Hi,
I have 3 SQL Servers running here. Here are their configurations:
SERVER 1:
OS: Windows 2000 SP 4
SQL: SQL Server 2000 SP 4
SERVER 2:
OS: Windows 2000 SP 4
SQL: SQL Server 2000 SP 4
SERVER 3:
OS: Windows XP Professionnal
SQL: SQL Server 2000 SP 3
Now, as you can see, SERVER 1 and SERVER 2 have identical configurations. Plus, both will accept Windows Authentication and SQL Authentication.
If I try to add a new Registration from SERVER 3 to SERVER 1, it works fine but from SERVER 3 to SERVER 2 it doesn't. I always get an error (SQL Server does not exist or access denied). But, using the exact same user name and password, a connection can be established from SERVER 1 to SERVER 2 and vice-versa. Only when trying to connect froms SERVER 3 to SERVER 2 fails.
Any ideas?
Thanks,
Skip.I thought we only have sp3a in sql 2000. Where did you get the sp4?|||Originally posted by joejcheng
I thought we only have sp3a in sql 2000. Where did you get the sp4?
I don't know, I'm not the sysadmin responsible for updating software. It's just what is says in the about menu option.
Skip.
Showing posts with label failure. Show all posts
Showing posts with label failure. Show all posts
Friday, March 23, 2012
New SQL Server Install
We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the disks
was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it will
move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we can
use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we could
use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction log
shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is important
to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
JohnSince you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You don't
need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very quick -
and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the mirror
and use it for reporting.
--
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the disks
was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it will
move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we can
use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we could
use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction log
shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is important
to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
John|||Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for
snapshots? We plan on using Standard Edition which will support two
clusters.
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You
> don't
> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very quick -
> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the mirror
> and use it for reporting.
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
> SQL Server MVP
> Toronto, ON Canada
> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>
> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the disks
> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it will
> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we
> can
> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
> could
> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
> log
> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
> important
> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
> John
>
>|||Yes, EE is required for database snapshots. Mirroring is available for SE but only on sync mode and
only one REDO thread.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23In0b5eXIHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for snapshots? We plan on using
> Standard Edition which will support two clusters.
>
> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
> news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You don't
>> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very quick -
>> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the mirror
>> and use it for reporting.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
>> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the disks
>> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
>> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
>> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
>> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
>> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
>> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
>> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it will
>> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we can
>> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we could
>> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
>> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction log
>> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is important
>> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
>> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
>> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
>> John
>>
>|||Yes, snapshots are supported only in Ent Ed. Also, Std Edition supports
2-node clusters - not "two clusters". It depends on where you want to put
your money and what your needs are. When it comes to High Availability
(HA), then you often have to go to Ent Ed. If you want clustering and have
only 2 nodes, then you can get away with Std Ed, but clustering hardware is
usually a bit more expensive and a little trickier to set up. Mirroring
will work on regular hardware and can go between dissimilar platforms.
Automatic failover, though is available in the Ent Ed.
When it comes to reporting, snapshots are your friend. Log shipping is fine
for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
--
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23In0b5eXIHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for
snapshots? We plan on using Standard Edition which will support two
clusters.
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You
> don't
> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very quick -
> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the mirror
> and use it for reporting.
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
> SQL Server MVP
> Toronto, ON Canada
> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>
> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the disks
> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it will
> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we
> can
> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
> could
> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
> log
> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
> important
> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
> John
>
>|||> Log shipping is fine
> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
Well, you can if you do the restores using STANDBY. But you'd have to kick out the users each time
you want to do the next restore. Which means that you really ... can't use a log shipped database
for reporting ;-).
(Just wanted to mention this before anyone else say "You can". )
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
news:uy0aAMfXIHA.1188@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Yes, snapshots are supported only in Ent Ed. Also, Std Edition supports
> 2-node clusters - not "two clusters". It depends on where you want to put
> your money and what your needs are. When it comes to High Availability
> (HA), then you often have to go to Ent Ed. If you want clustering and have
> only 2 nodes, then you can get away with Std Ed, but clustering hardware is
> usually a bit more expensive and a little trickier to set up. Mirroring
> will work on regular hardware and can go between dissimilar platforms.
> Automatic failover, though is available in the Ent Ed.
> When it comes to reporting, snapshots are your friend. Log shipping is fine
> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
> SQL Server MVP
> Toronto, ON Canada
> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>
> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23In0b5eXIHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for
> snapshots? We plan on using Standard Edition which will support two
> clusters.
>
> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
> news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You
>> don't
>> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very quick -
>> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the mirror
>> and use it for reporting.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
>> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the disks
>> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
>> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
>> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
>> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
>> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
>> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
>> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it will
>> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we
>> can
>> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
>> could
>> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
>> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
>> log
>> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
>> important
>> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
>> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
>> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
>> John
>>
>
>|||Low-end clusters have definitely gotten cheaper over the past few years.
Look at some of the dual-socket HP stuff and you can put together a good,
stable, basic cluster for under six figures.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior SQL Infrastructure Consultant
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
news:uy0aAMfXIHA.1188@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Yes, snapshots are supported only in Ent Ed. Also, Std Edition supports
> 2-node clusters - not "two clusters". It depends on where you want to put
> your money and what your needs are. When it comes to High Availability
> (HA), then you often have to go to Ent Ed. If you want clustering and
> have
> only 2 nodes, then you can get away with Std Ed, but clustering hardware
> is
> usually a bit more expensive and a little trickier to set up. Mirroring
> will work on regular hardware and can go between dissimilar platforms.
> Automatic failover, though is available in the Ent Ed.
> When it comes to reporting, snapshots are your friend. Log shipping is
> fine
> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
> SQL Server MVP
> Toronto, ON Canada
> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>
> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23In0b5eXIHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for
> snapshots? We plan on using Standard Edition which will support two
> clusters.
>
> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
> news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You
>> don't
>> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very quick -
>> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the mirror
>> and use it for reporting.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
>> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the
>> disks
>> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
>> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
>> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
>> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
>> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
>> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
>> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it
>> will
>> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we
>> can
>> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
>> could
>> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
>> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
>> log
>> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
>> important
>> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
>> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
>> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
>> John
>>
>
>|||Waaaaaay back in 2000, we created our own jobs to logship and only had the
restore command run every 8 hours. All the files were there, and we could
catch the whole thing up in about 20 minutes if the primary went down, but
it was a reporting server all day :)
Same thing could be done here if Log Shipping was desired, as well as
reporting. May not be the most glamorous solution, but it works...
--
Kevin3NF
SQL Server dude
You want fries with that?
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:0875841B-779E-4639-9C7F-31D19FCF060A@.microsoft.com...
>> Log shipping is fine
>> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
> Well, you can if you do the restores using STANDBY. But you'd have to kick
> out the users each time you want to do the next restore. Which means that
> you really ... can't use a log shipped database for reporting ;-).
> (Just wanted to mention this before anyone else say "You can". )
>
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
> news:uy0aAMfXIHA.1188@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Yes, snapshots are supported only in Ent Ed. Also, Std Edition supports
>> 2-node clusters - not "two clusters". It depends on where you want to
>> put
>> your money and what your needs are. When it comes to High Availability
>> (HA), then you often have to go to Ent Ed. If you want clustering and
>> have
>> only 2 nodes, then you can get away with Std Ed, but clustering hardware
>> is
>> usually a bit more expensive and a little trickier to set up. Mirroring
>> will work on regular hardware and can go between dissimilar platforms.
