I thought there is someone at Microsoft checking the managed newsgroups and
helps MSDN subscribers in trouble.
Please feel free to look at, discuss and answer to my post on 2005-05-21
conserning out replication problem (unresolved yet).
When we pay for our MSDN subscription there was no 2 or 3 bussiness days
before Microsoft collects the money from our bank account,
Request Ltd.,
Software and Parking automation solutions,
Sofia-BG
No such commitment exists...these newsgroups are publicly available and are
responded to by the average person, MVPs and Microsoft employees on a purely
volunteer basis
Kevin Hill
President
3NF Consulting
www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
www.DallasDBAs.com/forum - new DB forum for Dallas/Ft. Worth area DBAs.
www.experts-exchange.com - experts compete for points to answer your
questions
"see more" <seemore@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:466B54C8-1B37-44FC-806F-A774B1C3878F@.microsoft.com...
>I thought there is someone at Microsoft checking the managed newsgroups and
> helps MSDN subscribers in trouble.
> Please feel free to look at, discuss and answer to my post on 2005-05-21
> conserning out replication problem (unresolved yet).
> When we pay for our MSDN subscription there was no 2 or 3 bussiness days
> before Microsoft collects the money from our bank account,
> --
> Request Ltd.,
> Software and Parking automation solutions,
> Sofia-BG
Showing posts with label trouble. Show all posts
Showing posts with label trouble. 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:
Sunday, February 19, 2012
6.5 upgrade
I am having trouble upgrading from SQL 6.4 to SQL 2000
using the wizard.
The wizard runs nicely until I get to 'Export and Import
via Named pipes', then I get the following message:
Export.exe on the remote machine was hung...
Export Exit Code: 259 - export.exe -CodePage 1252 -
DeviceType Pipe -AllTables yes -MasterPath
C:\MSSQL\DATA\MASTER.DAT -DatabaseName Comp2 -DevicePath
\\.\pipe\~cnvpipe0
Import Exit Code: -1 - ~cnvpipe0
Msg 4854, Level 21, State 1, Server RLINKDEST, Procedure ,
Line 1
[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]****
Time:10-14-2003 10:27:21.125
Error return from function CreateFile
in file CnvPipe.cpp
Line=143
rc=5
Msg=Access is denied.
I have the same SA password on all accounts, and I have
set all ODBC drivers to connect in the same way, via named
pipes.
Please help!
Thank you
SusanneIf this is a 2 machine upgrade, then the SQL Server startup account on the
SQL 6.5 box may not have permission to the SQL Server 2000 machine.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
using the wizard.
The wizard runs nicely until I get to 'Export and Import
via Named pipes', then I get the following message:
Export.exe on the remote machine was hung...
Export Exit Code: 259 - export.exe -CodePage 1252 -
DeviceType Pipe -AllTables yes -MasterPath
C:\MSSQL\DATA\MASTER.DAT -DatabaseName Comp2 -DevicePath
\\.\pipe\~cnvpipe0
Import Exit Code: -1 - ~cnvpipe0
Msg 4854, Level 21, State 1, Server RLINKDEST, Procedure ,
Line 1
[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]****
Time:10-14-2003 10:27:21.125
Error return from function CreateFile
in file CnvPipe.cpp
Line=143
rc=5
Msg=Access is denied.
I have the same SA password on all accounts, and I have
set all ODBC drivers to connect in the same way, via named
pipes.
Please help!
Thank you
SusanneIf this is a 2 machine upgrade, then the SQL Server startup account on the
SQL 6.5 box may not have permission to the SQL Server 2000 machine.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
5 Database Queries to go with an online purchasing system :-)
Hi Guys,
I'm having trouble thinking of ideas for queries that would go with an online purchasing system. The queries must be partially complex (i.e. not just a simple insert query :p).
I can easily write the queries myself but i just need a little help thinking of useful queries.
A query for an 'Invoice' for example is a perfect idea as it implements table joins etc.
