@@BVersion.... Edition

How to findout the edition of SQL Server? like standard, enterprise...
select @.@.version gives that information?
I am using SQL 2K.
Thanks,
SmithHello
select serverproperty('Edition') will provide that information.
Check books on line for serverproperty().
select @.@.version will give the build version. SQLSecurity WebSite has a SQL
Server version database -
http://www.sqlsecurity.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=37
Carlos Eduardo Selonke de Souza
http://carlos.geekbunker.org
"Allen Smith" wrote:

> How to findout the edition of SQL Server? like standard, enterprise...
> select @.@.version gives that information?
> I am using SQL 2K.
> Thanks,
> Smith
>
>|||YOu are absoletely rigth.
Select @.@.Version
HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.
http://www.sqlserver2005.de
--
"Allen Smith" <ASmith_Forest@.hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:OXp78GGbFHA.348@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> How to findout the edition of SQL Server? like standard, enterprise...
> select @.@.version gives that information?
> I am using SQL 2K.
> Thanks,
> Smith
>
>|||Allen Smith wrote:
> How to findout the edition of SQL Server? like standard, enterprise...
> select @.@.version gives that information?
Though SELECT @.@.VERSION gives a long string that contains the edition
info too, you will have to copy it and paste it into the editor area to
really see that long string!
Instead, the SELECT SERVERPROPERTY('Edition') gives you just what you
wanted!|||Sarah wrote:
> Allen Smith wrote:
> Though SELECT @.@.VERSION gives a long string that contains the edition
> info too, you will have to copy it and paste it into the editor area
> to really see that long string!
> Instead, the SELECT SERVERPROPERTY('Edition') gives you just what you
> wanted!
In my case it's not a problem to see the string you get with SELECT
@.@.VERSION. If you just "expand" the result column you can scroll back and
forth to see it.
Regards
Steen

@@BVersion.... Edition

How to findout the edition of SQL Server? like standard, enterprise...
select @.@.version gives that information?
I am using SQL 2K.
Thanks,
Smith
Hello
select serverproperty('Edition') will provide that information.
Check books on line for serverproperty().
select @.@.version will give the build version. SQLSecurity WebSite has a SQL
Server version database -
http://www.sqlsecurity.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=37
Carlos Eduardo Selonke de Souza
http://carlos.geekbunker.org
"Allen Smith" wrote:

> How to findout the edition of SQL Server? like standard, enterprise...
> select @.@.version gives that information?
> I am using SQL 2K.
> Thanks,
> Smith
>
>
|||YOu are absoletely rigth.
Select @.@.Version
HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.
http://www.sqlserver2005.de
"Allen Smith" <ASmith_Forest@.hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:OXp78GGbFHA.348@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> How to findout the edition of SQL Server? like standard, enterprise...
> select @.@.version gives that information?
> I am using SQL 2K.
> Thanks,
> Smith
>
>
|||Allen Smith wrote:
> How to findout the edition of SQL Server? like standard, enterprise...
> select @.@.version gives that information?
Though SELECT @.@.VERSION gives a long string that contains the edition
info too, you will have to copy it and paste it into the editor area to
really see that long string!
Instead, the SELECT SERVERPROPERTY('Edition') gives you just what you
wanted!
|||Sarah wrote:
> Allen Smith wrote:
> Though SELECT @.@.VERSION gives a long string that contains the edition
> info too, you will have to copy it and paste it into the editor area
> to really see that long string!
> Instead, the SELECT SERVERPROPERTY('Edition') gives you just what you
> wanted!
In my case it's not a problem to see the string you get with SELECT
@.@.VERSION. If you just "expand" the result column you can scroll back and
forth to see it.
Regards
Steen

@@BVersion.... Edition

How to findout the edition of SQL Server? like standard, enterprise...
select @.@.version gives that information?
I am using SQL 2K.
Thanks,
SmithHello
select serverproperty('Edition') will provide that information.
Check books on line for serverproperty().
select @.@.version will give the build version. SQLSecurity WebSite has a SQL
Server version database -
http://www.sqlsecurity.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=37
--
Carlos Eduardo Selonke de Souza
http://carlos.geekbunker.org
"Allen Smith" wrote:
> How to findout the edition of SQL Server? like standard, enterprise...
> select @.@.version gives that information?
> I am using SQL 2K.
> Thanks,
> Smith
>
>|||YOu are absoletely rigth.
Select @.@.Version
--
HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.
--
http://www.sqlserver2005.de
--
"Allen Smith" <ASmith_Forest@.hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:OXp78GGbFHA.348@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> How to findout the edition of SQL Server? like standard, enterprise...
> select @.@.version gives that information?
> I am using SQL 2K.
> Thanks,
> Smith
>
>|||Allen Smith wrote:
> How to findout the edition of SQL Server? like standard, enterprise...
> select @.@.version gives that information?
Though SELECT @.@.VERSION gives a long string that contains the edition
info too, you will have to copy it and paste it into the editor area to
really see that long string!
Instead, the SELECT SERVERPROPERTY('Edition') gives you just what you
wanted!|||Sarah wrote:
> Allen Smith wrote:
>> How to findout the edition of SQL Server? like standard,
>> enterprise... select @.@.version gives that information?
> Though SELECT @.@.VERSION gives a long string that contains the edition
> info too, you will have to copy it and paste it into the editor area
> to really see that long string!
> Instead, the SELECT SERVERPROPERTY('Edition') gives you just what you
> wanted!
In my case it's not a problem to see the string you get with SELECT
@.@.VERSION. If you just "expand" the result column you can scroll back and
forth to see it.
Regards
Steen

VPN connection to an SQL Server and/or database

Hi All

Can we connect remotely using SQL Server Enterprise Manager from our
home PCs using a VPN connection, across the Internet, to an instance
of SQL Server(or a database on it) that resides on an ISP's Server?
Can this be done using a VPN IP connection? I believe a static IP is
required for this?

