collation issue

Hi
I have a problem with collation orders as follows.
The server collation order is set to Latin1_General_CI_AS.
How ever a few databases, a small number, have the collation order of
SQL_Latin1_General_CI_AS.
Now, when some operations are requested from the interograting App,
involving tempDB temp via sprocs and functions, I get a collation error, no
surprise there.
I have tried DTS, opps not the right tool, and scripts. I have nearly got
there with the scripts, but not quite.
So, to the question. What is the best way to amend the collation order of
the 'rogue' databases. And are there any *foolproof* solns that would do
this without the need for Extensive regression testing?
TIA
ChrisIn your select try something along the lines of
Select ...
From ..
Inner join tab1.Col1 = Tab1.Col2 Collate Database_Default
Can't remember the exact syntax but you can tell your query to use the
coillation of of the current database.
"Chris" <.@.> wrote in message
news:DNv7f.3599$iZ4.1238@.newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
> Hi
> I have a problem with collation orders as follows.
> The server collation order is set to Latin1_General_CI_AS.
> How ever a few databases, a small number, have the collation order of
> SQL_Latin1_General_CI_AS.
> Now, when some operations are requested from the interograting App,
> involving tempDB temp via sprocs and functions, I get a collation error,
> no surprise there.
> I have tried DTS, opps not the right tool, and scripts. I have nearly got
> there with the scripts, but not quite.
> So, to the question. What is the best way to amend the collation order of
> the 'rogue' databases. And are there any *foolproof* solns that would do
> this without the need for Extensive regression testing?
> TIA
> Chris
>

collation conflict resolution

I have a number of databases with quite similar structure, but with
different COLLATION
settings. Unfortunately when the structure (including keys and constraints)
has been created
no one took care of COLLATION at all.
At the moment statements like:
--
SELECT
. . .
(case FieldA
when 1 then (select Source1 from Table1 WHERE ...)
when 2 then (select Source2 from Table2 WHERE ...)
end) as Result,
--
gives COLLATION CONFLICT because Table1 and Table2 have different collation
setting.
But for a half of number of tables it works fine.
What aa I asking about: How to change COLLATION SETTING "on fly" for
different tables.fields ?
May be someone knows any fancy tools or "script wizards" to do so?
Please don't waste this newsgroup space with offering me to insert "COLLATE
DATABASE_DEFAULT"
to each statement which causes such problem. Ok?
Thanks a lot!
GnumHi,
CREATE VIEW FROM Table2
ADD COLLATE AFTER EACH FIELDS.
> when 1 then (select Source1 from Table1 WHERE ...)
(select Source1 from View1 WHERE ...)
--
SHINICHI YONEDA MXL04371@.nifty.ne.jp
Microsoft Most Valuable Professional
MVP for SQL Server 2002-2004
"Gnum" <no-email@.mail.boo> wrote in message
news:OTaDHbgvDHA.1340@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> I have a number of databases with quite similar structure, but with
> different COLLATION
> settings. Unfortunately when the structure (including keys and
constraints)
> has been created
> no one took care of COLLATION at all.
> At the moment statements like:
> --
> SELECT
> . . .
> (case FieldA
> when 1 then (select Source1 from Table1 WHERE ...)
> when 2 then (select Source2 from Table2 WHERE ...)
> end) as Result,
> --
> gives COLLATION CONFLICT because Table1 and Table2 have different
collation
> setting.
> But for a half of number of tables it works fine.
> What aa I asking about: How to change COLLATION SETTING "on fly" for
> different tables.fields ?
> May be someone knows any fancy tools or "script wizards" to do so?
> Please don't waste this newsgroup space with offering me to insert
"COLLATE
> DATABASE_DEFAULT"
> to each statement which causes such problem. Ok?
>
> Thanks a lot!
> Gnum
>|||Thank you very much for so big
MISUNDERSTANDING!
Have you ever read the question up to the end?
I've written there "
> > Please don't waste this newsgroup space with offering me to insert
> "COLLATE
> > DATABASE_DEFAULT"
> > to each statement which causes such problem. Ok?"
I need a help, but not a collection of stupid wisdom-like erudition esseys!
Thanks!
"Shinichi Yoneda" <mxl04371@.nifty.ne.jp> wrote in message
news:OOcY6TlvDHA.2880@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> CREATE VIEW FROM Table2
> ADD COLLATE AFTER EACH FIELDS.
> > when 1 then (select Source1 from Table1 WHERE ...)
> (select Source1 from View1 WHERE ...)
> --
> SHINICHI YONEDA MXL04371@.nifty.ne.jp
> Microsoft Most Valuable Professional
> MVP for SQL Server 2002-2004
> "Gnum" <no-email@.mail.boo> wrote in message
> news:OTaDHbgvDHA.1340@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > I have a number of databases with quite similar structure, but with
> > different COLLATION
> > settings. Unfortunately when the structure (including keys and
> constraints)
> > has been created
> > no one took care of COLLATION at all.
> > At the moment statements like:
> > --
> > SELECT
> > . . .
> > (case FieldA
> > when 1 then (select Source1 from Table1 WHERE ...)
> > when 2 then (select Source2 from Table2 WHERE ...)
> > end) as Result,
> > --
> > gives COLLATION CONFLICT because Table1 and Table2 have different
> collation
> > setting.
> > But for a half of number of tables it works fine.
> >
> > What aa I asking about: How to change COLLATION SETTING "on fly" for
> > different tables.fields ?
> > May be someone knows any fancy tools or "script wizards" to do so?
> >
> > Please don't waste this newsgroup space with offering me to insert
> "COLLATE
> > DATABASE_DEFAULT"
> > to each statement which causes such problem. Ok?
> >
> >
> > Thanks a lot!
> >
> > Gnum
> >
> >
>