>> Automatic failover, though is available in the Ent Ed.
>> When it comes to reporting, snapshots are your friend. Log shipping is
>> fine
>> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23In0b5eXIHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for
>> snapshots? We plan on using Standard Edition which will support two
>> clusters.
>>
>> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
>> news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You
>> don't
>> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very
>> quick -
>> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the
>> mirror
>> and use it for reporting.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
>> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the
>> disks
>> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
>> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot
>> of
>> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
>> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
>> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on
>> the
>> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
>> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it
>> will
>> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we
>> can
>> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
>> could
>> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
>> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
>> log
>> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
>> important
>> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost
>> of
>> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
>> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>|||Yeah, I figured I'd give him the "short answer". Of course, if you want,
you can have the log shipping sync on a daily schedule and use STANDBY.
That could be a poor man's way of doing mirroring with a daily snapshot.
--
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:0875841B-779E-4639-9C7F-31D19FCF060A@.microsoft.com...
> Log shipping is fine
> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
Well, you can if you do the restores using STANDBY. But you'd have to kick
out the users each time
you want to do the next restore. Which means that you really ... can't use a
log shipped database
for reporting ;-).
(Just wanted to mention this before anyone else say "You can". )
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
news:uy0aAMfXIHA.1188@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Yes, snapshots are supported only in Ent Ed. Also, Std Edition supports
> 2-node clusters - not "two clusters". It depends on where you want to put
> your money and what your needs are. When it comes to High Availability
> (HA), then you often have to go to Ent Ed. If you want clustering and
have
> only 2 nodes, then you can get away with Std Ed, but clustering hardware
is
> usually a bit more expensive and a little trickier to set up. Mirroring
> will work on regular hardware and can go between dissimilar platforms.
> Automatic failover, though is available in the Ent Ed.
> When it comes to reporting, snapshots are your friend. Log shipping is
fine
> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
> SQL Server MVP
> Toronto, ON Canada
> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>
> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23In0b5eXIHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for
> snapshots? We plan on using Standard Edition which will support two
> clusters.
>
> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
> news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You
>> don't
>> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very quick -
>> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the mirror
>> and use it for reporting.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
>> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the
disks
>> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
>> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
>> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
>> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
>> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
>> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
>> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it
will
>> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we
>> can
>> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
>> could
>> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
>> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
>> log
>> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
>> important
>> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
>> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
>> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
>> John
>>
>
>|||Way back 1.5 years ago I did the same thing for a client with thousands of
databases. Worked like a champ.
--
Kevin G. Boles
Indicium Resources, Inc.
SQL Server MVP
kgboles a earthlink dt net
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:%23v1x6WfXIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Waaaaaay back in 2000, we created our own jobs to logship and only had the
> restore command run every 8 hours. All the files were there, and we could
> catch the whole thing up in about 20 minutes if the primary went down, but
> it was a reporting server all day :)
> Same thing could be done here if Log Shipping was desired, as well as
> reporting. May not be the most glamorous solution, but it works...
> --
> Kevin3NF
> SQL Server dude
> You want fries with that?
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
> I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
> Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
> in message news:0875841B-779E-4639-9C7F-31D19FCF060A@.microsoft.com...
>> Log shipping is fine
>> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
>> Well, you can if you do the restores using STANDBY. But you'd have to
>> kick out the users each time you want to do the next restore. Which means
>> that you really ... can't use a log shipped database for reporting ;-).
>> (Just wanted to mention this before anyone else say "You can". )
>>
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>>
>> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
>> news:uy0aAMfXIHA.1188@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Yes, snapshots are supported only in Ent Ed. Also, Std Edition supports
>> 2-node clusters - not "two clusters". It depends on where you want to
>> put
>> your money and what your needs are. When it comes to High Availability
>> (HA), then you often have to go to Ent Ed. If you want clustering and
>> have
>> only 2 nodes, then you can get away with Std Ed, but clustering hardware
>> is
>> usually a bit more expensive and a little trickier to set up. Mirroring
>> will work on regular hardware and can go between dissimilar platforms.
>> Automatic failover, though is available in the Ent Ed.
>> When it comes to reporting, snapshots are your friend. Log shipping is
>> fine
>> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23In0b5eXIHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for
>> snapshots? We plan on using Standard Edition which will support two
>> clusters.
>>
>> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
>> news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You
>> don't
>> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very
>> quick -
>> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the
>> mirror
>> and use it for reporting.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database.
>> This
>> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the
>> disks
>> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array
>> to
>> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot
>> of
>> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
>> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I
>> have
>> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on
>> the
>> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
>> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it
>> will
>> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server
>> we
>> can
>> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
>> could
>> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
>> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
>> log
>> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
>> important
>> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost
>> of
>> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those
>> who
>> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>|||Just a word of caution to help manage the expectation. If your storage goes
bad, you can for sure leverage certain DBMS features to alleviate the pain.
But there is no magic. SQL Server offers you many good features, but the same
potential storage problems won't magically go away. Due diligence is required
to plan for storage disasters.
Linchi
"John Wright" wrote:
> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the disks
> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it will
> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we can
> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we could
> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction log
> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is important
> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
> John
>
>|||After much reading and study, I think we are going to implement the Database
Mirroring option with a witness to facilitate automatic fail-over.
Operating in High-Availability with full safety and a witness server should
do it for us. The servers are connected via a gigabit connection so latency
should not be a problem. Thanks one and all for the advice.
John
"Linchi Shea" <LinchiShea@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C8570CAA-676A-4FE3-963D-21F4ECAC794B@.microsoft.com...
> Just a word of caution to help manage the expectation. If your storage
> goes
> bad, you can for sure leverage certain DBMS features to alleviate the
> pain.
> But there is no magic. SQL Server offers you many good features, but the
> same
> potential storage problems won't magically go away. Due diligence is
> required
> to plan for storage disasters.
> Linchi
> "John Wright" wrote:
>> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
>> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the
>> disks
>> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
>> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
>> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
>> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
>> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
>> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
>> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it
>> will
>> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we
>> can
>> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
>> could
>> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
>> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
>> log
>> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
>> important
>> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
>> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
>> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
>> John
>>
database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the disks
was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it will
move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we can
use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we could
use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction log
shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is important
to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
JohnSince you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You don't
need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very quick -
and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the mirror
and use it for reporting.
--
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the disks
was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it will
move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we can
use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we could
use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction log
shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is important
to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
John|||Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for
snapshots? We plan on using Standard Edition which will support two
clusters.
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You
> don't
> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very quick -
> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the mirror
> and use it for reporting.
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
> SQL Server MVP
> Toronto, ON Canada
> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>
> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the disks
> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it will
> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we
> can
> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
> could
> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
> log
> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
> important
> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
> John
>
>|||Yes, EE is required for database snapshots. Mirroring is available for SE but only on sync mode and
only one REDO thread.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23In0b5eXIHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for snapshots? We plan on using
> Standard Edition which will support two clusters.
