires to run
some querys. thanks.Hi

Has Sp4 been installed on those MSDE Instances?

What is the SELECT @.@.version for them?

http://www.microsoft.com/sql/downloads/sp4.asp

--
----------
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland

IM: mike@.epprecht.net

MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp

Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/

<jcharth@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115245790.849461.5680@.o13g2000cwo.googlegrou ps.com...
> Hello does anyone know how to apply this patch on msde. I am getting
> the rootkit.h in some of my servers and this patch requires to run
> some querys. thanks.

64bit patch question

I know 64bit SQL Server has sp3a rolled into the install and I know that
there is a 64bit MS03-031 patch.
Do the rest of the patches (pss and otherwise) work for 64bit or is MS03-031
the last and only one beyond the install?
Thanks in advance
frankmHi
There are quite a few fixes for 64-bit after MS03-31
If you search Microsoft.com for "kbfix kbbug sql 64-bit", you will get quite
a few hits.
Unless you are encountering one of the problems, it is best to wait for SP4
which is currently in beta (and if you have a test environment, you can beta
test it (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/betanominations.asp).
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"frankm" <frankm@.nospam.postalias> wrote in message
news:OZ6G7TeFFHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> I know 64bit SQL Server has sp3a rolled into the install and I know that
> there is a 64bit MS03-031 patch.
> Do the rest of the patches (pss and otherwise) work for 64bit or is
MS03-031
> the last and only one beyond the install?
> Thanks in advance
> frankm
>|||How do identify a 64bit hotfix from a 32bit hotfix?
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:OyDcFPgFFHA.3732@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> There are quite a few fixes for 64-bit after MS03-31
> If you search Microsoft.com for "kbfix kbbug sql 64-bit", you will get
quite
> a few hits.
> Unless you are encountering one of the problems, it is best to wait for
SP4
> which is currently in beta (and if you have a test environment, you can
beta
> test it (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/betanominations.asp).
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "frankm" <frankm@.nospam.postalias> wrote in message
> news:OZ6G7TeFFHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > I know 64bit SQL Server has sp3a rolled into the install and I know that
> > there is a 64bit MS03-031 patch.
> > Do the rest of the patches (pss and otherwise) work for 64bit or is
> MS03-031
> > the last and only one beyond the install?
> >
> > Thanks in advance
> > frankm
> >
> >
>|||Hi
In KB, it gives the 32 bit and/or 64 bit binary versions that are included
in the hotfix. If 64 bit is not specified, it does not apply to it.
In the SP4 beta documentation, there is a list of fixes that are rolling
with SP4. On that list you can also see what are 64bit Fixes.
Most of the time. the downloadable file from MS does not specify 32 or 64
bit, except when you look up the KB article that is in the file name.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"frankm" <frankm@.nospam.postalias> wrote in message
news:OJwITUvFFHA.3608@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> How do identify a 64bit hotfix from a 32bit hotfix?
>
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
> news:OyDcFPgFFHA.3732@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > Hi
> >
> > There are quite a few fixes for 64-bit after MS03-31
> > If you search Microsoft.com for "kbfix kbbug sql 64-bit", you will get
> quite
> > a few hits.
> >
> > Unless you are encountering one of the problems, it is best to wait for
> SP4
> > which is currently in beta (and if you have a test environment, you can
> beta
> > test it (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/betanominations.asp).
> >
> > Regards
> > --
> > Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> > Zurich, Switzerland
> >
> > IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> >
> > MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> >
> > Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> >
> > "frankm" <frankm@.nospam.postalias> wrote in message
> > news:OZ6G7TeFFHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > > I know 64bit SQL Server has sp3a rolled into the install and I know
that
> > > there is a 64bit MS03-031 patch.
> > > Do the rest of the patches (pss and otherwise) work for 64bit or is
> > MS03-031
> > > the last and only one beyond the install?
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance
> > > frankm
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

