/3GB

I've been doing some research on whether or not to use the /3GB switch, and
/PAE, in boot.ini but seem that I find contradicting information.
This article by Brian Moran seems to indicate I should use it, and I have
the utmost respect for Brian.
[url]http://www.sqlmag.com/Article/ArticleID/45156/Using_SQL_Server_with_Large_Amounts_of_Memory.html [/url]
But I seem to see other articles by MS that either caution against it, or
say it should only be used with certain flavors or OS. And I can't even
find my OS in any of the articles.
I'm using Windows 2003 R2, SQL 2k sp4, on a Proliant 580 with 4GB of ram.
My box is a dedicated SQL Server. I am, temporarily, running IIS and
Reporting Services on the same box. Those will be offloaded to another
server shortly.
Can anyone tell me conclusively whether or not I should use the /3GB switch?
Thanks, Andre
Use the /3GB, but don't use the /PAE. Reevaluate after you move IIS and SSRS
off of the box.
Since SQL 2000 can't access memory over 3GB without /PAE, and since /PEA
requires a large memory block (up to 1GB) just to manage memory, in your
scenario, you may actually be causing a reduction to the memory available to
SQL Server.
Configuration -Enabling AWE Memory for SQL Server
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673.aspx
Configuration -Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179301.aspx
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Andre" <no@.spam.com> wrote in message
news:%23DJkotWFHHA.1252@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> I've been doing some research on whether or not to use the /3GB switch,
> and /PAE, in boot.ini but seem that I find contradicting information.
> This article by Brian Moran seems to indicate I should use it, and I have
> the utmost respect for Brian.
> [url]http://www.sqlmag.com/Article/ArticleID/45156/Using_SQL_Server_with_Large_Amounts_of_Memory.html [/url]
> But I seem to see other articles by MS that either caution against it, or
> say it should only be used with certain flavors or OS. And I can't even
> find my OS in any of the articles.
> I'm using Windows 2003 R2, SQL 2k sp4, on a Proliant 580 with 4GB of ram.
> My box is a dedicated SQL Server. I am, temporarily, running IIS and
> Reporting Services on the same box. Those will be offloaded to another
> server shortly.
> Can anyone tell me conclusively whether or not I should use the /3GB
> switch?
> Thanks, Andre
>

.NET CLR stored procedure capabilities

I've want to create a typed DataSet and use it inside a .NET CLR stored
procedure. But the option to add a typed DataSet to the project
doesn't exist. Am I missing something? Or are .NET CLR stored
procedures not all they're hyped up to be?
Todd
toddpiltingsrud@.altoconsulting.com wrote in
news:1132776964.626979.93470@.g47g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com:

> I've want to create a typed DataSet and use it inside a .NET CLR
> stored procedure. But the option to add a typed DataSet to the
> project doesn't exist. Am I missing something? Or are .NET CLR
> stored procedures not all they're hyped up to be?
Course you can create a typed DataSet and use it in SQLCLR. Younhave to
create it manually though instead of drag 'n drop.
Just out of curiousity; why do you want a typed dataset inside SQL
Server?
Niels
**************************************************
* Niels Berglund
* http://staff.develop.com/nielsb
* nielsb@.no-spam.develop.com
* "A First Look at SQL Server 2005 for Developers"
* http://www.awprofessional.com/title/0321180593
**************************************************

.NET 2.0/SQL 2000 Named Pipes Provider, error: 40

I have an app that I've written in .NET 2.0 using SQL 2000 as the back end. It works fine in development but when I move it out to our QA server I get the following error.

An error has occurred while establishing a connection to the server. When connecting to SQL Server 2005, this failure may be caused by the fact that under the default settings SQL Server does not allow remote connections. (provider: Named Pipes Provider, error: 40 - Could not open a connection to SQL Server)

One of the odd things I notice is that the error message references SQL Server 2005 when that's not installed on our QA box, only SQL 2000 is on it.

I've checked the server and TCP/IP and Named Pipes are enabled.

Here is my connection string

<add name="myConnectionString" connectionString="Data Source=(local);Integrated Security=false;Initial Catalog=TestDatabase;User Id=myUsername;Password=myPassword;" providerName="System.Data.SqlClient"/>

There's at least one other .NET 2.0 application running on this server that accesses the database so I know that it can work! However, have access to the source code for that application so it's not any help with my troubleshooting.

Any thoughts or ideas?

Is the SqlServer 2000 service running on the same machine? You connection configuration is pointed to a (local) copy of SqlServer. Also, make sure that the myUsername exists on the QA server.

|||

Yes. Sql 2000 is on the same box.

And I double checked that myUsername exists in that QA SQL server and has rights to my database.

Thanks though.

I'll post back when I figure it out.

If anyone else wants to weigh in I'm all ears.

|||

Hi,

I had the same problem.

Check this Registry entry: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\MSSQLServer\Client\ConnectTo.

Are there any entries that reference the SQL server you want to use (DBMPNTW = named pipes)? If so remove them.

Regards,

Thierry

*= Notation in 2005

Hi,
I've heard a rumour that the *= notation is no longer supported in SQL
Server 2005. I've searched through the knowledge base but can't find any
articles on it. If anybody who currently has 2005 could confirm whether it
is or isn't supported that would be great.
Thanks,
David.
Hi David,
*= and =* are NON-ANSI standard LEFT and RIGHT OUTER joins. THis is
supported only in the compatibility level 80 (SQL 2000) and lower versions.
If the database compatibility is 90 (SQL 2005) then you may need to right
the query using LEFT OUTER JOIN or RIGHT OUTER JOIN.
Thanks
Hari
"David" <David@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6E05EAFB-595B-4E64-9267-563A825B0644@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I've heard a rumour that the *= notation is no longer supported in SQL
> Server 2005. I've searched through the knowledge base but can't find any
> articles on it. If anybody who currently has 2005 could confirm whether
> it
> is or isn't supported that would be great.
> Thanks,
> David.
>

**** grouping

hey peeps

well ive been stuck on this for a long time ... if anyone can help, i would appreciate it very much ....

in the database where im getting the data from, the data is displayed in the following way:

PART_ID PART_NAME PROD_TYPE DESC PASS_TYPE PASS_CNT
-----------------------------
4 BERT 5 CASH 0 15
6 BORO 5 CASH 0 1
6 BORO 5 CASH 3 4
etc
etc

here's my problem. when i try and display this in crystal, i group it by part_id and by prod_type but i still get two rows for CASH ...
example:

PRODUCT OPERATOR ADULT YOUTH
---------------------------
5 (CASH) 6 (PART_ID) 1 (PASS_COUNT)
5 (CASH) 6 (PART_ID) 4 PASS_COUNT

So what im trying to do is basically display it in one row....
NOW, ideally i want the above to be like this:

PRODUCT OPERATOR ADULT YOUTH
--------------------------
5 (CASH) 6 (PART_ID) 1 (PASS_COUNT) 4 PASS_COUNT

can anyone help ....
thanksK.
Lemme try this.

Firstly, if PASS_COUNT is a sumable value, it'll b a somewhat easier solution.
Make a formula field on your report that sums the pass_cnt field.
then place that field into the place of the other field.

Otherwise you can just make a sumed result set in your sql.
like

select ....,
sum(pass_cnt)
from <table>
where <conditions>
group by part_id,
part_name,
prod_type,
desc

but remember to leave out pass_type and pass_cnt. That is to elimenate the multiple rows.

Hope this helps somewhat.