Thanks in Advance, MichaelIn article <8a68c00d.0310180406.41af69bf@.posting.google.com>,
MikeTheBike@.tpgi.com.au says...
> Hi All
> Can we connect remotely using SQL Server Enterprise Manager from our
> home PCs using a VPN connection, across the Internet, to an instance
> of SQL Server(or a database on it) that resides on an ISP's Server?
> Can this be done using a VPN IP connection? I believe a static IP is
> required for this?
> Thanks in Advance, Michael

You don't need a fixed IP to use VPN, but if the destination has a fixed
IP it makes it easier to find the next time.

If the SQL server doesn't have a fixed IP then you are asking for
trouble.

It's standard practice for workers at home to have dynamic IP's and the
office to have fixed IP's.

--
--
spamfree999@.rrohio.com
(Remove 999 to reply to me)|||Hi

There is not reason why this should not work, although if you are not
part of the domain or on a trusted domain then you will probably have
to use SQL authentication.

I don't think a static IP is absolutely necessary, but it may be
required by the firewall/router for authentication.

John

MikeTheBike@.tpgi.com.au (Michael Holberton) wrote in message news:<8a68c00d.0310180406.41af69bf@.posting.google.com>...
> Hi All
> Can we connect remotely using SQL Server Enterprise Manager from our
> home PCs using a VPN connection, across the Internet, to an instance
> of SQL Server(or a database on it) that resides on an ISP's Server?
> Can this be done using a VPN IP connection? I believe a static IP is
> required for this?
> Thanks in Advance, Michael|||Hi John,

Thanks for your response. I couldn't set up a VPN connection but I was
able to connect directly, using the IP Address, using Enterprise
Manager. I had a brainwave earlier today and discovered I could also
setup an ODBC connection using the IP Address and hence link to Tables
from Access.

Regards Michael

jrm_bell@.hotmail.com (John Bell) wrote in message news:<59c6a934.0310181029.1ffcf5ed@.posting.google.com>...
> Hi
> There is not reason why this should not work, although if you are not
> part of the domain or on a trusted domain then you will probably have
> to use SQL authentication.
> I don't think a static IP is absolutely necessary, but it may be
> required by the firewall/router for authentication.
> John|||Hi

If you are not using the VPN and have access restricted to those connecting
though the VPN then anyone can connect!!

John

"Michael Holberton" <MikeTheBike@.tpgi.com.au> wrote in message
news:8a68c00d.0310200113.2586be5d@.posting.google.c om...
> Hi John,
> Thanks for your response. I couldn't set up a VPN connection but I was
> able to connect directly, using the IP Address, using Enterprise
> Manager. I had a brainwave earlier today and discovered I could also
> setup an ODBC connection using the IP Address and hence link to Tables
> from Access.
> Regards Michael
> jrm_bell@.hotmail.com (John Bell) wrote in message
news:<59c6a934.0310181029.1ffcf5ed@.posting.google.com>...
> > Hi
> > There is not reason why this should not work, although if you are not
> > part of the domain or on a trusted domain then you will probably have
> > to use SQL authentication.
> > I don't think a static IP is absolutely necessary, but it may be
> > required by the firewall/router for authentication.
> > John

/3GB benifits

What are the benifits of settings the 3gb switch and the userva=3030 in the
boot.ini of sql server 2000? thanks.
windows 2003 enterprise
4gb ram
sql server enterpriseHi,
Read the below article for more details.
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp
Thnks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Gabe Matteson" <gmatteson@.inquery.biz.nospam> wrote in message
news:%2366kqs4TFHA.1796@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> What are the benifits of settings the 3gb switch and the userva=3030 in
the
> boot.ini of sql server 2000? thanks.
> windows 2003 enterprise
> 4gb ram
> sql server enterprise
>

/3GB and Maximum server memory

Hi,
I have a 32-bit SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition with 4GB of memory. I
activated the /3GB switch in the boot.ini, but I still can't setthe Maximum
server memory any higher than 2147483647. What should I do else? I presume I
should be able to set it until 3 gigabytes now?
Any help will be really appreciated,
Thansk a lot in advance,
Pieter
This is my boot.ini:
[boot loader]
timeout=30
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOW S
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Windo ws Server 2003, Standard"
/noexecute=optout /fastdetect /3GB
With /3GB switch alone, you should be able to see SQLServer:Buffer
Manager\Total Pages or SQLServer:Memory Manager\Total Server Memory
(KB)--both measuring the buffer pool--reach more than 2GB. But you probably
won't see the buffer pool reach 3GB. Maybe, you didn't drive the SQL instance
hard enough for it to use more than what you reported.
See
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/2007/01/11/awe-and-3gb-an-empirical-picture.aspx for an exmaple.
BTW, how did you get the 2147483647 number?
Linchi
"Pieter" wrote:

> Hi,
> I have a 32-bit SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition with 4GB of memory. I
> activated the /3GB switch in the boot.ini, but I still can't setthe Maximum
> server memory any higher than 2147483647. What should I do else? I presume I
> should be able to set it until 3 gigabytes now?
>
> Any help will be really appreciated,
>
> Thansk a lot in advance,
>
> Pieter
> This is my boot.ini:
> [boot loader]
> timeout=30
> default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOW S
> [operating systems]
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Windo ws Server 2003, Standard"
> /noexecute=optout /fastdetect /3GB
>
>
|||IIRC, that setting is in MEGABYTES, so it is far more than 4GB. Also,
you really should set the limit for this to about 2.5-3GB to keep from
starving the OS and other necessary items of RAM.
Kevin G. Boles
Indicium Resources, Inc.
SQL Server MVP
kgboles a earthlink dt net
"Pieter" <pieterNOSPAMcoucke@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:u5h1fb6mIHA.3636@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have a 32-bit SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition with 4GB of memory. I
> activated the /3GB switch in the boot.ini, but I still can't setthe
> Maximum server memory any higher than 2147483647. What should I do else? I
> presume I should be able to set it until 3 gigabytes now?
>
> Any help will be really appreciated,
>
> Thansk a lot in advance,
>
> Pieter
> This is my boot.ini:
> [boot loader]
> timeout=30
> default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOW S
> [operating systems]
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Windo ws Server 2003,
> Standard" /noexecute=optout /fastdetect /3GB
>
|||Hi,
Indeed: In the mean time (when looking at the Task Manager) SQL Server is
using allmost 3 gigabytes, which is perfect!
Regarding the 2147483647: when you right click on the Server in the SQL
Server Management Studio, choose properties, and than Memory, you see the
Maximum server memory. But I guess it has nothing to do with it :-)
"Linchi Shea" <LinchiShea@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8DEA94EC-ACD9-4C2F-8C93-FE8B24FF7F94@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> With /3GB switch alone, you should be able to see SQLServer:Buffer
> Manager\Total Pages or SQLServer:Memory Manager\Total Server Memory
> (KB)--both measuring the buffer pool--reach more than 2GB. But you
> probably
> won't see the buffer pool reach 3GB. Maybe, you didn't drive the SQL
> instance
> hard enough for it to use more than what you reported.
> See
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/2007/01/11/awe-and-3gb-an-empirical-picture.aspx
> for an exmaple.
> BTW, how did you get the 2147483647 number?
> Linchi
> "Pieter" wrote:

/3GB and Maximum server memory

Hi,
I have a 32-bit SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition with 4GB of memory. I
activated the /3GB switch in the boot.ini, but I still can't setthe Maximum
server memory any higher than 2147483647. What should I do else? I presume I
should be able to set it until 3 gigabytes now?
Any help will be really appreciated,
Thansk a lot in advance,
Pieter
This is my boot.ini:
[boot loader]
timeout=30
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Windows Server 2003, Standard"
/noexecute=optout /fastdetect /3GBWith /3GB switch alone, you should be able to see SQLServer:Buffer
Manager\Total Pages or SQLServer:Memory Manager\Total Server Memory
(KB)--both measuring the buffer pool--reach more than 2GB. But you probably
won't see the buffer pool reach 3GB. Maybe, you didn't drive the SQL instance
hard enough for it to use more than what you reported.
See
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/2007/01/11/awe-and-3gb-an-empirical-picture.aspx for an exmaple.
BTW, how did you get the 2147483647 number?
Linchi
"Pieter" wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a 32-bit SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition with 4GB of memory. I
> activated the /3GB switch in the boot.ini, but I still can't setthe Maximum
> server memory any higher than 2147483647. What should I do else? I presume I
> should be able to set it until 3 gigabytes now?
>
> Any help will be really appreciated,
>
> Thansk a lot in advance,
>
> Pieter
> This is my boot.ini:
> [boot loader]
> timeout=30
> default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS
> [operating systems]
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Windows Server 2003, Standard"
> /noexecute=optout /fastdetect /3GB
>
>|||IIRC, that setting is in MEGABYTES, so it is far more than 4GB. :) Also,
you really should set the limit for this to about 2.5-3GB to keep from
starving the OS and other necessary items of RAM.
--
Kevin G. Boles
Indicium Resources, Inc.
SQL Server MVP
kgboles a earthlink dt net
"Pieter" <pieterNOSPAMcoucke@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:u5h1fb6mIHA.3636@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have a 32-bit SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition with 4GB of memory. I
> activated the /3GB switch in the boot.ini, but I still can't setthe
> Maximum server memory any higher than 2147483647. What should I do else? I
> presume I should be able to set it until 3 gigabytes now?
>
> Any help will be really appreciated,
>
> Thansk a lot in advance,
>
> Pieter
> This is my boot.ini:
> [boot loader]
> timeout=30
> default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS
> [operating systems]
> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Windows Server 2003,
> Standard" /noexecute=optout /fastdetect /3GB
>|||Hi,
Indeed: In the mean time (when looking at the Task Manager) SQL Server is
using allmost 3 gigabytes, which is perfect!
Regarding the 2147483647: when you right click on the Server in the SQL
Server Management Studio, choose properties, and than Memory, you see the
Maximum server memory. But I guess it has nothing to do with it :-)
"Linchi Shea" <LinchiShea@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8DEA94EC-ACD9-4C2F-8C93-FE8B24FF7F94@.microsoft.com...
> With /3GB switch alone, you should be able to see SQLServer:Buffer
> Manager\Total Pages or SQLServer:Memory Manager\Total Server Memory
> (KB)--both measuring the buffer pool--reach more than 2GB. But you
> probably
> won't see the buffer pool reach 3GB. Maybe, you didn't drive the SQL
> instance
> hard enough for it to use more than what you reported.
> See
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/2007/01/11/awe-and-3gb-an-empirical-picture.aspx
> for an exmaple.
> BTW, how did you get the 2147483647 number?
> Linchi
> "Pieter" wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I have a 32-bit SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition with 4GB of memory. I
>> activated the /3GB switch in the boot.ini, but I still can't setthe
>> Maximum
>> server memory any higher than 2147483647. What should I do else? I
>> presume I
>> should be able to set it until 3 gigabytes now?
>>
>> Any help will be really appreciated,
>>
>> Thansk a lot in advance,
>>
>> Pieter
>> This is my boot.ini:
>> [boot loader]
>> timeout=30
>> default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS
>> [operating systems]
>> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Windows Server 2003,
>> Standard"
>> /noexecute=optout /fastdetect /3GB
>>