64bit patch question

I know 64bit SQL Server has sp3a rolled into the install and I know that
there is a 64bit MS03-031 patch.
Do the rest of the patches (pss and otherwise) work for 64bit or is MS03-031
the last and only one beyond the install?
Thanks in advance
frankmHi
There are quite a few fixes for 64-bit after MS03-31
If you search Microsoft.com for "kbfix kbbug sql 64-bit", you will get quite
a few hits.
Unless you are encountering one of the problems, it is best to wait for SP4
which is currently in beta (and if you have a test environment, you can beta
test it (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evalua...nominations.asp).
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"frankm" <frankm@.nospam.postalias> wrote in message
news:OZ6G7TeFFHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> I know 64bit SQL Server has sp3a rolled into the install and I know that
> there is a 64bit MS03-031 patch.
> Do the rest of the patches (pss and otherwise) work for 64bit or is
MS03-031
> the last and only one beyond the install?
> Thanks in advance
> frankm
>|||How do identify a 64bit hotfix from a 32bit hotfix?
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:OyDcFPgFFHA.3732@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> There are quite a few fixes for 64-bit after MS03-31
> If you search Microsoft.com for "kbfix kbbug sql 64-bit", you will get
quite
> a few hits.
> Unless you are encountering one of the problems, it is best to wait for
SP4
> which is currently in beta (and if you have a test environment, you can
beta
> test it (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evalua...nominations.asp).
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "frankm" <frankm@.nospam.postalias> wrote in message
> news:OZ6G7TeFFHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> MS03-031
>|||Hi
In KB, it gives the 32 bit and/or 64 bit binary versions that are included
in the hotfix. If 64 bit is not specified, it does not apply to it.
In the SP4 beta documentation, there is a list of fixes that are rolling
with SP4. On that list you can also see what are 64bit Fixes.
Most of the time. the downloadable file from MS does not specify 32 or 64
bit, except when you look up the KB article that is in the file name.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"frankm" <frankm@.nospam.postalias> wrote in message
news:OJwITUvFFHA.3608@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> How do identify a 64bit hotfix from a 32bit hotfix?
>
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
> news:OyDcFPgFFHA.3732@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> quite
> SP4
> beta
that[vbcol=seagreen]
>

64bit patch question

I know 64bit SQL Server has sp3a rolled into the install and I know that
there is a 64bit MS03-031 patch.
Do the rest of the patches (pss and otherwise) work for 64bit or is MS03-031
the last and only one beyond the install?
Thanks in advance
frankm
Hi
There are quite a few fixes for 64-bit after MS03-31
If you search Microsoft.com for "kbfix kbbug sql 64-bit", you will get quite
a few hits.
Unless you are encountering one of the problems, it is best to wait for SP4
which is currently in beta (and if you have a test environment, you can beta
test it (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluat...ominations.asp).
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"frankm" <frankm@.nospam.postalias> wrote in message
news:OZ6G7TeFFHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> I know 64bit SQL Server has sp3a rolled into the install and I know that
> there is a 64bit MS03-031 patch.
> Do the rest of the patches (pss and otherwise) work for 64bit or is
MS03-031
> the last and only one beyond the install?
> Thanks in advance
> frankm
>
|||How do identify a 64bit hotfix from a 32bit hotfix?
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:OyDcFPgFFHA.3732@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> There are quite a few fixes for 64-bit after MS03-31
> If you search Microsoft.com for "kbfix kbbug sql 64-bit", you will get
quite
> a few hits.
> Unless you are encountering one of the problems, it is best to wait for
SP4
> which is currently in beta (and if you have a test environment, you can
beta
> test it (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluat...ominations.asp).
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "frankm" <frankm@.nospam.postalias> wrote in message
> news:OZ6G7TeFFHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> MS03-031
>
|||Hi
In KB, it gives the 32 bit and/or 64 bit binary versions that are included
in the hotfix. If 64 bit is not specified, it does not apply to it.
In the SP4 beta documentation, there is a list of fixes that are rolling
with SP4. On that list you can also see what are 64bit Fixes.
Most of the time. the downloadable file from MS does not specify 32 or 64
bit, except when you look up the KB article that is in the file name.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"frankm" <frankm@.nospam.postalias> wrote in message
news:OJwITUvFFHA.3608@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> How do identify a 64bit hotfix from a 32bit hotfix?
>
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
> news:OyDcFPgFFHA.3732@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> quite
> SP4
> beta
that
>