Collation Conflict

Hi,
I am running a query over 2 tables in 2 different databases.
I get the following error "Cannot resolve collation conflict for equal to
operation"
for example
SELECT TOP 100 [TB1].[Product] AS Q0000000 FROM ( [BD1].[dbo].[TB1] [TB1]
INNER JOIN [DB2].[dbo].[TB2] [TB2] ON [TB1].[Product]=[TB2].[ProductCode])
WHERE [TB2].[ProdGroup]=@.PG
@.PG is a string parameter.
Regards
Tim
Your TEMPDB collation differs to your database,
You either need to preform Julie option or do a rebuildm to the correct
collation but this would wipe out your users, and user databases (you can
reattached).
J
"Tim Marsden" <TM@.UK.COM> wrote in message
news:e0iKaZjQEHA.132@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I am running a query over 2 tables in 2 different databases.
> I get the following error "Cannot resolve collation conflict for equal to
> operation"
> for example
> SELECT TOP 100 [TB1].[Product] AS Q0000000 FROM ( [BD1].[dbo].[TB1] [TB1]
> INNER JOIN [DB2].[dbo].[TB2] [TB2] ON [TB1].[Product]=[TB2].[ProductCode])
> WHERE [TB2].[ProdGroup]=@.PG
> @.PG is a string parameter.
> Regards
> Tim
>
sqlsql