/3G question

We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition. 8G
total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
server memory both show 7G.
My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am I
missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
Thanks very much.
Brian
AWE enables SQL Server (or any properly enabled app) to see up to 64GB of
memory with the proper OS and SQL Editions. The /3GB has nothing to do with
AWE (other than you should turn it off at 12GB or higher to ensure enough
PTEs). It only allows the app to see 3GB instead of 2GB of directly
addressable memory.
http://sqljunkies.com/Tutorial/0D4FF40A-695C-4327-A41B-F9F2FE2D58F6.scuk
Memory
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp Using AWE Memory
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=321363 SQL Server 7 & 2000 memory
usage
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=274750 Memory config
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037 Large Memory Support Is
Available in Windows 2000 (AWE)
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=811891 Can not use more than 2GB of
memory
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Brian Brian" <BrianBrian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2DB937E4-6853-4EFB-B1F3-C23012F70734@.microsoft.com...
> We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition.
> 8G
> total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
> enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
> memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
> server memory both show 7G.
> My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am
> I
> missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
> implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
> Thanks very much.
> --
> Brian
|||Hi Brian
I'm not sure where you get the 6GB figure from. Without AWE, SQL Server is
limited to either 2GB or 3GB. With AWE, SQL Server can use up to 64GB,
depending on the version and edition. The /3GB switch only controls how
much memory is directly addressable. All memory above 2GB or 3GB must be
accessed through AWE memory mapping.
Direct addressing is slightly faster than going through AWE, so with the 3GB
flag you will get to more memory slightly faster. In addition, only pages
from your data files can use the memory addressed through AWE. All other
memory uses (query plan, user connections, lock memory, etc) has to use
directly addressed memory, so having 3GB enabled will give you up to 50%
more space for those other memory uses. This can be a good thing.
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.InsideSQLServer.com
http://sqlblog.com
"Brian Brian" <BrianBrian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2DB937E4-6853-4EFB-B1F3-C23012F70734@.microsoft.com...
> We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition.
> 8G
> total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
> enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
> memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
> server memory both show 7G.
> My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am
> I
> missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
> implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
> Thanks very much.
> --
> Brian

/3G question

We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition. 8G
total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
server memory both show 7G.
My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am I
missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
Thanks very much.
--
BrianAWE enables SQL Server (or any properly enabled app) to see up to 64GB of
memory with the proper OS and SQL Editions. The /3GB has nothing to do with
AWE (other than you should turn it off at 12GB or higher to ensure enough
PTEs). It only allows the app to see 3GB instead of 2GB of directly
addressable memory.
http://sqljunkies.com/Tutorial/0D4FF40A-695C-4327-A41B-F9F2FE2D58F6.scuk
Memory
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp Using AWE Memory
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=321363 SQL Server 7 & 2000 memory
usage
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=274750 Memory config
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037 Large Memory Support Is
Available in Windows 2000 (AWE)
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=811891 Can not use more than 2GB of
memory
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Brian Brian" <BrianBrian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2DB937E4-6853-4EFB-B1F3-C23012F70734@.microsoft.com...
> We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition.
> 8G
> total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
> enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
> memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
> server memory both show 7G.
> My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am
> I
> missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
> implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
> Thanks very much.
> --
> Brian|||Hi Brian
I'm not sure where you get the 6GB figure from. Without AWE, SQL Server is
limited to either 2GB or 3GB. With AWE, SQL Server can use up to 64GB,
depending on the version and edition. The /3GB switch only controls how
much memory is directly addressable. All memory above 2GB or 3GB must be
accessed through AWE memory mapping.
Direct addressing is slightly faster than going through AWE, so with the 3GB
flag you will get to more memory slightly faster. In addition, only pages
from your data files can use the memory addressed through AWE. All other
memory uses (query plan, user connections, lock memory, etc) has to use
directly addressed memory, so having 3GB enabled will give you up to 50%
more space for those other memory uses. This can be a good thing.
--
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.InsideSQLServer.com
http://sqlblog.com
"Brian Brian" <BrianBrian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2DB937E4-6853-4EFB-B1F3-C23012F70734@.microsoft.com...
> We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition.
> 8G
> total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
> enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
> memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
> server memory both show 7G.
> My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am
> I
> missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
> implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
> Thanks very much.
> --
> Brian

/3G question

We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition. 8G
total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
server memory both show 7G.
My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am I
missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
Thanks very much.
--
BrianAWE enables SQL Server (or any properly enabled app) to see up to 64GB of
memory with the proper OS and SQL Editions. The /3GB has nothing to do with
AWE (other than you should turn it off at 12GB or higher to ensure enough
PTEs). It only allows the app to see 3GB instead of 2GB of directly
addressable memory.
http://sqljunkies.com/Tutorial/0D4F...F2FE2D58F6.scuk
Memory
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/awe_memory.asp Using AWE Memory
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=321363 SQL Server 7 & 2000 memory
usage
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=274750 Memory config
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=283037 Large Memory Support Is
Available in Windows 2000 (AWE)
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=811891 Can not use more than 2GB of
memory
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Brian Brian" <BrianBrian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2DB937E4-6853-4EFB-B1F3-C23012F70734@.microsoft.com...
> We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition.
> 8G
> total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
> enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
> memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
> server memory both show 7G.
> My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am
> I
> missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
> implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
> Thanks very much.
> --
> Brian|||Hi Brian
I'm not sure where you get the 6GB figure from. Without AWE, SQL Server is
limited to either 2GB or 3GB. With AWE, SQL Server can use up to 64GB,
depending on the version and edition. The /3GB switch only controls how
much memory is directly addressable. All memory above 2GB or 3GB must be
accessed through AWE memory mapping.
Direct addressing is slightly faster than going through AWE, so with the 3GB
flag you will get to more memory slightly faster. In addition, only pages
from your data files can use the memory addressed through AWE. All other
memory uses (query plan, user connections, lock memory, etc) has to use
directly addressed memory, so having 3GB enabled will give you up to 50%
more space for those other memory uses. This can be a good thing.
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.InsideSQLServer.com
http://sqlblog.com
"Brian Brian" <BrianBrian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2DB937E4-6853-4EFB-B1F3-C23012F70734@.microsoft.com...
> We have some boxes with Sql 2000 sp4 on windows 2003 enterprise edition.
> 8G
> total physical memory, boot.ini options with /PAE but without /3G. SQL AWE
> enabled, and max server memeory configured to be 7G. From Task manager,
> memory utilization is 7.2G. From perf mon, sql target mem is 7G and total
> server memory both show 7G.
> My question is, without /3G, how could SQL use more than 6G of memory? Am
> I
> missing something here? and most importantly, is there any performance
> implications configuring SQL to use 7G without /3G boot option?
> Thanks very much.
> --
> Brian

.net 1.1 and SQL Server 2005

Hi,

I run .net 1.1, VS2003 with SQL Server Enterprise Manager v 8.0 on my home XP Pro machine.