64 Bit patches. Are these SQL?

I noticed that my 64 bit version of Win 2003 Server is creating a lot of
patch folders under C:\Windows. What are these all about and why do I not see
similar folder names on my 32 bit server?
I'm told these all are SQL patches. If so, can I safely delete them?
Examples:
03/22/2007 03:55 PM <DIR> DTS9_KB933508_ENU_64
04/08/2007 09:45 AM <DIR> DTS9_KB934458_ENU_64
03/22/2007 03:54 PM <DIR> NS9_KB933508_ENU_64
04/08/2007 09:44 AM <DIR> NS9_KB934458_ENU_64
03/22/2007 03:51 PM <DIR> OLAP9_KB933508_ENU_64
04/08/2007 09:42 AM <DIR> OLAP9_KB934458_ENU_64
03/22/2007 03:52 PM <DIR> RS9_KB933508_ENU_64
04/08/2007 09:43 AM <DIR> RS9_KB934458_ENU_64
03/22/2007 03:49 PM <DIR> SQL9_KB933508_ENU_64
04/08/2007 09:40 AM <DIR> SQL9_KB934458_ENU_64
03/22/2007 03:56 PM <DIR> SQLTools9_KB933508_ENU_64
04/08/2007 05:22 PM <DIR> SQLTools9_KB934458_ENU_64
--
BobBob,
They are: - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/933508/ and
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/934458 both patches that MS offered under
Microsoft Update. Do you have Automatic Updating on?
Chris
"Bob" <86c6c2e6-2146512712@.news.postalias> wrote in message
news:E0BF66B1-D15C-4C30-A312-96F211652272@.microsoft.com...
>I noticed that my 64 bit version of Win 2003 Server is creating a lot of
> patch folders under C:\Windows. What are these all about and why do I not
> see
> similar folder names on my 32 bit server?
> I'm told these all are SQL patches. If so, can I safely delete them?
> Examples:
> 03/22/2007 03:55 PM <DIR> DTS9_KB933508_ENU_64
> 04/08/2007 09:45 AM <DIR> DTS9_KB934458_ENU_64
> 03/22/2007 03:54 PM <DIR> NS9_KB933508_ENU_64
> 04/08/2007 09:44 AM <DIR> NS9_KB934458_ENU_64
> 03/22/2007 03:51 PM <DIR> OLAP9_KB933508_ENU_64
> 04/08/2007 09:42 AM <DIR> OLAP9_KB934458_ENU_64
> 03/22/2007 03:52 PM <DIR> RS9_KB933508_ENU_64
> 04/08/2007 09:43 AM <DIR> RS9_KB934458_ENU_64
> 03/22/2007 03:49 PM <DIR> SQL9_KB933508_ENU_64
> 04/08/2007 09:40 AM <DIR> SQL9_KB934458_ENU_64
> 03/22/2007 03:56 PM <DIR> SQLTools9_KB933508_ENU_64
> 04/08/2007 05:22 PM <DIR> SQLTools9_KB934458_ENU_64
> --
> Bob|||Yes, WSUS pushes these out.
I presume these are the prior code that the patches replaced, just in case
the patch needs to be backed off. If so, why doesn't SQL store them like all
other MS products; under C:\Windows\$...
Anyway, can I delete these (as I assume they are pre-patch code for the
purpose of patch backoffs).
--
Bob|||Dear Bob,
Thank you for posting here.
From the problem description of the post you submitted, my understanding
is: you have found several SQL related folders (E.X: DTS9_KB933508_ENU_64)
exist under the C:\Windows on a 64 bit version of Windows Server 2003 and
you would like to know whether they can be removed safely from the system.
If I have misunderstood about your concern, feel free to let me know.
For your information, these folders belong to the SQL Server 2005 and are
created during the installation of two SQL Server Updates (KB933508 and
KB934458). These folders are used to store the uninstall components as you
mentioned. For example, KB934458 will update the following five SQL Server
components and services. To store the uninstall information for each
component, the setup program will create five corresponding sub-folders
under C:\Windows directory and all the uninstall information for each
component will be extracted into these folders. Later, uninstall API will
use the files in each folder one by one to perform the update KB934458's
un-installation procedure if you try to uninstall them from the Add/Remove
program.
- SQL Server Database Services 2005
- SQL Server Analysis Services 2005
- SQL Server Notification services 2005
- SQL Server Integration Services 2005
- SQL Server Tools and Workstation Components 2005
That's to say, these folders are used to store the uninstall setup files
and they can be removed from the system safely if you do not uninstall this
update in future. If you have any further question about this, please feel
free to let me know.
Reference
===============Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Service Pack 2 issue: Cleanup tasks run at
different intervals than intended
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=933508
FIX: The Check Database Integrity task and the Execute T-SQL Statement task
in a maintenance plan may lose database context in certain circumstances in
SQL Server 2005 builds 3042 through 3053
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=934458
Please let me know if above information has answered your question. If