>
> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
> news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You don't
>> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very quick -
>> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the mirror
>> and use it for reporting.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
>> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the disks
>> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
>> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
>> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
>> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
>> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
>> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
>> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it will
>> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we can
>> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we could
>> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
>> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction log
>> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is important
>> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
>> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
>> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
>> John
>>
>|||Yes, snapshots are supported only in Ent Ed. Also, Std Edition supports
2-node clusters - not "two clusters". It depends on where you want to put
your money and what your needs are. When it comes to High Availability
(HA), then you often have to go to Ent Ed. If you want clustering and have
only 2 nodes, then you can get away with Std Ed, but clustering hardware is
usually a bit more expensive and a little trickier to set up. Mirroring
will work on regular hardware and can go between dissimilar platforms.
Automatic failover, though is available in the Ent Ed.
When it comes to reporting, snapshots are your friend. Log shipping is fine
for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
--
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23In0b5eXIHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for
snapshots? We plan on using Standard Edition which will support two
clusters.
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You
> don't
> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very quick -
> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the mirror
> and use it for reporting.
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
> SQL Server MVP
> Toronto, ON Canada
> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>
> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the disks
> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it will
> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we
> can
> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
> could
> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
> log
> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
> important
> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
> John
>
>|||> Log shipping is fine
> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
Well, you can if you do the restores using STANDBY. But you'd have to kick out the users each time
you want to do the next restore. Which means that you really ... can't use a log shipped database
for reporting ;-).
(Just wanted to mention this before anyone else say "You can". )
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
news:uy0aAMfXIHA.1188@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Yes, snapshots are supported only in Ent Ed. Also, Std Edition supports
> 2-node clusters - not "two clusters". It depends on where you want to put
> your money and what your needs are. When it comes to High Availability
> (HA), then you often have to go to Ent Ed. If you want clustering and have
> only 2 nodes, then you can get away with Std Ed, but clustering hardware is
> usually a bit more expensive and a little trickier to set up. Mirroring
> will work on regular hardware and can go between dissimilar platforms.
> Automatic failover, though is available in the Ent Ed.
> When it comes to reporting, snapshots are your friend. Log shipping is fine
> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
> SQL Server MVP
> Toronto, ON Canada
> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>
> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23In0b5eXIHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for
> snapshots? We plan on using Standard Edition which will support two
> clusters.
>
> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
> news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You
>> don't
>> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very quick -
>> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the mirror
>> and use it for reporting.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
>> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the disks
>> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
>> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
>> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
>> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
>> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
>> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
>> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it will
>> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we
>> can
>> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
>> could
>> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
>> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
>> log
>> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
>> important
>> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
>> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
>> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
>> John
>>
>
>|||Low-end clusters have definitely gotten cheaper over the past few years.
Look at some of the dual-socket HP stuff and you can put together a good,
stable, basic cluster for under six figures.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior SQL Infrastructure Consultant
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
news:uy0aAMfXIHA.1188@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Yes, snapshots are supported only in Ent Ed. Also, Std Edition supports
> 2-node clusters - not "two clusters". It depends on where you want to put
> your money and what your needs are. When it comes to High Availability
> (HA), then you often have to go to Ent Ed. If you want clustering and
> have
> only 2 nodes, then you can get away with Std Ed, but clustering hardware
> is
> usually a bit more expensive and a little trickier to set up. Mirroring
> will work on regular hardware and can go between dissimilar platforms.
> Automatic failover, though is available in the Ent Ed.
> When it comes to reporting, snapshots are your friend. Log shipping is
> fine
> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
> SQL Server MVP
> Toronto, ON Canada
> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>
> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23In0b5eXIHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for
> snapshots? We plan on using Standard Edition which will support two
> clusters.
>
> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
> news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You
>> don't
>> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very quick -
>> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the mirror
>> and use it for reporting.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
>> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the
>> disks
>> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
>> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
>> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
>> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
>> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
>> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
>> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it
>> will
>> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we
>> can
>> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
>> could
>> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
>> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
>> log
>> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
>> important
>> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
>> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
>> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
>> John
>>
>
>|||Waaaaaay back in 2000, we created our own jobs to logship and only had the
restore command run every 8 hours. All the files were there, and we could
catch the whole thing up in about 20 minutes if the primary went down, but
it was a reporting server all day :)
Same thing could be done here if Log Shipping was desired, as well as
reporting. May not be the most glamorous solution, but it works...
--
Kevin3NF
SQL Server dude
You want fries with that?
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:0875841B-779E-4639-9C7F-31D19FCF060A@.microsoft.com...
>> Log shipping is fine
>> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
> Well, you can if you do the restores using STANDBY. But you'd have to kick
> out the users each time you want to do the next restore. Which means that
> you really ... can't use a log shipped database for reporting ;-).
> (Just wanted to mention this before anyone else say "You can". )
>
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
> news:uy0aAMfXIHA.1188@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Yes, snapshots are supported only in Ent Ed. Also, Std Edition supports
>> 2-node clusters - not "two clusters". It depends on where you want to
>> put
>> your money and what your needs are. When it comes to High Availability
>> (HA), then you often have to go to Ent Ed. If you want clustering and
>> have
>> only 2 nodes, then you can get away with Std Ed, but clustering hardware
>> is
>> usually a bit more expensive and a little trickier to set up. Mirroring
>> will work on regular hardware and can go between dissimilar platforms.
>> Automatic failover, though is available in the Ent Ed.
>> When it comes to reporting, snapshots are your friend. Log shipping is
>> fine
>> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23In0b5eXIHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for
>> snapshots? We plan on using Standard Edition which will support two
>> clusters.
>>
>> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
>> news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You
>> don't
>> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very
>> quick -
>> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the
>> mirror
>> and use it for reporting.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
>> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the
>> disks
>> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
>> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot
>> of
>> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
>> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
>> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on
>> the
>> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
>> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it
>> will
>> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we
>> can
>> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
>> could
>> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
>> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
>> log
>> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
>> important
>> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost
>> of
>> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
>> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>|||Yeah, I figured I'd give him the "short answer". Of course, if you want,
you can have the log shipping sync on a daily schedule and use STANDBY.
That could be a poor man's way of doing mirroring with a daily snapshot.
--
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:0875841B-779E-4639-9C7F-31D19FCF060A@.microsoft.com...
> Log shipping is fine
> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
Well, you can if you do the restores using STANDBY. But you'd have to kick
out the users each time
you want to do the next restore. Which means that you really ... can't use a
log shipped database
for reporting ;-).
(Just wanted to mention this before anyone else say "You can". )
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
news:uy0aAMfXIHA.1188@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Yes, snapshots are supported only in Ent Ed. Also, Std Edition supports
> 2-node clusters - not "two clusters". It depends on where you want to put
> your money and what your needs are. When it comes to High Availability
> (HA), then you often have to go to Ent Ed. If you want clustering and
have
> only 2 nodes, then you can get away with Std Ed, but clustering hardware
is
> usually a bit more expensive and a little trickier to set up. Mirroring
> will work on regular hardware and can go between dissimilar platforms.
> Automatic failover, though is available in the Ent Ed.
> When it comes to reporting, snapshots are your friend. Log shipping is
fine
> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
> SQL Server MVP
> Toronto, ON Canada
> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>
> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23In0b5eXIHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for
> snapshots? We plan on using Standard Edition which will support two
> clusters.
>
> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
> news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You
>> don't
>> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very quick -
>> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the mirror
>> and use it for reporting.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
>> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the
disks
>> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
>> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
>> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
>> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
>> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
>> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
>> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it
will
>> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we
>> can
>> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
>> could
>> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
>> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
>> log
>> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
>> important
>> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
>> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
>> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
>> John
>>
>
>|||Way back 1.5 years ago I did the same thing for a client with thousands of
databases. Worked like a champ.