Collation Conflict

Hi,
I am running a query over 2 tables in 2 different databases.
I get the following error "Cannot resolve collation conflict for equal to
operation"
for example
SELECT TOP 100 [TB1].[Product] AS Q0000000 FROM ( [BD1].[dbo].[TB1] [TB1]
INNER JOIN [DB2].[dbo].[TB2] [TB2] ON [TB1].[Product]=[TB2].[ProductCode])
WHERE [TB2].[ProdGroup]=@.PG
@.PG is a string parameter.
Regards
TimModify your query so that it converts your joins to
unicode data. This will make it collation independant.
PS Do you want to know why it went wrong or are you ok
with it ?
J
>--Original Message--
>Hi,
>I am running a query over 2 tables in 2 different
databases.
>I get the following error "Cannot resolve collation
conflict for equal to
>operation"
>for example
>SELECT TOP 100 [TB1].[Product] AS Q0000000 FROM ( [BD1].
[dbo].[TB1] [TB1]
>INNER JOIN [DB2].[dbo].[TB2] [TB2] ON [TB1].[Product]=[TB2].[ProductCode])
>WHERE [TB2].[ProdGroup]=@.PG
>@.PG is a string parameter.
>Regards
>Tim
>
>.
>|||Your TEMPDB collation differs to your database,
You either need to preform Julie option or do a rebuildm to the correct
collation but this would wipe out your users, and user databases (you can
reattached).
J
"Tim Marsden" <TM@.UK.COM> wrote in message
news:e0iKaZjQEHA.132@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I am running a query over 2 tables in 2 different databases.
> I get the following error "Cannot resolve collation conflict for equal to
> operation"
> for example
> SELECT TOP 100 [TB1].[Product] AS Q0000000 FROM ( [BD1].[dbo].[TB1] [TB1]
> INNER JOIN [DB2].[dbo].[TB2] [TB2] ON [TB1].[Product]=[TB2].[ProductCode])
> WHERE [TB2].[ProdGroup]=@.PG
> @.PG is a string parameter.
> Regards
> Tim
>|||Many Thanks
Please could you explain why it when wrong, and give me an example of
unicodes joins.
Regards
Tim
"Julie" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:11c6101c4423b$568580b0$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> Modify your query so that it converts your joins to
> unicode data. This will make it collation independant.
> PS Do you want to know why it went wrong or are you ok
> with it ?
> J
>
> >--Original Message--
> >Hi,
> >
> >I am running a query over 2 tables in 2 different
> databases.
> >I get the following error "Cannot resolve collation
> conflict for equal to
> >operation"
> >
> >for example
> >
> >SELECT TOP 100 [TB1].[Product] AS Q0000000 FROM ( [BD1].
> [dbo].[TB1] [TB1]
> >INNER JOIN [DB2].[dbo].[TB2] [TB2] ON [TB1].[Product]=> [TB2].[ProductCode])
> >WHERE [TB2].[ProdGroup]=@.PG
> >
> >@.PG is a string parameter.
> >
> >Regards
> >Tim
> >
> >
> >.
> >|||Your [TB1].[Product] and [TB2].[ProductCode] columns have different
collations, so the result of the join expression is ambiguous. Take a
look at the BOL topic "Collation Precedence" -- it provides a good
explanation of the problem. You can avoid this fairly trivially by
providing a COLLATE clause that removes the ambiguity like this:
SELECT TOP 100 [TB1].[Product] AS Q0000000
FROM ( [BD1].[dbo].[TB1] [TB1]
INNER JOIN [DB2].[dbo].[TB2] [TB2]
ON [TB1].[Product]=[TB2].[ProductCode]) COLLATE database_default
WHERE [TB2].[ProdGroup]=@.PG
but this will make it impossible for the QP to use an index seek on the
right side of the join. If this is a big problem it may be better to
change the collation of one of the two columns (using ALTER TABLE ALTER
COLUMN) so that the collations match. Note that to run ALTER COLUMN on a
column's collation you must first drop any indexes, stats, or constraints
that reference the column.
Bart
--
Bart Duncan
Microsoft SQL Server Support
Please reply to the newsgroup only - thanks.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
From: "Tim Marsden" <TM@.UK.COM>
References: <e0iKaZjQEHA.132@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>
<11c6101c4423b$568580b0$a301280a@.phx.gbl>
Subject: Re: Collation Conflict
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 14:49:31 +0100
Lines: 46
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
Message-ID: <OC3oY8lQEHA.3988@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
NNTP-Posting-Host: host213-122-182-242.in-addr.btopenworld.com
213.122.182.242
Path:
cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTFEED01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!tk2msftngp
13.phx.gbl
Xref: cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.server:342917
X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
Many Thanks
Please could you explain why it when wrong, and give me an example of
unicodes joins.
Regards
Tim
"Julie" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:11c6101c4423b$568580b0$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> Modify your query so that it converts your joins to
> unicode data. This will make it collation independant.
> PS Do you want to know why it went wrong or are you ok
> with it ?
> J
>
> >--Original Message--
> >Hi,
> >
> >I am running a query over 2 tables in 2 different
> databases.
> >I get the following error "Cannot resolve collation
> conflict for equal to
> >operation"
> >
> >for example
> >
> >SELECT TOP 100 [TB1].[Product] AS Q0000000 FROM ( [BD1].
> [dbo].[TB1] [TB1]
> >INNER JOIN [DB2].[dbo].[TB2] [TB2] ON [TB1].[Product]=> [TB2].[ProductCode])
> >WHERE [TB2].[ProdGroup]=@.PG
> >
> >@.PG is a string parameter.
> >
> >Regards
> >Tim
> >
> >
> >.
> >