anything is unclear in my reply, please don't hesitate to let me know and I
will be glad to help. Thank you for your efforts and time.
Have a nice day!
Best regards,
Adams Qu, MCSE 2000, MCDBA
Microsoft Online Support
Microsoft Global Technical Support Center
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
=====================================================When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
=====================================================This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
--
| Thread-Topic: 64 Bit patches. Are these SQL?
| thread-index: AceMKcRApMypWrq9REifJbwpnTlQBA==| X-WBNR-Posting-Host: 207.46.19.197
| From: =?Utf-8?B?Qm9i?= <86c6c2e6-2146512712@.news.postalias>
| References: <E0BF66B1-D15C-4C30-A312-96F211652272@.microsoft.com>
<OdrJ$eCjHHA.4064@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>
| Subject: Re: 64 Bit patches. Are these SQL?
| Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 12:49:01 -0700
| Lines: 10
| Message-ID: <8C8B3AA7-1C74-4A18-94F7-D67FCF95C59A@.microsoft.com>
| MIME-Version: 1.0
| Content-Type: text/plain;
| charset="Utf-8"
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
| X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
| Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
| Importance: normal
| Priority: normal
| X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2826
| Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
| Path: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl
| Xref: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.server:14495
| NNTP-Posting-Host: tk2msftibfm01.phx.gbl 10.40.244.149
| X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
|
| Yes, WSUS pushes these out.
|
| I presume these are the prior code that the patches replaced, just in
case
| the patch needs to be backed off. If so, why doesn't SQL store them like
all
| other MS products; under C:\Windows\$...
|
| Anyway, can I delete these (as I assume they are pre-patch code for the
| purpose of patch backoffs).
| --
| Bob
||||Hi,
Can you answer this question for me please? I have been told that SQL2005
Service packs are not uninstallable but hotfixes after build 3050 are
supposed to be. I have a 32 bit server that we applied build 3050 then build
3152 then build 3159 by applying the hotixes. If I look in Add/Remove
programs I only see the latest hotfix build 3159. If I tried to uninstall
this hotfix what build might I be on?
Thanks
Chris
"Adams Qu [MSFT]" <v-adamqu@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:q07jxfJjHHA.1140@.TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl...
> Dear Bob,
> Thank you for posting here.
> From the problem description of the post you submitted, my understanding
> is: you have found several SQL related folders (E.X: DTS9_KB933508_ENU_64)
> exist under the C:\Windows on a 64 bit version of Windows Server 2003 and
> you would like to know whether they can be removed safely from the system.
> If I have misunderstood about your concern, feel free to let me know.
> For your information, these folders belong to the SQL Server 2005 and are
> created during the installation of two SQL Server Updates (KB933508 and
> KB934458). These folders are used to store the uninstall components as you
> mentioned. For example, KB934458 will update the following five SQL Server
> components and services. To store the uninstall information for each
> component, the setup program will create five corresponding sub-folders
> under C:\Windows directory and all the uninstall information for each
> component will be extracted into these folders. Later, uninstall API will
> use the files in each folder one by one to perform the update KB934458's
> un-installation procedure if you try to uninstall them from the Add/Remove
> program.
> - SQL Server Database Services 2005
> - SQL Server Analysis Services 2005
> - SQL Server Notification services 2005
> - SQL Server Integration Services 2005
> - SQL Server Tools and Workstation Components 2005
> That's to say, these folders are used to store the uninstall setup files
> and they can be removed from the system safely if you do not uninstall
> this
> update in future. If you have any further question about this, please feel
> free to let me know.
> Reference
> ===============> Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Service Pack 2 issue: Cleanup tasks run at
> different intervals than intended
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=933508
> FIX: The Check Database Integrity task and the Execute T-SQL Statement
> task