--
Kevin G. Boles
Indicium Resources, Inc.
SQL Server MVP
kgboles a earthlink dt net
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:%23v1x6WfXIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Waaaaaay back in 2000, we created our own jobs to logship and only had the
> restore command run every 8 hours. All the files were there, and we could
> catch the whole thing up in about 20 minutes if the primary went down, but
> it was a reporting server all day :)
> Same thing could be done here if Log Shipping was desired, as well as
> reporting. May not be the most glamorous solution, but it works...
> --
> Kevin3NF
> SQL Server dude
> You want fries with that?
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
> I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
> Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
> in message news:0875841B-779E-4639-9C7F-31D19FCF060A@.microsoft.com...
>> Log shipping is fine
>> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
>> Well, you can if you do the restores using STANDBY. But you'd have to
>> kick out the users each time you want to do the next restore. Which means
>> that you really ... can't use a log shipped database for reporting ;-).
>> (Just wanted to mention this before anyone else say "You can". )
>>
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>>
>> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
>> news:uy0aAMfXIHA.1188@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Yes, snapshots are supported only in Ent Ed. Also, Std Edition supports
>> 2-node clusters - not "two clusters". It depends on where you want to
>> put
>> your money and what your needs are. When it comes to High Availability
>> (HA), then you often have to go to Ent Ed. If you want clustering and
>> have
>> only 2 nodes, then you can get away with Std Ed, but clustering hardware
>> is
>> usually a bit more expensive and a little trickier to set up. Mirroring
>> will work on regular hardware and can go between dissimilar platforms.
>> Automatic failover, though is available in the Ent Ed.
>> When it comes to reporting, snapshots are your friend. Log shipping is
>> fine
>> for HA, but you can't report off of the destination DB.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23In0b5eXIHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Isn't SQL Server Enterprise edition the only edition that allows for
>> snapshots? We plan on using Standard Edition which will support two
>> clusters.
>>
>> "Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
>> news:ee6ZxueXIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Since you are using SQL Server 2005, consider database mirroring. You
>> don't
>> need the fancy hardware that clustering does and failover is very
>> quick -
>> and can be automatic. Also, you can do a database snapshot on the
>> mirror
>> and use it for reporting.
>> --
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Toronto, ON Canada
>> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>>
>> "John Wright" <riley_wrightx@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:u6BTxreXIHA.3400@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database.
>> This
>> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the
>> disks
>> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array
>> to
>> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot
>> of
>> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
>> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I
>> have
>> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on
>> the
>> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
>> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it
>> will
>> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server
>> we
>> can
>> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
>> could
>> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
>> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
>> log
>> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
>> important
>> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost
>> of
>> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those
>> who
>> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>|||Just a word of caution to help manage the expectation. If your storage goes
bad, you can for sure leverage certain DBMS features to alleviate the pain.
But there is no magic. SQL Server offers you many good features, but the same
potential storage problems won't magically go away. Due diligence is required
to plan for storage disasters.
Linchi
"John Wright" wrote:
> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the disks
> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it will
> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we can
> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we could
> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction log
> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is important
> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
> John
>
>|||After much reading and study, I think we are going to implement the Database
Mirroring option with a witness to facilitate automatic fail-over.
Operating in High-Availability with full safety and a witness server should
do it for us. The servers are connected via a gigabit connection so latency
should not be a problem. Thanks one and all for the advice.
John
"Linchi Shea" <LinchiShea@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C8570CAA-676A-4FE3-963D-21F4ECAC794B@.microsoft.com...
> Just a word of caution to help manage the expectation. If your storage
> goes
> bad, you can for sure leverage certain DBMS features to alleviate the
> pain.
> But there is no magic. SQL Server offers you many good features, but the
> same
> potential storage problems won't magically go away. Due diligence is
> required
> to plan for storage disasters.
> Linchi
> "John Wright" wrote:
>> We just went through a catastrophic failure of an Oracle database. This
>> database was running on a server with a RAID 5 installed. One of the
>> disks
>> was having read/write errors. When we pulled the disk from the array to
>> have the hot spare kick in, the Oracle server failed and it took a lot of
>> effort to get it back. (I hate oracle).
>> We are moving to SQL Server 2005 and want to avoid this problem. I have
>> been asked to get the specs for a cluster. I have been reading up on the
>> clustering, but came across Transaction Log Shipping. I know that the
>> Transaction Log shipping does not have an automatic fail over, but it
>> will
>> move the transaction log to another server and provide another server we
>> can
>> use for reporting and in the event of a failure on the main server, we
>> could
>> use the other server until we can bring it up on line.
>> What in your opinion would be a better solution, cluster or transaction
>> log
>> shipping? All of our programs will be using this data, and it is
>> important
>> to recover from a disaster like this as quickly as possible. The cost of
>> clustering may be preventative, so I would like your input for those who
>> have used one or both methods for pros and cons. Thanks.
>> John
>>
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
New SP2 Client Install Failure
Hi,
I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected the
following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
Setup Support Files
SQL Server Native Client
Client Components
MSXML 6.0 Parser
SQLXML4
Backward Compatibility
The client component upgrade failed on
Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
this in the hotfix.log
MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microso ft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll
in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception from
HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
Any ideas?
Thanks
Chris
I found the answer on Connect. You need to have DTC running for the update
to finish.
Chris
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:evoMCLaYHHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
> hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected
> the following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
> Setup Support Files
> SQL Server Native Client
> Client Components
> MSXML 6.0 Parser
> SQLXML4
> Backward Compatibility
> The client component upgrade failed on
> Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
> this in the hotfix.log
> MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
> Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microso ft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll
> in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
> Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
> Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception
> from HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
> Any ideas?
> Thanks
> Chris
>
|||Try starting MSDTC if it's not already started and double check your event
logs for any COM+ errors.
HTH,
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
http://www.sqldbatips.com
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:evoMCLaYHHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
> hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected
> the following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
> Setup Support Files
> SQL Server Native Client
> Client Components
> MSXML 6.0 Parser
> SQLXML4
> Backward Compatibility
> The client component upgrade failed on
> Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
> this in the hotfix.log
> MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
> Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microso ft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll
> in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
> Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
> Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception
> from HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
> Any ideas?
> Thanks
> Chris
>
I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected the
following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
Setup Support Files
SQL Server Native Client
Client Components
MSXML 6.0 Parser
SQLXML4
Backward Compatibility
The client component upgrade failed on
Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
this in the hotfix.log
MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microso ft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll
in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception from
HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
Any ideas?
Thanks
Chris
I found the answer on Connect. You need to have DTC running for the update
to finish.
Chris
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:evoMCLaYHHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
> hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected
> the following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
> Setup Support Files
> SQL Server Native Client
> Client Components
> MSXML 6.0 Parser
> SQLXML4
> Backward Compatibility
> The client component upgrade failed on
> Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
> this in the hotfix.log
> MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
> Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microso ft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll
> in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
> Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
> Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception
> from HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
> Any ideas?
> Thanks
> Chris
>
|||Try starting MSDTC if it's not already started and double check your event
logs for any COM+ errors.
HTH,
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
http://www.sqldbatips.com
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:evoMCLaYHHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
> hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected
> the following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
> Setup Support Files
> SQL Server Native Client
> Client Components
> MSXML 6.0 Parser
> SQLXML4
> Backward Compatibility
> The client component upgrade failed on
> Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
> this in the hotfix.log
> MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
> Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microso ft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll
> in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
> Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
> Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception
> from HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
> Any ideas?