Collation Conflict

Hi,
I am running a query over 2 tables in 2 different databases.
I get the following error "Cannot resolve collation conflict for equal to
operation"
for example
SELECT TOP 100 [TB1].[Product] AS Q0000000 FROM ( [BD1].[dbo
].[TB1] [TB1]
INNER JOIN [DB2].[dbo].[TB2] [TB2] ON [TB1].[Product
]=[TB2].[ProductCode])
WHERE [TB2].[ProdGroup]=@.PG
@.PG is a string parameter.
Regards
TimYour TEMPDB collation differs to your database,
You either need to preform Julie option or do a rebuildm to the correct
collation but this would wipe out your users, and user databases (you can
reattached).
J
"Tim Marsden" <TM@.UK.COM> wrote in message
news:e0iKaZjQEHA.132@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I am running a query over 2 tables in 2 different databases.
> I get the following error "Cannot resolve collation conflict for equal to
> operation"
> for example
> SELECT TOP 100 [TB1].[Product] AS Q0000000 FROM ( [BD1].[d
bo].[TB1] [TB1]
> INNER JOIN [DB2].[dbo].[TB2] [TB2] ON [TB1].[Produ
ct]=[TB2].[ProductCode])
> WHERE [TB2].[ProdGroup]=@.PG
> @.PG is a string parameter.
> Regards
> Tim
>

Collation and views

Suppose you have your databases's collation as X but the value of collation
on the varchar fields of some of your tables as Y.
Suppose you create a view like this:
SELECT 'CostantString1', 'CostantString2', Field1, Field2 FROM
Table_A
UNIONA ALL
SELECT VarcharField1, VarcharField2, Field3, Field4 FROM
Table_B
You've got an error of incompatble collation on the first two columns of the
view. I think because on the constant string values the db assign the
collation X while the corresponding varchar fields of Table_B have
collation Y.
Is there any solution to this problem?
Thank you all
Andreayes, there is: use COLLATE clause in the select statement.
dean
"Andrea Temporin" <NOSPAM_temporin@.encopro.it> wrote in message
news:%232K2hKyGFHA.3108@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Suppose you have your databases's collation as X but the value of
collation
> on the varchar fields of some of your tables as Y.
> Suppose you create a view like this:
> SELECT 'CostantString1', 'CostantString2', Field1, Field2 FROM
> Table_A
> UNIONA ALL
> SELECT VarcharField1, VarcharField2, Field3, Field4 FROM
> Table_B
> You've got an error of incompatble collation on the first two columns of
the
> view. I think because on the constant string values the db assign the
> collation X while the corresponding varchar fields of Table_B have
> collation Y.
> Is there any solution to this problem?
> Thank you all
> Andrea
>

collation

I have a couple of databases that I must change the
collation (from Collation=Latin1_General_CI_AS,
SQLSortOrder=0 to Collation=SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS
SQLSortOrder=52) as I have to move them from one server
to another. How can I do that ? Is the rebuilding master
db the only way to transfer them to another server?
Some of the other databases residing on the same server
have the right collation order , can somebody explain how
is that possible.
Thanks for your time!
Mironever done this but you can use ALTER DATABASE to change collation of a DB.
Rebuilding master would affect other DBs as well. Look in BOL for 'Changing
Collations'
hth,
"Miro" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:320e01c3e1f6$42923b70$a001280a@.phx.gbl...
> I have a couple of databases that I must change the
> collation (from Collation=Latin1_General_CI_AS,
> SQLSortOrder=0 to Collation=SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS
> SQLSortOrder=52) as I have to move them from one server
> to another. How can I do that ? Is the rebuilding master
> db the only way to transfer them to another server?
> Some of the other databases residing on the same server
> have the right collation order , can somebody explain how
> is that possible.
> Thanks for your time!
> Miro

collation

I have a couple of databases that I must change the
collation (from Collation=Latin1_General_CI_AS,
SQLSortOrder=0 to Collation=SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS
SQLSortOrder=52) as I have to move them from one server
to another. How can I do that ? Is the rebuilding master
db the only way to transfer them to another server?
Some of the other databases residing on the same server
have the right collation order , can somebody explain how
is that possible.
Thanks for your time!
Mironever done this but you can use ALTER DATABASE to change collation of a DB.
Rebuilding master would affect other DBs as well. Look in BOL for 'Changing
Collations'
hth,
"Miro" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:320e01c3e1f6$42923b70$a001280a@.phx.gbl...

quote:

---

> I have a couple of databases that I must change the
> collation (from Collation=Latin1_General_CI_AS,
> SQLSortOrder=0 to Collation=SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS
> SQLSortOrder=52) as I have to move them from one server
> to another. How can I do that ? Is the rebuilding master
> db the only way to transfer them to another server?
> Some of the other databases residing on the same server
> have the right collation order , can somebody explain how
> is that possible.
> Thanks for your time!
> Miro

---

Clusters idea. Guidance Please.