I have recently purchased some hosting with SQL Server 2005 capabilities. I was in a real rush but I should have checked I suppose.

I would love to be able to use my Enterprise Manager but obviously that wont work as it isnt compatible with 2005. It would be preferable not to have to use the web based admin and I have been told I have to install Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio Express, which requires .net 2.0 to be installed. It seems a bit of a mess really.

Can anyone enlighten me as to what options I have?

Thanks,

Pete

You're already looking at the best option, but incorrectly assuming it's a mess. It isn't. The two framework versions are independent and play fine together, and just doing the default installs should give you wahat you need in not much more time than it takes to download the files.

Jeff

|||

ah OK Jeff thanks,

I shall give it a go!

Pete

|||

Can anyone tell me why 2003 isn't compatible with 2005?

Not a gripe, just curious...

|||

2003 what and 2005 what?

Jeff

|||

Oops,

Well, the whole .net 2 / SQL Server 2005 thing.

Why cant I log in to 2005 server using my Enterprise manager 8.0 ... :)

.MDF and .LDF files that are Read Only

I have a pair of .MDF and .LDF files that I attached to my SQL 2000 server
from the Enterprise Manager. But when the Attach Process was complete, the
icon for that new database was grayed out and it has a (Read-Only) next to
it. After I gave myself every single permission on the SQL server, the
system still won't let me change the configuration properties.
What do I do next?
A couple of guesses here. Was the db in a non-recovered state when you
detached it or was it even properly detached? Are the files them selves set
to Read Only or is the Archive bit set?
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"racky" <racky@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8E7FB560-5343-40DD-BEAA-D93C2EB1F265@.microsoft.com...
>I have a pair of .MDF and .LDF files that I attached to my SQL 2000 server
> from the Enterprise Manager. But when the Attach Process was complete,
> the
> icon for that new database was grayed out and it has a (Read-Only) next to
> it. After I gave myself every single permission on the SQL server, the
> system still won't let me change the configuration properties.
> What do I do next?
|||Try the following command:
ALTER DATABASE databasename SET READ_WRITE
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:OG9213wsEHA.2556@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> A couple of guesses here. Was the db in a non-recovered state when you
> detached it or was it even properly detached? Are the files them selves
set[vbcol=seagreen]
> to Read Only or is the Archive bit set?
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "racky" <racky@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:8E7FB560-5343-40DD-BEAA-D93C2EB1F265@.microsoft.com...
server[vbcol=seagreen]
to
>
|||I hope he already tried that but your right<g>.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Derrick Leggett" <derrickleggett@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ecGC278sEHA.3460@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Try the following command:
> ALTER DATABASE databasename SET READ_WRITE
>
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:OG9213wsEHA.2556@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> set
> server
> to
>

.ldf log file

Hi everybody, I have a 10.2Gb .ldf file that is giving me hard disk space problems. We already empty the file with the Enterprise Manager, but the file
still weigths the same...
Is there any procedure shrink this file??
thanks in advanceHi everybody, I have a 10.2Gb .ldf file that is giving me hard disk space problems. We already empty the file with the Enterprise Manager, but the file
still weigths the same...
Is there any procedure shrink this file??
thanks in advance

go to the database in question, type in CHECKPOINT. Wait a little while, then run a shrinkdb. If you are not going to be doing log backups, you need to set the recovery mode to Simple so you don't keep having trouble with this though. After you set it to simple, you can run a shrinkdb and you'll be fine.|||thanks,!
that worked pretty good...
regards,