> Thanks
> Chris
>
New SP2 Client Install Failure
Hi,
I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected the
following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
Setup Support Files
SQL Server Native Client
Client Components
MSXML 6.0 Parser
SQLXML4
Backward Compatibility
The client component upgrade failed on
Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
this in the hotfix.log
MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll
in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception from
HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
Any ideas?
Thanks
ChrisI found the answer on Connect. You need to have DTC running for the update
to finish.
Chris
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:evoMCLaYHHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
> hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected
> the following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
> Setup Support Files
> SQL Server Native Client
> Client Components
> MSXML 6.0 Parser
> SQLXML4
> Backward Compatibility
> The client component upgrade failed on
> Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
> this in the hotfix.log
> MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
> Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll
> in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
> Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
> Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception
> from HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
> Any ideas?
> Thanks
> Chris
>|||Try starting MSDTC if it's not already started and double check your event
logs for any COM+ errors.
--
HTH,
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
http://www.sqldbatips.com
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:evoMCLaYHHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
> hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected
> the following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
> Setup Support Files
> SQL Server Native Client
> Client Components
> MSXML 6.0 Parser
> SQLXML4
> Backward Compatibility
> The client component upgrade failed on
> Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
> this in the hotfix.log
> MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
> Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll
> in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
> Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
> Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception
> from HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
> Any ideas?
> Thanks
> Chris
>
I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected the
following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
Setup Support Files
SQL Server Native Client
Client Components
MSXML 6.0 Parser
SQLXML4
Backward Compatibility
The client component upgrade failed on
Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
this in the hotfix.log
MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll
in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception from
HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
Any ideas?
Thanks
ChrisI found the answer on Connect. You need to have DTC running for the update
to finish.
Chris
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:evoMCLaYHHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
> hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected
> the following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
> Setup Support Files
> SQL Server Native Client
> Client Components
> MSXML 6.0 Parser
> SQLXML4
> Backward Compatibility
> The client component upgrade failed on
> Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
> this in the hotfix.log
> MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
> Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll
> in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
> Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
> Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception
> from HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
> Any ideas?
> Thanks
> Chris
>|||Try starting MSDTC if it's not already started and double check your event
logs for any COM+ errors.
--
HTH,
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
http://www.sqldbatips.com
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:evoMCLaYHHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
> hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected
> the following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
> Setup Support Files
> SQL Server Native Client
> Client Components
> MSXML 6.0 Parser
> SQLXML4
> Backward Compatibility
> The client component upgrade failed on
> Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
> this in the hotfix.log
> MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
> Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll
> in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
> Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
> Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception
> from HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
> Any ideas?
> Thanks
> Chris
>
New SP2 Client Install Failure
Hi,
I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected the
following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
Setup Support Files
SQL Server Native Client
Client Components
MSXML 6.0 Parser
SQLXML4
Backward Compatibility
The client component upgrade failed on
Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
this in the hotfix.log
MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microsoft.sqlserver.notifications
ervices.dll
in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception from
HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
Any ideas?
Thanks
ChrisI found the answer on Connect. You need to have DTC running for the update
to finish.
Chris
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:evoMCLaYHHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
> hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected
> the following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
> Setup Support Files
> SQL Server Native Client
> Client Components
> MSXML 6.0 Parser
> SQLXML4
> Backward Compatibility
> The client component upgrade failed on
> Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
> this in the hotfix.log
> MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
> Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microsoft.sqlserver.notificatio
nservices.dll
> in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
> Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
> Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception
> from HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
> Any ideas?
> Thanks
> Chris
>|||Try starting MSDTC if it's not already started and double check your event
logs for any COM+ errors.
HTH,
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
http://www.sqldbatips.com
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:evoMCLaYHHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
> hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected
> the following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
> Setup Support Files
> SQL Server Native Client
> Client Components
> MSXML 6.0 Parser
> SQLXML4
> Backward Compatibility
> The client component upgrade failed on
> Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
> this in the hotfix.log
> MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
> Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microsoft.sqlserver.notificatio
nservices.dll
> in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
> Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
> Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception
> from HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
> Any ideas?
> Thanks
> Chris
>sql
I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected the
following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
Setup Support Files
SQL Server Native Client
Client Components
MSXML 6.0 Parser
SQLXML4
Backward Compatibility
The client component upgrade failed on
Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
this in the hotfix.log
MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microsoft.sqlserver.notifications
ervices.dll
in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception from
HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
Any ideas?
Thanks
ChrisI found the answer on Connect. You need to have DTC running for the update
to finish.
Chris
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:evoMCLaYHHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
> hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected
> the following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
> Setup Support Files
> SQL Server Native Client
> Client Components
> MSXML 6.0 Parser
> SQLXML4
> Backward Compatibility
> The client component upgrade failed on
> Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
> this in the hotfix.log
> MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
> Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microsoft.sqlserver.notificatio
nservices.dll
> in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
> Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
> Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception
> from HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
> Any ideas?
> Thanks
> Chris
>|||Try starting MSDTC if it's not already started and double check your event
logs for any COM+ errors.
HTH,
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
http://www.sqldbatips.com
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:evoMCLaYHHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have successfully upgraded a server with both the new SP2 and the 3050
> hotfix. I am now trying to do this to my client workstation. It selected
> the following components on my SQL2005 SP1 client to upgrade.
> Setup Support Files
> SQL Server Native Client
> Client Components
> MSXML 6.0 Parser
> SQLXML4
> Backward Compatibility
> The client component upgrade failed on
> Microsoft.sqlserver.notificationservices.dll. I had an error code 1603 and
> this in the hotfix.log
> MSP Error: 29549 Failed to install and configure assemblies c:\Program
> Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\NotificationServices\9.0.242\Bin\microsoft.sqlserver.notificatio
nservices.dll
> in the COM+ catalog. Error: -2146233087
> Error message: Unknown error 0x80131501
> Error description: The Transaction Manager is not available. (Exception
> from HRESULT: 0x8004D01B)
> Any ideas?
> Thanks
> Chris
>sql
Monday, March 12, 2012
New Oracle Data Provider for .NET (ODP .NET) 10.2.0.2.20 failure.
Oracle recently released Oracle Data Provider for .NET (ODP .NET) 10.2.0.2.20. It happened on August 1, 2006. Oracle claims that its software is compliant with Microsoft ADO.NET 2.0 and “…more flexible, faster, and more stable….”. On top of it Oracle introduced many new features “… not available from other .NET drivers…”.
http://www.oracle.com/technology/tech/windows/odpnet/index.html
I decided to give it a shot and try in SSIS.
I installed ODP.NET on my machine and it works just fine in PL/SQL Developer
Next, I opened Data Source Wizard in BIDS for SSIS project.
I see Oracle Data Provider for .NET option is enlisted under .NET Providers node on a tree. But when I select it, I am getting an error dialog:
Failed to find or load the registered .Net Framework Data Provider.
So what could be done in such scenario?
Regards,
Yitzhak
The message seems to say the provider just cannot be found. These seems a bit extreme, but you could find out what has been registered, and try and see if the assembly is then available.