> in a maintenance plan may lose database context in certain circumstances
> in
> SQL Server 2005 builds 3042 through 3053
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=934458
> Please let me know if above information has answered your question. If
> anything is unclear in my reply, please don't hesitate to let me know and
> I
> will be glad to help. Thank you for your efforts and time.
> Have a nice day!
> Best regards,
> Adams Qu, MCSE 2000, MCDBA
> Microsoft Online Support
> Microsoft Global Technical Support Center
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> =====================================================> When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
> that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
> =====================================================> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
> --
> | Thread-Topic: 64 Bit patches. Are these SQL?
> | thread-index: AceMKcRApMypWrq9REifJbwpnTlQBA==> | X-WBNR-Posting-Host: 207.46.19.197
> | From: =?Utf-8?B?Qm9i?= <86c6c2e6-2146512712@.news.postalias>
> | References: <E0BF66B1-D15C-4C30-A312-96F211652272@.microsoft.com>
> <OdrJ$eCjHHA.4064@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>
> | Subject: Re: 64 Bit patches. Are these SQL?
> | Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 12:49:01 -0700
> | Lines: 10
> | Message-ID: <8C8B3AA7-1C74-4A18-94F7-D67FCF95C59A@.microsoft.com>
> | MIME-Version: 1.0
> | Content-Type: text/plain;
> | charset="Utf-8"
> | Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> | X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
> | Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
> | Importance: normal
> | Priority: normal
> | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2826
> | Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
> | Path: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl
> | Xref: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.server:14495
> | NNTP-Posting-Host: tk2msftibfm01.phx.gbl 10.40.244.149
> | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
> |
> | Yes, WSUS pushes these out.
> |
> | I presume these are the prior code that the patches replaced, just in
> case
> | the patch needs to be backed off. If so, why doesn't SQL store them
> like
> all
> | other MS products; under C:\Windows\$...
> |
> | Anyway, can I delete these (as I assume they are pre-patch code for the
> | purpose of patch backoffs).
> | --
> | Bob
> |
>|||Hello,
Thank you for posting here.
The SQL Server update is normally released as the cumulative update. That's
to say, the later hotfix will normally include the pervious version of the
update and that's is the reason why we can only see the latest hotfix build
3159 in the Add/Remove program. If we choose to uninstall the update 3159
in the Add/remove program, the version of the SQL Server should normally be
rolled back to the previous hotfix version (Version 3152).
Have a nice day!
Best regards,
Adams Qu, MCSE 2000, MCDBA
Microsoft Online Support
Microsoft Global Technical Support Center
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
=====================================================When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
=====================================================This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
| From: "Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
| References: <E0BF66B1-D15C-4C30-A312-96F211652272@.microsoft.com>
<OdrJ$eCjHHA.4064@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>
<8C8B3AA7-1C74-4A18-94F7-D67FCF95C59A@.microsoft.com>
<q07jxfJjHHA.1140@.TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl>
| Subject: Re: 64 Bit patches. Are these SQL?
| Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 08:26:44 -0600
| Lines: 127
| X-Priority: 3
| X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
| X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028
| X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028
| X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
| Message-ID: <uVvX4XMjHHA.4624@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>
| Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
| NNTP-Posting-Host: n175en1.energy.gov.ab.ca 199.214.175.1
| Path: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
| Xref: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.server:14589
| X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
|
| Hi,
|
| Can you answer this question for me please? I have been told that SQL2005
| Service packs are not uninstallable but hotfixes after build 3050 are