.bak file is incorrectly formed error

I create a backup file in Enterprise Manager on SQL Server 2000. When I try
to restore this file using SQL Server 2005 Express on another machine, I get
the error "The media family on [my .bak file] is incorrectly formed. SQL
Server cannot process this media family. RESTORE HEADER is terminating
abnormally. (Error 3241)."
This same process has worked successfully several times, the last time in
September 2007. A backup file created in December 2006 will restore. What
has changed to cause this error now and how can it be fixed?
Thanking you in anticipation.I'd re-create the backup file, this should work. And, to be certain that the right steps are taken,
I'd do both the backup and the restore using TSQL commands instead of the GUI (BACKUP DTABASE and
RESTORE DATABASE).
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Roger Withnell" <RogerWithnell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:481F37E4-F944-4F1C-A738-0075F7E2BD05@.microsoft.com...
>I create a backup file in Enterprise Manager on SQL Server 2000. When I try
> to restore this file using SQL Server 2005 Express on another machine, I get
> the error "The media family on [my .bak file] is incorrectly formed. SQL
> Server cannot process this media family. RESTORE HEADER is terminating
> abnormally. (Error 3241)."
> This same process has worked successfully several times, the last time in
> September 2007. A backup file created in December 2006 will restore. What
> has changed to cause this error now and how can it be fixed?
> Thanking you in anticipation.|||Thanks for this, but it didn't fix the problem.
Process is:
1 Use DTS to make a copy of operational database into laptop1 (this has SQL
server 2000). (Use of BACKUP DATABASE is prohibited on the operational
server, which is in a shared environment).
2 Make a backup with TSQL in laptop1 (I can restore from this backup in
laptop1 successfully).
3 Restore with this backup on laptop2 (running SQL Server 2005) using TSQL
gives the same error.
TSQL used is simply BACKUP/RESTORE DATABASE dbname TO/FROM DISK ='C:\...\file.bak
This process has worked successfully in the past. Last accomplished in
September 2007.
Thanking you in anticipation.
Roger
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> I'd re-create the backup file, this should work. And, to be certain that the right steps are taken,
> I'd do both the backup and the restore using TSQL commands instead of the GUI (BACKUP DTABASE and
> RESTORE DATABASE).
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "Roger Withnell" <RogerWithnell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:481F37E4-F944-4F1C-A738-0075F7E2BD05@.microsoft.com...
> >I create a backup file in Enterprise Manager on SQL Server 2000. When I try
> > to restore this file using SQL Server 2005 Express on another machine, I get
> > the error "The media family on [my .bak file] is incorrectly formed. SQL
> > Server cannot process this media family. RESTORE HEADER is terminating
> > abnormally. (Error 3241)."
> >
> > This same process has worked successfully several times, the last time in
> > September 2007. A backup file created in December 2006 will restore. What
> > has changed to cause this error now and how can it be fixed?
> >
> > Thanking you in anticipation.
>|||I see. So you have a 2000 backup, which restores successfully on 2000. But the same backup file
generates below error if you try to restore on 2005:
"The media family on [my .bak file] is incorrectly formed. SQL Server cannot process this media
family. RESTORE HEADER is terminating abnormally. (Error 3241)."
I would either assume that you don't really restore from the same file, or that some file copy
operation from laptop 1 to laptop 2 was unsuccessful. If you are 100% certain that it really is the
same file, then I'd open a case with MS Support.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Roger Withnell" <RogerWithnell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F9BB51AA-2EE6-4C2E-98FB-62A3423BB0A4@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks for this, but it didn't fix the problem.
> Process is:
> 1 Use DTS to make a copy of operational database into laptop1 (this has SQL
> server 2000). (Use of BACKUP DATABASE is prohibited on the operational
> server, which is in a shared environment).
> 2 Make a backup with TSQL in laptop1 (I can restore from this backup in
> laptop1 successfully).
> 3 Restore with this backup on laptop2 (running SQL Server 2005) using TSQL
> gives the same error.
> TSQL used is simply BACKUP/RESTORE DATABASE dbname TO/FROM DISK => 'C:\...\file.bak
> This process has worked successfully in the past. Last accomplished in
> September 2007.
> Thanking you in anticipation.
> Roger
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>> I'd re-create the backup file, this should work. And, to be certain that the right steps are
>> taken,
>> I'd do both the backup and the restore using TSQL commands instead of the GUI (BACKUP DTABASE and
>> RESTORE DATABASE).
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>>
>> "Roger Withnell" <RogerWithnell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:481F37E4-F944-4F1C-A738-0075F7E2BD05@.microsoft.com...
>> >I create a backup file in Enterprise Manager on SQL Server 2000. When I try
>> > to restore this file using SQL Server 2005 Express on another machine, I get
>> > the error "The media family on [my .bak file] is incorrectly formed. SQL
>> > Server cannot process this media family. RESTORE HEADER is terminating
>> > abnormally. (Error 3241)."
>> >
>> > This same process has worked successfully several times, the last time in
>> > September 2007. A backup file created in December 2006 will restore. What
>> > has changed to cause this error now and how can it be fixed?
>> >
>> > Thanking you in anticipation.|||"Roger Withnell" <RogerWithnell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F9BB51AA-2EE6-4C2E-98FB-62A3423BB0A4@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks for this, but it didn't fix the problem.
> Process is:
> 1 Use DTS to make a copy of operational database into laptop1 (this has
> SQL
> server 2000). (Use of BACKUP DATABASE is prohibited on the operational
> server, which is in a shared environment).
I'm curious why BACKUP DATABASE is prohibited.
In my experience DTS never quite got the "copy db" process down well.
> 2 Make a backup with TSQL in laptop1 (I can restore from this backup in
> laptop1 successfully).
> 3 Restore with this backup on laptop2 (running SQL Server 2005) using
> TSQL
> gives the same error.
Hmm, obvious questions, like "32 bit vs 64 bit?" or different language?
And compression on the 2nd laptop?
> TSQL used is simply BACKUP/RESTORE DATABASE dbname TO/FROM DISK => 'C:\...\file.bak
> This process has worked successfully in the past. Last accomplished in
> September 2007.
> Thanking you in anticipation.
> Roger
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>> I'd re-create the backup file, this should work. And, to be certain that
>> the right steps are taken,
>> I'd do both the backup and the restore using TSQL commands instead of the
>> GUI (BACKUP DTABASE and
>> RESTORE DATABASE).
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>>
>> "Roger Withnell" <RogerWithnell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> message
>> news:481F37E4-F944-4F1C-A738-0075F7E2BD05@.microsoft.com...
>> >I create a backup file in Enterprise Manager on SQL Server 2000. When I
>> >try
>> > to restore this file using SQL Server 2005 Express on another machine,
>> > I get
>> > the error "The media family on [my .bak file] is incorrectly formed.
>> > SQL
>> > Server cannot process this media family. RESTORE HEADER is terminating
>> > abnormally. (Error 3241)."
>> >
>> > This same process has worked successfully several times, the last time
>> > in
>> > September 2007. A backup file created in December 2006 will restore.
>> > What
>> > has changed to cause this error now and how can it be fixed?
>> >
>> > Thanking you in anticipation.
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html