Managed providers are registered in C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\CONFIG\machine.config. There will be a section that looks a bit like this -
<system.data>
<DbProviderFactories>
<add name="Odbc Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.Odbc" description=".Net Framework Data Provider for Odbc" type="System.Data.Odbc.OdbcFactory, System.Data, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"/>
<add name="OleDb Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.OleDb" description=".Net Framework Data Provider for OleDb" type="System.Data.OleDb.OleDbFactory, System.Data, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"/>
<add name="OracleClient Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.OracleClient" description=".Net Framework Data Provider for Oracle" type="System.Data.OracleClient.OracleClientFactory, System.Data.OracleClient, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"/>
<add name="SqlClient Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.SqlClient" description=".Net Framework Data Provider for SqlServer" type="System.Data.SqlClient.SqlClientFactory, System.Data, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"/>
<add name="SQL Server CE Data Provider" invariant="Microsoft.SqlServerCe.Client" description=".NET Framework Data Provider for Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Mobile Edition" type="Microsoft.SqlServerCe.Client.SqlCeClientFactory, Microsoft.SqlServerCe.Client, Version=9.0.242.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89845dcd8080cc91"/>
</DbProviderFactories>
</system.data>
This shows that I have 5 managed providers, and it also gives the strong name for each. They should then be available in the GAC. A simple application that loads an assembly by it's string name could be use dto check that it really is available.
This seems somewhat excessive, and there should be simpler explanation, but the documentation didn't make too much sense to me.
|||I checked machine.config file on my machine.
Here is what it has:
<system.data>
<DbProviderFactories>
<add name="Odbc Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.Odbc" description=".Net Framework Data Provider for Odbc"
type="System.Data.Odbc.OdbcFactory, System.Data, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" />
<add name="OleDb Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.OleDb"
description=".Net Framework Data Provider for OleDb" type="System.Data.OleDb.OleDbFactory, System.Data, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" />
<add name="OracleClient Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.OracleClient"
description=".Net Framework Data Provider for Oracle" type="System.Data.OracleClient.OracleClientFactory, System.Data.OracleClient, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" />
<add name="SqlClient Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.SqlClient"
description=".Net Framework Data Provider for SqlServer" type="System.Data.SqlClient.SqlClientFactory, System.Data, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" />
<add name="Oracle Data Provider for .NET" invariant="Oracle.DataAccess.Client"
description="Oracle Data Provider for .NET" type="Oracle.DataAccess.Client.OracleClientFactory, Oracle.DataAccess, Version=2.102.2.20, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89b483f429c47342" />
</DbProviderFactories>
</system.data>
I also checked c:\winnt\assembly directory (GAC)
Oracle.DataAccess version 2.102.2.20 is there.
Regards,
Yitzhak
There is some new development on the subject.
Oracle Data Provider for .NET (ODP .NET) 10.2.0.2.20 comes with the sample projects for Visual Studio 2005. I decided to try one of them - DSPopulate. It issues a single SQL statement and populates a data grid for Win Form app. Long story short, the sample application complies and works. References node in VS2005 shows a reference to Oracle Data provider.
I reopened my SSIS project and went through the same steps to create a new Data Source. I picked Oracle Data Provider for .NET. And here is some new behavior. Connection tab shows the following message:
Connection page is not available. Please switch to use ‘All’ properties tab page to set the properties of connection string.
So I switched to All tab and was able to set needed parameters and successfully test the connection.
I tested Oracle ODP.NET based connection with the Data Reader Source task. It works.
Regards,
Yitzhak
|||
Hi,
We also installed ODP.Net in my system however after the installation our usual oracle providers didnt worked. Started showing error when we used other oracle providers(Oracle Provider, Microsoft oracle provider).
Whether we can use ODP.NET as destination? If so, how can we use it?
Please help me in this regarding
Thanks
New Oracle Data Provider for .NET (ODP .NET) 10.2.0.2.20 failure.
Oracle recently released Oracle Data Provider for .NET (ODP .NET) 10.2.0.2.20. It happened on August 1, 2006. Oracle claims that its software is compliant with Microsoft ADO.NET 2.0 and “…more flexible, faster, and more stable….”. On top of it Oracle introduced many new features “… not available from other .NET drivers…”.
http://www.oracle.com/technology/tech/windows/odpnet/index.html
I decided to give it a shot and try in SSIS.
I installed ODP.NET on my machine and it works just fine in PL/SQL Developer
Next, I opened Data Source Wizard in BIDS for SSIS project.
I see Oracle Data Provider for .NET option is enlisted under .NET Providers node on a tree. But when I select it, I am getting an error dialog:
Failed to find or load the registered .Net Framework Data Provider.
So what could be done in such scenario?
Regards,
Yitzhak
The message seems to say the provider just cannot be found. These seems a bit extreme, but you could find out what has been registered, and try and see if the assembly is then available.
Managed providers are registered in C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\CONFIG\machine.config. There will be a section that looks a bit like this -
<system.data>
<DbProviderFactories>
<add name="Odbc Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.Odbc" description=".Net Framework Data Provider for Odbc" type="System.Data.Odbc.OdbcFactory, System.Data, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"/>
<add name="OleDb Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.OleDb" description=".Net Framework Data Provider for OleDb" type="System.Data.OleDb.OleDbFactory, System.Data, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"/>
<add name="OracleClient Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.OracleClient" description=".Net Framework Data Provider for Oracle" type="System.Data.OracleClient.OracleClientFactory, System.Data.OracleClient, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"/>
<add name="SqlClient Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.SqlClient" description=".Net Framework Data Provider for SqlServer" type="System.Data.SqlClient.SqlClientFactory, System.Data, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"/>
<add name="SQL Server CE Data Provider" invariant="Microsoft.SqlServerCe.Client" description=".NET Framework Data Provider for Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Mobile Edition" type="Microsoft.SqlServerCe.Client.SqlCeClientFactory, Microsoft.SqlServerCe.Client, Version=9.0.242.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89845dcd8080cc91"/>
</DbProviderFactories>
</system.data>
This shows that I have 5 managed providers, and it also gives the strong name for each. They should then be available in the GAC. A simple application that loads an assembly by it's string name could be use dto check that it really is available.
This seems somewhat excessive, and there should be simpler explanation, but the documentation didn't make too much sense to me.
|||I checked machine.config file on my machine.
Here is what it has:
<system.data>
<DbProviderFactories>
<add name="Odbc Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.Odbc" description=".Net Framework Data Provider for Odbc"
type="System.Data.Odbc.OdbcFactory, System.Data, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" />
<add name="OleDb Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.OleDb"
description=".Net Framework Data Provider for OleDb" type="System.Data.OleDb.OleDbFactory, System.Data, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" />
<add name="OracleClient Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.OracleClient"
description=".Net Framework Data Provider for Oracle" type="System.Data.OracleClient.OracleClientFactory, System.Data.OracleClient, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" />
<add name="SqlClient Data Provider" invariant="System.Data.SqlClient"
description=".Net Framework Data Provider for SqlServer" type="System.Data.SqlClient.SqlClientFactory, System.Data, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" />
<add name="Oracle Data Provider for .NET" invariant="Oracle.DataAccess.Client"
description="Oracle Data Provider for .NET" type="Oracle.DataAccess.Client.OracleClientFactory, Oracle.DataAccess, Version=2.102.2.20, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89b483f429c47342" />
</DbProviderFactories>
</system.data>
I also checked c:\winnt\assembly directory (GAC)
Oracle.DataAccess version 2.102.2.20 is there.
Regards,
Yitzhak
There is some new development on the subject.