| supposed to be. I have a 32 bit server that we applied build 3050 then
build
| 3152 then build 3159 by applying the hotixes. If I look in Add/Remove
| programs I only see the latest hotfix build 3159. If I tried to uninstall
| this hotfix what build might I be on?
|
| Thanks
|
| Chris
|
| "Adams Qu [MSFT]" <v-adamqu@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
| news:q07jxfJjHHA.1140@.TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl...
| > Dear Bob,
| >
| > Thank you for posting here.
| >
| > From the problem description of the post you submitted, my understanding
| > is: you have found several SQL related folders (E.X:
DTS9_KB933508_ENU_64)
| > exist under the C:\Windows on a 64 bit version of Windows Server 2003
and
| > you would like to know whether they can be removed safely from the
system.
| > If I have misunderstood about your concern, feel free to let me know.
| >
| > For your information, these folders belong to the SQL Server 2005 and
are
| > created during the installation of two SQL Server Updates (KB933508 and
| > KB934458). These folders are used to store the uninstall components as
you
| > mentioned. For example, KB934458 will update the following five SQL
Server
| > components and services. To store the uninstall information for each
| > component, the setup program will create five corresponding sub-folders
| > under C:\Windows directory and all the uninstall information for each
| > component will be extracted into these folders. Later, uninstall API
will
| > use the files in each folder one by one to perform the update KB934458's
| > un-installation procedure if you try to uninstall them from the
Add/Remove
| > program.
| >
| > - SQL Server Database Services 2005
| > - SQL Server Analysis Services 2005
| > - SQL Server Notification services 2005
| > - SQL Server Integration Services 2005
| > - SQL Server Tools and Workstation Components 2005
| >
| > That's to say, these folders are used to store the uninstall setup files
| > and they can be removed from the system safely if you do not uninstall
| > this
| > update in future. If you have any further question about this, please
feel
| > free to let me know.
| >
| > Reference
| > ===============| > Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Service Pack 2 issue: Cleanup tasks run at
| > different intervals than intended
| > http://support.microsoft.com/?id=933508
| >
| > FIX: The Check Database Integrity task and the Execute T-SQL Statement
| > task
| > in a maintenance plan may lose database context in certain
circumstances
| > in
| > SQL Server 2005 builds 3042 through 3053
| > http://support.microsoft.com/?id=934458
| >
| > Please let me know if above information has answered your question. If
| > anything is unclear in my reply, please don't hesitate to let me know
and
| > I
| > will be glad to help. Thank you for your efforts and time.
| >
| > Have a nice day!
| >
| > Best regards,
| >
| > Adams Qu, MCSE 2000, MCDBA
| > Microsoft Online Support
| >
| > Microsoft Global Technical Support Center
| >
| > Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
| > =====================================================| > When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
| > that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
| > =====================================================| > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
| > rights.
| >
| > --
| > | Thread-Topic: 64 Bit patches. Are these SQL?
| > | thread-index: AceMKcRApMypWrq9REifJbwpnTlQBA==| > | X-WBNR-Posting-Host: 207.46.19.197
| > | From: =?Utf-8?B?Qm9i?= <86c6c2e6-2146512712@.news.postalias>
| > | References: <E0BF66B1-D15C-4C30-A312-96F211652272@.microsoft.com>
| > <OdrJ$eCjHHA.4064@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>
| > | Subject: Re: 64 Bit patches. Are these SQL?
| > | Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 12:49:01 -0700
| > | Lines: 10
| > | Message-ID: <8C8B3AA7-1C74-4A18-94F7-D67FCF95C59A@.microsoft.com>
| > | MIME-Version: 1.0
| > | Content-Type: text/plain;
| > | charset="Utf-8"
| > | Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
| > | X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
| > | Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
| > | Importance: normal
| > | Priority: normal
| > | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2826
| > | Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
| > | Path: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl
| > | Xref: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.server:14495