.bak file is incorrectly formed error

I create a backup file in Enterprise Manager on SQL Server 2000. When I try
to restore this file using SQL Server 2005 Express on another machine, I get
the error "The media family on [my .bak file] is incorrectly formed. SQL
Server cannot process this media family. RESTORE HEADER is terminating
abnormally. (Error 3241)."
This same process has worked successfully several times, the last time in
September 2007. A backup file created in December 2006 will restore. What
has changed to cause this error now and how can it be fixed?
Thanking you in anticipation.
Thanks for this, but it didn't fix the problem.
Process is:
1 Use DTS to make a copy of operational database into laptop1 (this has SQL
server 2000). (Use of BACKUP DATABASE is prohibited on the operational
server, which is in a shared environment).
2 Make a backup with TSQL in laptop1 (I can restore from this backup in
laptop1 successfully).
3 Restore with this backup on laptop2 (running SQL Server 2005) using TSQL
gives the same error.
TSQL used is simply BACKUP/RESTORE DATABASE dbname TO/FROM DISK =
'C:\...\file.bak
This process has worked successfully in the past. Last accomplished in
September 2007.
Thanking you in anticipation.
Roger
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:

> I'd re-create the backup file, this should work. And, to be certain that the right steps are taken,
> I'd do both the backup and the restore using TSQL commands instead of the GUI (BACKUP DTABASE and
> RESTORE DATABASE).
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "Roger Withnell" <RogerWithnell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:481F37E4-F944-4F1C-A738-0075F7E2BD05@.microsoft.com...
>
|||"Roger Withnell" <RogerWithnell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F9BB51AA-2EE6-4C2E-98FB-62A3423BB0A4@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks for this, but it didn't fix the problem.
> Process is:
> 1 Use DTS to make a copy of operational database into laptop1 (this has
> SQL
> server 2000). (Use of BACKUP DATABASE is prohibited on the operational
> server, which is in a shared environment).
I'm curious why BACKUP DATABASE is prohibited.
In my experience DTS never quite got the "copy db" process down well.

> 2 Make a backup with TSQL in laptop1 (I can restore from this backup in
> laptop1 successfully).
> 3 Restore with this backup on laptop2 (running SQL Server 2005) using
> TSQL
> gives the same error.
Hmm, obvious questions, like "32 bit vs 64 bit?" or different language?
And compression on the 2nd laptop?
[vbcol=seagreen]
> TSQL used is simply BACKUP/RESTORE DATABASE dbname TO/FROM DISK =
> 'C:\...\file.bak
> This process has worked successfully in the past. Last accomplished in
> September 2007.
> Thanking you in anticipation.
> Roger
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html

,Re: upgrade sql server personal edition to enterprise edition

hello all,

i need to upgrade my sql server from personal edition to enterprise edition.

how I can proceed?

there is a documentation to which I can refer?

thanks

Ivano

Hi, did you have a look in BOL (Books online) ?

You can upgrade from Std to Enterprise, ther eis no upgrade path from personal to enterprise. If you have to possiblity to upgrade to std first, you can do the upgrading stated below.

If not, do the steps an MS posted in the groups here : http://groups.google.de/group/microsoft.public.sqlserver.server/browse_frm/thread/7e28aaa330db719c
to upgrade to another edition.

How to perform an edition upgrade within SQL Server 2000 (Setup)
To upgrade a SQL Server 2000 installation to a different edition of SQL
Server 2000

1.. Insert the Microsoft? SQL Server 2000T compact disc for the edition
you want to install into your CD-ROM drive. If the compact disc does not
autorun, double-click Autorun.exe in the root directory of the compact disc.

2.. Select SQL Server 2000 Components, select Install Database Server, and
then setup prepares the SQL Server Installation Wizard. At the Welcome
screen, click Next.

3.. In Computer Name dialog box, select Local Computer or Remote computer.

4.. In the Installation Selection dialog box, click Upgrade, Remove, or
Add Components to an existing instance of SQL Server, and then click Next.

5.. In the Instance Name dialog box, click Next.

6.. In the Existing Installation dialog box, click Upgrade your existing
installation, and then click Next.

7.. If Setup detects that you are doing an edition upgrade, the Upgrade
dialog box appears. Click Yes, Upgrade my <text specific to the upgrade> to
upgrade the feature set of your current installation, and click Next.

8.. After the upgrade is completed, you are prompted as to whether you
want to install additional components. If you click Yes, the Select
Components dialog box appears. Accept the defaults or select the additional
components you want to install, and then click Next.
You can select an item in the Components list, and then select items from
the related Sub-Components list. Click to select items you want to install;
clear the check box of the items you do not want to install.

9.. When you are finished specifying options, in the Start Copying Files
dialog box, click Next.

10.. In the Setup Complete dialog box, click Yes, I want to restart my
computer now, and then click Finish to complete the edition upgrade.

HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de

*.SQL File - Seemingly Easy

The Set-Up:
Remote Shared SQL Server
Local Software - SQL Server Enterprise Manager
.SQL File
The Problem:
I am trying to set up a forum on my website which tells me to use the
supplied .SQL file to set up the tables. How do I go about doing that?
Thanks in advance for any feedback."Ryan" <Ryan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D3D230D4-6344-409A-9926-54BC64CBE973@.microsoft.com...
> The Set-Up:
> Remote Shared SQL Server
> Local Software - SQL Server Enterprise Manager
> .SQL File
> The Problem:
> I am trying to set up a forum on my website which tells me to use the
> supplied .SQL file to set up the tables. How do I go about doing that?
> Thanks in advance for any feedback.
Open up Query Analyzer (from EM you can highlight the correct database and
select Tools > Query Analyzer from the main menu). Then in QA, click File >
Open ... and load your .SQL file. Then select Query > Execute (or press
F5).|||Heck ya, thanks lots!

*.SQL File - Seemingly Easy

The Set-Up:
Remote Shared SQL Server
Local Software - SQL Server Enterprise Manager
.SQL File
The Problem:
I am trying to set up a forum on my website which tells me to use the
supplied .SQL file to set up the tables. How do I go about doing that?
Thanks in advance for any feedback."Ryan" <Ryan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D3D230D4-6344-409A-9926-54BC64CBE973@.microsoft.com...
> The Set-Up:
> Remote Shared SQL Server
> Local Software - SQL Server Enterprise Manager
> .SQL File
> The Problem:
> I am trying to set up a forum on my website which tells me to use the
> supplied .SQL file to set up the tables. How do I go about doing that?
> Thanks in advance for any feedback.
Open up Query Analyzer (from EM you can highlight the correct database and
select Tools > Query Analyzer from the main menu). Then in QA, click File >
Open ... and load your .SQL file. Then select Query > Execute (or press
F5).|||Heck ya, thanks lots!