Possible other queries are:
Find all customers that have spent a total of more than X amount
Find all delivery address's that X customer has sent items to
Track an order to see if items have been sent yet or not.
etc...
If anyone else can think of a few other ideas i'd be very grateful :-)
thx for reading :-)
--Philkillsonline purchasing sytem? or homework assignment? ;)
total sales by category for the previous month
average price of backlogged orders (product not in stock)
most popular item (by quantity sold, not total price)|||easiest technique...
open a copy of Access, create yuour tables
create the realtionships
open up the query designer
add the required constraints...
run the query, prove it works
open up the query in SQL mode, copy and paste the SQL to your homework assignment paper
...jobsagoodun
... requires minimum thought and creativity, and absolutely no proof that you have understood the concepts behid joins, where clauses etc...|||online purchasing sytem? or homework assignment? ;)
total sales by category for the previous month
average price of backlogged orders (product not in stock)
most popular item (by quantity sold, not total price)
Some nice ideas there thx ^^
easiest technique...
open a copy of Access, create yuour tables
create the realtionships
open up the query designer
add the required constraints...
run the query, prove it works
open up the query in SQL mode, copy and paste the SQL to your homework assignment paper
...jobsagoodun
... requires minimum thought and creativity, and absolutely no proof that you have understood the concepts behid joins, where clauses etc...
and lol...
a nice way to cheat i suppose... but i do actually understand joins etc ;p|||total sales by category for the previous month
average price of backlogged orders (product not in stock)
most popular item (by quantity sold, not total price)
Variations on these:
- Total sales for all foregoing months
- Top ten most popular items
- Most popular category per client (useful for better direct advertising ;-)
- Top ten clients in terms of the amount spent
- Same question, but now in 12 columns, for each of the last 12 months|||- Customer's year to date sales (purchases) compared with last year's year to date sales (purchases).
:shocked:
I'm having trouble thinking of ideas for queries that would go with an online purchasing system. The queries must be partially complex (i.e. not just a simple insert query :p).
I can easily write the queries myself but i just need a little help thinking of useful queries.
A query for an 'Invoice' for example is a perfect idea as it implements table joins etc.
Possible other queries are:
Find all customers that have spent a total of more than X amount
Find all delivery address's that X customer has sent items to
Track an order to see if items have been sent yet or not.
etc...
If anyone else can think of a few other ideas i'd be very grateful :-)
thx for reading :-)
--Philkillsonline purchasing sytem? or homework assignment? ;)
total sales by category for the previous month
average price of backlogged orders (product not in stock)
most popular item (by quantity sold, not total price)|||easiest technique...
open a copy of Access, create yuour tables
create the realtionships
open up the query designer
add the required constraints...
run the query, prove it works
open up the query in SQL mode, copy and paste the SQL to your homework assignment paper
...jobsagoodun
... requires minimum thought and creativity, and absolutely no proof that you have understood the concepts behid joins, where clauses etc...|||online purchasing sytem? or homework assignment? ;)
total sales by category for the previous month
average price of backlogged orders (product not in stock)
most popular item (by quantity sold, not total price)
Some nice ideas there thx ^^
easiest technique...
open a copy of Access, create yuour tables
create the realtionships
open up the query designer
add the required constraints...
run the query, prove it works
open up the query in SQL mode, copy and paste the SQL to your homework assignment paper
...jobsagoodun
... requires minimum thought and creativity, and absolutely no proof that you have understood the concepts behid joins, where clauses etc...
and lol...
a nice way to cheat i suppose... but i do actually understand joins etc ;p|||total sales by category for the previous month
average price of backlogged orders (product not in stock)
most popular item (by quantity sold, not total price)
Variations on these:
- Total sales for all foregoing months
- Top ten most popular items
- Most popular category per client (useful for better direct advertising ;-)
- Top ten clients in terms of the amount spent
- Same question, but now in 12 columns, for each of the last 12 months|||- Customer's year to date sales (purchases) compared with last year's year to date sales (purchases).
:shocked:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)