| > | NNTP-Posting-Host: tk2msftibfm01.phx.gbl 10.40.244.149
| > | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
| > |
| > | Yes, WSUS pushes these out.
| > |
| > | I presume these are the prior code that the patches replaced, just in
| > case
| > | the patch needs to be backed off. If so, why doesn't SQL store them
| > like
| > all
| > | other MS products; under C:\Windows\$...
| > |
| > | Anyway, can I delete these (as I assume they are pre-patch code for
the
| > | purpose of patch backoffs).
| > | --
| > | Bob
| > |
| >
|
|
||||Dear Bob,
We wanted to see if the information provided was helpful. Please keep us
posted on your progress and let us know if you have any additional
questions or concerns.
We are looking forward to your response.
Have a nice day!
Best regards,
Adams Qu, MCSE 2000, MCDBA
Microsoft Online Support
Microsoft Global Technical Support Center
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
=====================================================When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
=====================================================This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
| X-Tomcat-ID: 134584506
| References: <E0BF66B1-D15C-4C30-A312-96F211652272@.microsoft.com>
<OdrJ$eCjHHA.4064@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>
<8C8B3AA7-1C74-4A18-94F7-D67FCF95C59A@.microsoft.com>
| MIME-Version: 1.0
| Content-Type: text/plain
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
| From: v-adamqu@.online.microsoft.com (Adams Qu [MSFT])
| Organization: Microsoft
| Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 08:57:40 GMT
| Subject: Re: 64 Bit patches. Are these SQL?
| X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
| Message-ID: <q07jxfJjHHA.1140@.TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl>
| Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
| Lines: 106
| Path: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl
| Xref: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.server:14556
| NNTP-Posting-Host: TOMCATIMPORT1 10.201.218.122
|
| Dear Bob,
|
| Thank you for posting here.
|
| From the problem description of the post you submitted, my understanding
| is: you have found several SQL related folders (E.X:
DTS9_KB933508_ENU_64)
| exist under the C:\Windows on a 64 bit version of Windows Server 2003 and
| you would like to know whether they can be removed safely from the
system.
| If I have misunderstood about your concern, feel free to let me know.
|
| For your information, these folders belong to the SQL Server 2005 and are
| created during the installation of two SQL Server Updates (KB933508 and
| KB934458). These folders are used to store the uninstall components as
you
| mentioned. For example, KB934458 will update the following five SQL
Server
| components and services. To store the uninstall information for each
| component, the setup program will create five corresponding sub-folders
| under C:\Windows directory and all the uninstall information for each
| component will be extracted into these folders. Later, uninstall API will
| use the files in each folder one by one to perform the update KB934458's
| un-installation procedure if you try to uninstall them from the
Add/Remove
| program.
|
| - SQL Server Database Services 2005
| - SQL Server Analysis Services 2005
| - SQL Server Notification services 2005
| - SQL Server Integration Services 2005
| - SQL Server Tools and Workstation Components 2005
|
| That's to say, these folders are used to store the uninstall setup files
| and they can be removed from the system safely if you do not uninstall
this
| update in future. If you have any further question about this, please
feel
| free to let me know.
|
| Reference
| ===============| Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Service Pack 2 issue: Cleanup tasks run at
| different intervals than intended
| http://support.microsoft.com/?id=933508
|
| FIX: The Check Database Integrity task and the Execute T-SQL Statement
task
| in a maintenance plan may lose database context in certain circumstances
in
| SQL Server 2005 builds 3042 through 3053
| http://support.microsoft.com/?id=934458
|
| Please let me know if above information has answered your question. If
| anything is unclear in my reply, please don't hesitate to let me know and
I
| will be glad to help. Thank you for your efforts and time.
|
| Have a nice day!
|
| Best regards,
|
| Adams Qu, MCSE 2000, MCDBA
| Microsoft Online Support
|
| Microsoft Global Technical Support Center
|
| Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