Oracle Data Provider for .NET (ODP .NET) 10.2.0.2.20 comes with the sample projects for Visual Studio 2005. I decided to try one of them - DSPopulate. It issues a single SQL statement and populates a data grid for Win Form app. Long story short, the sample application complies and works. References node in VS2005 shows a reference to Oracle Data provider.
I reopened my SSIS project and went through the same steps to create a new Data Source. I picked Oracle Data Provider for .NET. And here is some new behavior. Connection tab shows the following message:
Connection page is not available. Please switch to use ‘All’ properties tab page to set the properties of connection string.
So I switched to All tab and was able to set needed parameters and successfully test the connection.
I tested Oracle ODP.NET based connection with the Data Reader Source task. It works.
Regards,
Yitzhak
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
New Installation Error
Hello all.
After suffering a complete RAID failure, I am now tasked with the
responsibility of setting up reporting services again, on a new and
different machine. I had been successful getting it running last time,
so I figured this wouldn't be too much problem. The installation goes
fine, until the end, when it reports that the service wont start for
the first time.
As for information. Server2003-sp1. For the ReportServer Windows
service I'm using account (NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE). I've left
virtual directories the same, except that I've disabled SSL
connections. The Database is running locally, and for the runtime
connection credentials, I've chosen to use a Domain User Account (set
up especially for this purpose) "RSExec".
As I said, the install goes fine, but fails. The only thing I can
think of is that maybe my new RSExec user needs more permission than a
standard user. But I've read the books (Lachev, and Blackburn &
Vaughn), as well as the BOL, and I can't find any indication of what I
might be missing.
Opening the //machine/ReportServer page, I get the following error
message:
* The report server cannot open a connection to the report server
database. The logon failed. (rsReportServerDatabaseLogonFailed) Get
Online Help
o Logon failure: the user has not been granted the requested logon
type at this computer.
The error message from the log shows:
w3wp!ui!dc0!9/27/2005-08:25:37:: e ERROR:
System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapException: The report server cannot
open a connection to the report server database. The logon failed. -->
Microsoft.ReportingServices.Diagnostics.Utilities.ReportServerDatabaseLogonFailedException:
The report server cannot open a connection to the report server
database. The logon failed. -->
System.Runtime.InteropServices.COMException (0x80070569): Logon
failure: the user has not been granted the requested logon type at this
computer.
at System.Runtime.InteropServices.Marshal.ThrowExceptionForHR(Int32
errorCode, IntPtr errorInfo)
at RSRemoteRpcClient.RemoteLogon.GetRemoteImpToken(String pUserName,
String pDomain, String pPassword, Boolean bTryRemote, IntPtr&
pImpToken)
at
Microsoft.ReportingServices.Library.ConnectionManager.GetImpersonationToken(String
userName, String domain, String userPwd)
-- End of inner exception stack trace --
Thanks for all your help. It is sincerely appreciated.
Brian AckermannDid you grant RSExec permissions to logon to SQL server? If so, can you
check to see if the user has permission to the RS database?
--
-Daniel
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Brian Ackermann" <brian.ackermann@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127830923.220944.153010@.g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hello all.
> After suffering a complete RAID failure, I am now tasked with the
> responsibility of setting up reporting services again, on a new and
> different machine. I had been successful getting it running last time,
> so I figured this wouldn't be too much problem. The installation goes
> fine, until the end, when it reports that the service wont start for
> the first time.
> As for information. Server2003-sp1. For the ReportServer Windows
> service I'm using account (NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE). I've left
> virtual directories the same, except that I've disabled SSL
> connections. The Database is running locally, and for the runtime
> connection credentials, I've chosen to use a Domain User Account (set
> up especially for this purpose) "RSExec".
> As I said, the install goes fine, but fails. The only thing I can
> think of is that maybe my new RSExec user needs more permission than a
> standard user. But I've read the books (Lachev, and Blackburn &
> Vaughn), as well as the BOL, and I can't find any indication of what I
> might be missing.
> Opening the //machine/ReportServer page, I get the following error
> message:
> * The report server cannot open a connection to the report server
> database. The logon failed. (rsReportServerDatabaseLogonFailed) Get
> Online Help
> o Logon failure: the user has not been granted the requested logon
> type at this computer.
> The error message from the log shows:
> w3wp!ui!dc0!9/27/2005-08:25:37:: e ERROR:
> System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapException: The report server cannot
> open a connection to the report server database. The logon failed. -->
> Microsoft.ReportingServices.Diagnostics.Utilities.ReportServerDatabaseLogonFailedException:
> The report server cannot open a connection to the report server
> database. The logon failed. -->
> System.Runtime.InteropServices.COMException (0x80070569): Logon
> failure: the user has not been granted the requested logon type at this
> computer.
> at System.Runtime.InteropServices.Marshal.ThrowExceptionForHR(Int32
> errorCode, IntPtr errorInfo)
> at RSRemoteRpcClient.RemoteLogon.GetRemoteImpToken(String pUserName,
> String pDomain, String pPassword, Boolean bTryRemote, IntPtr&
> pImpToken)
> at
> Microsoft.ReportingServices.Library.ConnectionManager.GetImpersonationToken(String
> userName, String domain, String userPwd)
> -- End of inner exception stack trace --
> Thanks for all your help. It is sincerely appreciated.
> Brian Ackermann
>|||Daniel,
Thanks for the reply.
As far as I can tell, the installer gives the RSExec user permissions
on the database. I must be missing it if there was something else.
There was a user called RSExec intalled on the database, with what
appeared to be appropriate values.
Can you be more explicit as to what settings exactly need to be set.
I'm sure its quite simple, and that I'm just not seeing it.
Thanks
Brian Ackermann|||From the look of the call stack, it appears that you are using a domain
account to talk to the RS database server. It doesn't appear that user has
permission to logon to the RS box. You should verify if that is the case.
--
-Daniel
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Brian Ackermann" <brian.ackermann@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127939219.565435.135110@.o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Daniel,
> Thanks for the reply.
> As far as I can tell, the installer gives the RSExec user permissions
> on the database. I must be missing it if there was something else.
> There was a user called RSExec intalled on the database, with what
> appeared to be appropriate values.
> Can you be more explicit as to what settings exactly need to be set.
> I'm sure its quite simple, and that I'm just not seeing it.
> Thanks
> Brian Ackermann
>
After suffering a complete RAID failure, I am now tasked with the
responsibility of setting up reporting services again, on a new and
different machine. I had been successful getting it running last time,
so I figured this wouldn't be too much problem. The installation goes
fine, until the end, when it reports that the service wont start for
the first time.
As for information. Server2003-sp1. For the ReportServer Windows
service I'm using account (NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE). I've left
virtual directories the same, except that I've disabled SSL
connections. The Database is running locally, and for the runtime
connection credentials, I've chosen to use a Domain User Account (set
up especially for this purpose) "RSExec".
As I said, the install goes fine, but fails. The only thing I can
think of is that maybe my new RSExec user needs more permission than a
standard user. But I've read the books (Lachev, and Blackburn &
Vaughn), as well as the BOL, and I can't find any indication of what I
might be missing.
Opening the //machine/ReportServer page, I get the following error
message:
* The report server cannot open a connection to the report server
database. The logon failed. (rsReportServerDatabaseLogonFailed) Get
Online Help
o Logon failure: the user has not been granted the requested logon
type at this computer.