**Current Activity(Enterprise Manager)**

Hi
I'm using SQL server 2000 and when I select the current activity in
enterprise manager and want to sort the CPU column ascending, it seels by
clicking on the title of this column it will be sort alphabetically not in
numeric mode,why?
and the second problem is,by looking through this page how can I
understand which users or application are using the resources on server
more? and is there anyway to find if an object locked or busy for a long
time with a special program on specific station?
Fore example: I've a specific procedure that most of time work probably(2
sec) but sometimes it takes a long time to fetch the result (5 min)!! and
by renaming it ,it works well again,can this page help me to find which
station is running this query during that special "5 minute" time?
Any help would be thankfulThe CPU data is probably converted to a character behind the scenes. Take a
look at sp_who2 and sp_lock sp's to get a better picture of what is
happening. These are more flexible than EM and you can look at the code for
them in the master db to see what they are doing. You may also want to run
a trace to capture more information about who is doing what and how long
each takes. Lookup trace or profiler in BooksOnLine.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
<R> wrote in message news:opssw5yamdmw7tkz@.system109.parskhazar.net...
> Hi
> I'm using SQL server 2000 and when I select the current activity in
> enterprise manager and want to sort the CPU column ascending, it seels by
> clicking on the title of this column it will be sort alphabetically not in
> numeric mode,why?
> and the second problem is,by looking through this page how can I
> understand which users or application are using the resources on server
> more? and is there anyway to find if an object locked or busy for a long
> time with a special program on specific station?
> Fore example: I've a specific procedure that most of time work probably(2
> sec) but sometimes it takes a long time to fetch the result (5 min)!! and
> by renaming it ,it works well again,can this page help me to find which
> station is running this query during that special "5 minute" time?
> Any help would be thankful|||Thanks, I tried to save activities by creating a trace saving result to
table.
Although I filtered it just to save some activities for some logins ,it
needs a lot space to store all details in a table for some days!!!
I want to find a way to record most activities in details to refer to them
later to find who and when sth happened.
can you direct me more?
Thanks a lot|||You should never send a trace directly to a table, especially if it is long
term. You should send the results directly to a file on a local disk drive.
You can then load them into a table later with fn_trace_gettable. Don't use
profiler for this but rather sp_trace_create and it's associated sp's. See
here for more details:
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/server_side_tracing_in_sql_server.htm
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
<R> wrote in message news:opss0idcllmw7tkz@.system109.parskhazar.net...
> Thanks, I tried to save activities by creating a trace saving result to
> table.
> Although I filtered it just to save some activities for some logins ,it
> needs a lot space to store all details in a table for some days!!!
> I want to find a way to record most activities in details to refer to them
> later to find who and when sth happened.
> can you direct me more?
> Thanks a lot

**Current Activity(Enterprise Manager)**

Hi
I'm using SQL server 2000 and when I select the current activity in
enterprise manager and want to sort the CPU column ascending, it seels by
clicking on the title of this column it will be sort alphabetically not in
numeric mode,why?
and the second problem is,by looking through this page how can I
understand which users or application are using the resources on server
more? and is there anyway to find if an object locked or busy for a long
time with a special program on specific station?
Fore example: I've a specific procedure that most of time work probably(2
sec) but sometimes it takes a long time to fetch the result (5 min)!! and
by renaming it ,it works well again,can this page help me to find which
station is running this query during that special "5 minute" time?
Any help would be thankfulThe CPU data is probably converted to a character behind the scenes. Take a
look at sp_who2 and sp_lock sp's to get a better picture of what is
happening. These are more flexible than EM and you can look at the code for
them in the master db to see what they are doing. You may also want to run
a trace to capture more information about who is doing what and how long
each takes. Lookup trace or profiler in BooksOnLine.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
<R> wrote in message news:opssw5yamdmw7tkz@.system109.parskhazar.net...
> Hi
> I'm using SQL server 2000 and when I select the current activity in
> enterprise manager and want to sort the CPU column ascending, it seels by
> clicking on the title of this column it will be sort alphabetically not in
> numeric mode,why?
> and the second problem is,by looking through this page how can I
> understand which users or application are using the resources on server
> more? and is there anyway to find if an object locked or busy for a long
> time with a special program on specific station?
> Fore example: I've a specific procedure that most of time work probably(2
> sec) but sometimes it takes a long time to fetch the result (5 min)!! and
> by renaming it ,it works well again,can this page help me to find which
> station is running this query during that special "5 minute" time?
> Any help would be thankful|||Thanks, I tried to save activities by creating a trace saving result to
table.
Although I filtered it just to save some activities for some logins ,it
needs a lot space to store all details in a table for some days!!!
I want to find a way to record most activities in details to refer to them
later to find who and when sth happened.
can you direct me more?
Thanks a lot|||You should never send a trace directly to a table, especially if it is long
term. You should send the results directly to a file on a local disk drive.
You can then load them into a table later with fn_trace_gettable. Don't use
profiler for this but rather sp_trace_create and it's associated sp's. See
here for more details:
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/server_sid..._sql_server.htm
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
<R> wrote in message news:opss0idcllmw7tkz@.system109.parskhazar.net...
> Thanks, I tried to save activities by creating a trace saving result to
> table.
> Although I filtered it just to save some activities for some logins ,it
> needs a lot space to store all details in a table for some days!!!
> I want to find a way to record most activities in details to refer to them
> later to find who and when sth happened.
> can you direct me more?
> Thanks a lot