| =====================================================| When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
| that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
| =====================================================| This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
|
| --
| | Thread-Topic: 64 Bit patches. Are these SQL?
| | thread-index: AceMKcRApMypWrq9REifJbwpnTlQBA==| | X-WBNR-Posting-Host: 207.46.19.197
| | From: =?Utf-8?B?Qm9i?= <86c6c2e6-2146512712@.news.postalias>
| | References: <E0BF66B1-D15C-4C30-A312-96F211652272@.microsoft.com>
| <OdrJ$eCjHHA.4064@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>
| | Subject: Re: 64 Bit patches. Are these SQL?
| | Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 12:49:01 -0700
| | Lines: 10
| | Message-ID: <8C8B3AA7-1C74-4A18-94F7-D67FCF95C59A@.microsoft.com>
| | MIME-Version: 1.0
| | Content-Type: text/plain;
| | charset="Utf-8"
| | Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
| | X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
| | Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
| | Importance: normal
| | Priority: normal
| | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2826
| | Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
| | Path: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl
| | Xref: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.server:14495
| | NNTP-Posting-Host: tk2msftibfm01.phx.gbl 10.40.244.149
| | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
| |
| | Yes, WSUS pushes these out.
| |
| | I presume these are the prior code that the patches replaced, just in
| case
| | the patch needs to be backed off. If so, why doesn't SQL store them
like
| all
| | other MS products; under C:\Windows\$...
| |
| | Anyway, can I delete these (as I assume they are pre-patch code for the
| | purpose of patch backoffs).
| | --
| | Bob
| |
|
||||Hi Adams,
Sorry it took so long to post back, just a bit busy I guess.
Yes, your post (and extra info to Chris Wood) was very imformative and
helpful.
Because I'm not even using SQL server yet, I can't imagine I'll ever need to
back off the patches. Therefore, I'll delete the folders pronto!
Thanks much!
--
Bob|||Dear Bob,
Appreciate your update and response. I am glad to hear that the information
I provided is helpful.
If you have any other questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to
contact me. It is always my pleasure to be of assistance.
Have a nice day!
Best regards,
Adams Qu, MCSE 2000, MCDBA
Microsoft Online Support
Microsoft Global Technical Support Center
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
=====================================================When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
=====================================================This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
| Thread-Topic: 64 Bit patches. Are these SQL?
| thread-index: AceT9uRfqiEg8oiqSGiE5QiPoR/9tw==| X-WBNR-Posting-Host: 207.46.19.168
| From: =?Utf-8?B?Qm9i?= <86c6c2e6-2146512712@.news.postalias>
| References: <E0BF66B1-D15C-4C30-A312-96F211652272@.microsoft.com>
<OdrJ$eCjHHA.4064@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>
<8C8B3AA7-1C74-4A18-94F7-D67FCF95C59A@.microsoft.com>
<q07jxfJjHHA.1140@.TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl>
<dT4mgWEkHHA.1144@.TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl>
| Subject: Re: 64 Bit patches. Are these SQL?
| Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 11:05:00 -0700
| Lines: 13
| Message-ID: <B2B26BD7-9E4F-4A08-98B6-0772283A8DE3@.microsoft.com>
| MIME-Version: 1.0
| Content-Type: text/plain;
| charset="Utf-8"
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
| X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
| Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
| Importance: normal
| Priority: normal
| X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2826
| Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
| Path: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl
| Xref: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.server:15442
| NNTP-Posting-Host: tk2msftibfm01.phx.gbl 10.40.244.149
| X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
|
| Hi Adams,
|
| Sorry it took so long to post back, just a bit busy I guess.
|
| Yes, your post (and extra info to Chris Wood) was very imformative and
| helpful.
|
| Because I'm not even using SQL server yet, I can't imagine I'll ever need
to
| back off the patches. Therefore, I'll delete the folders pronto!
|
| Thanks much!
| --
| Bob
|