The error message from the log shows:
w3wp!ui!dc0!9/27/2005-08:25:37:: e ERROR:
System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapException: The report server cannot
open a connection to the report server database. The logon failed. -->
Microsoft.ReportingServices.Diagnostics.Utilities.ReportServerDatabaseLogonFailedException:
The report server cannot open a connection to the report server
database. The logon failed. -->
System.Runtime.InteropServices.COMException (0x80070569): Logon
failure: the user has not been granted the requested logon type at this
computer.
at System.Runtime.InteropServices.Marshal.ThrowExceptionForHR(Int32
errorCode, IntPtr errorInfo)
at RSRemoteRpcClient.RemoteLogon.GetRemoteImpToken(String pUserName,
String pDomain, String pPassword, Boolean bTryRemote, IntPtr&
pImpToken)
at
Microsoft.ReportingServices.Library.ConnectionManager.GetImpersonationToken(String
userName, String domain, String userPwd)
-- End of inner exception stack trace --
Thanks for all your help. It is sincerely appreciated.
Brian AckermannDid you grant RSExec permissions to logon to SQL server? If so, can you
check to see if the user has permission to the RS database?
--
-Daniel
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Brian Ackermann" <brian.ackermann@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127830923.220944.153010@.g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hello all.
> After suffering a complete RAID failure, I am now tasked with the
> responsibility of setting up reporting services again, on a new and
> different machine. I had been successful getting it running last time,
> so I figured this wouldn't be too much problem. The installation goes
> fine, until the end, when it reports that the service wont start for
> the first time.
> As for information. Server2003-sp1. For the ReportServer Windows
> service I'm using account (NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE). I've left
> virtual directories the same, except that I've disabled SSL
> connections. The Database is running locally, and for the runtime
> connection credentials, I've chosen to use a Domain User Account (set
> up especially for this purpose) "RSExec".
> As I said, the install goes fine, but fails. The only thing I can
> think of is that maybe my new RSExec user needs more permission than a
> standard user. But I've read the books (Lachev, and Blackburn &
> Vaughn), as well as the BOL, and I can't find any indication of what I
> might be missing.
> Opening the //machine/ReportServer page, I get the following error
> message:
> * The report server cannot open a connection to the report server
> database. The logon failed. (rsReportServerDatabaseLogonFailed) Get
> Online Help
> o Logon failure: the user has not been granted the requested logon
> type at this computer.
> The error message from the log shows:
> w3wp!ui!dc0!9/27/2005-08:25:37:: e ERROR:
> System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapException: The report server cannot
> open a connection to the report server database. The logon failed. -->
> Microsoft.ReportingServices.Diagnostics.Utilities.ReportServerDatabaseLogonFailedException:
> The report server cannot open a connection to the report server
> database. The logon failed. -->
> System.Runtime.InteropServices.COMException (0x80070569): Logon
> failure: the user has not been granted the requested logon type at this
> computer.
> at System.Runtime.InteropServices.Marshal.ThrowExceptionForHR(Int32
> errorCode, IntPtr errorInfo)
> at RSRemoteRpcClient.RemoteLogon.GetRemoteImpToken(String pUserName,
> String pDomain, String pPassword, Boolean bTryRemote, IntPtr&
> pImpToken)
> at
> Microsoft.ReportingServices.Library.ConnectionManager.GetImpersonationToken(String
> userName, String domain, String userPwd)
> -- End of inner exception stack trace --
> Thanks for all your help. It is sincerely appreciated.
> Brian Ackermann
>|||Daniel,
Thanks for the reply.
As far as I can tell, the installer gives the RSExec user permissions
on the database. I must be missing it if there was something else.
There was a user called RSExec intalled on the database, with what
appeared to be appropriate values.
Can you be more explicit as to what settings exactly need to be set.
I'm sure its quite simple, and that I'm just not seeing it.
Thanks
Brian Ackermann|||From the look of the call stack, it appears that you are using a domain
account to talk to the RS database server. It doesn't appear that user has
permission to logon to the RS box. You should verify if that is the case.
--
-Daniel
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Brian Ackermann" <brian.ackermann@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127939219.565435.135110@.o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Daniel,
> Thanks for the reply.
> As far as I can tell, the installer gives the RSExec user permissions
> on the database. I must be missing it if there was something else.
> There was a user called RSExec intalled on the database, with what
> appeared to be appropriate values.
> Can you be more explicit as to what settings exactly need to be set.
> I'm sure its quite simple, and that I'm just not seeing it.
> Thanks
> Brian Ackermann
>
Monday, February 20, 2012
New data source connection failure
Hi,
Windows 2003 Server Std. Edition - SQL Server 200 Std. Edition
I'm able to create a new data source in the ODBC panel on the SQL
server which points to a db on the same SQL server but not creating
that same new data source in the SQL Server Enterprise Manager or
Analysis Manager. I tried creating a new cube, a new DTS and so on but
I won't get past the new data source failure.
Error: [DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen(Connect()).] SQL Server does not
exist or access is denied.
I tried using local admin account, sa account which both belong to the
sysadmin serve role.
Thank you.
Steve"Steve" <steve@.500mg.be> wrote in message
news:6b781b0f.0410300430.775b6306@.posting.google.com...
> Windows 2003 Server Std. Edition - SQL Server 200 Std. Edition
> I'm able to create a new data source in the ODBC panel on the SQL
> server which points to a db on the same SQL server but not creating
> that same new data source in the SQL Server Enterprise Manager or
> Analysis Manager. I tried creating a new cube, a new DTS and so on but
> I won't get past the new data source failure.
> Error: [DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen(Connect()).] SQL Server does not
> exist or access is denied.
> I tried using local admin account, sa account which both belong to the
> sysadmin serve role.
It sounds like your SQL Server 2000 is running in "windows only"
authentication mode, which means the 'sa' account would not be recognized.
Try either a windows account (preferred technique) local admin should work
if you have not changed the basic security install, or change the
authentication mode to "sql server and windows", stop and restart SQL
Server.
Steve
Windows 2003 Server Std. Edition - SQL Server 200 Std. Edition
I'm able to create a new data source in the ODBC panel on the SQL
server which points to a db on the same SQL server but not creating
that same new data source in the SQL Server Enterprise Manager or
Analysis Manager. I tried creating a new cube, a new DTS and so on but
I won't get past the new data source failure.
Error: [DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen(Connect()).] SQL Server does not
exist or access is denied.
I tried using local admin account, sa account which both belong to the
sysadmin serve role.
Thank you.
Steve"Steve" <steve@.500mg.be> wrote in message
news:6b781b0f.0410300430.775b6306@.posting.google.com...
> Windows 2003 Server Std. Edition - SQL Server 200 Std. Edition
> I'm able to create a new data source in the ODBC panel on the SQL
> server which points to a db on the same SQL server but not creating
> that same new data source in the SQL Server Enterprise Manager or
> Analysis Manager. I tried creating a new cube, a new DTS and so on but
> I won't get past the new data source failure.
> Error: [DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen(Connect()).] SQL Server does not
> exist or access is denied.
> I tried using local admin account, sa account which both belong to the
> sysadmin serve role.
It sounds like your SQL Server 2000 is running in "windows only"
authentication mode, which means the 'sa' account would not be recognized.
Try either a windows account (preferred technique) local admin should work
if you have not changed the basic security install, or change the
authentication mode to "sql server and windows", stop and restart SQL
Server.
Steve
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)