i have been tasked to add fault tolerance to a SQL 2000 server we have that
holds the databases for a Sharepoint Server.
I am not going to get the funds to make it a SQL Cluster, and SQL 2005 is
just not going to be used ever, so that new funky disk mirroring is out.
The good news is that this Sharepoint site is almost entirely static. I am
the only person who publishes content, so the databases do not have many
changes. System performance is not an issue.
Don't ask why I am using Sharepoint like this; I inherited this beast. But i
will say that because of the massive amount of custom programming done, you
would never know you are looking at a sharepoint portal.
So here is my thought:
I have two different NIC teams in these servers.
Set up replication between two sql servers and then join them in an NLB
(Network Load Balancing) Cluster.
Am I missing something? Will this work?Aside from the fact that replication in SQL 2000 does not include DDL
statements or stored procedures or views or a lot of other things, you have
a good idea. Seriously, fault tolerance is a very good idea. Fault
tolerance on zero budget is willful stupidity on the part of management. I
suggest researching all recovery scenarios, starting with backup-restore,
moving up to log shipping, then failover clustering. Show the pros and
cons, focusing on potential data loss and estimated recovery times. Include
realistic cost estimates for each option. You can even include Database
Mirroring as an option but with SQL 2005 as a pre-requisite. Also, examine
third-party options that do something akin to DB mirroring at the file
level. Some actually work, but make them demonstrate it befoer plunking
down your money.
Your job is not to make up something for nothing, it is to present realistic
options to the business decision makers and to implement their choices. If
they choose not to listen and to demand the impossible, then it is time to
find a job where failure isn't mandatory.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Manny Borges" <MannyBorges@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9FEEB93C-D3EB-4790-9379-6BD24531C0F1@.microsoft.com...
>i have been tasked to add fault tolerance to a SQL 2000 server we have that
> holds the databases for a Sharepoint Server.
> I am not going to get the funds to make it a SQL Cluster, and SQL 2005 is
> just not going to be used ever, so that new funky disk mirroring is out.
> The good news is that this Sharepoint site is almost entirely static. I am
> the only person who publishes content, so the databases do not have many
> changes. System performance is not an issue.
> Don't ask why I am using Sharepoint like this; I inherited this beast. But
> i
> will say that because of the massive amount of custom programming done,
> you
> would never know you are looking at a sharepoint portal.
> So here is my thought:
> I have two different NIC teams in these servers.
> Set up replication between two sql servers and then join them in an NLB
> (Network Load Balancing) Cluster.
>
> Am I missing something? Will this work?

Clusters idea. Guidance Please.

i have been tasked to add fault tolerance to a SQL 2000 server we have that
holds the databases for a Sharepoint Server.
I am not going to get the funds to make it a SQL Cluster, and SQL 2005 is
just not going to be used ever, so that new funky disk mirroring is out.
The good news is that this Sharepoint site is almost entirely static. I am
the only person who publishes content, so the databases do not have many
changes. System performance is not an issue.
Don't ask why I am using Sharepoint like this; I inherited this beast. But i
will say that because of the massive amount of custom programming done, you
would never know you are looking at a sharepoint portal.
So here is my thought:
I have two different NIC teams in these servers.
Set up replication between two sql servers and then join them in an NLB
(Network Load Balancing) Cluster.
Am I missing something? Will this work?Aside from the fact that replication in SQL 2000 does not include DDL
statements or stored procedures or views or a lot of other things, you have
a good idea. Seriously, fault tolerance is a very good idea. Fault
tolerance on zero budget is willful stupidity on the part of management. I
suggest researching all recovery scenarios, starting with backup-restore,
moving up to log shipping, then failover clustering. Show the pros and
cons, focusing on potential data loss and estimated recovery times. Include
realistic cost estimates for each option. You can even include Database
Mirroring as an option but with SQL 2005 as a pre-requisite. Also, examine
third-party options that do something akin to DB mirroring at the file
level. Some actually work, but make them demonstrate it befoer plunking
down your money.
Your job is not to make up something for nothing, it is to present realistic
options to the business decision makers and to implement their choices. If
they choose not to listen and to demand the impossible, then it is time to
find a job where failure isn't mandatory.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Manny Borges" <MannyBorges@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9FEEB93C-D3EB-4790-9379-6BD24531C0F1@.microsoft.com...
>i have been tasked to add fault tolerance to a SQL 2000 server we have that
> holds the databases for a Sharepoint Server.
> I am not going to get the funds to make it a SQL Cluster, and SQL 2005 is
> just not going to be used ever, so that new funky disk mirroring is out.
> The good news is that this Sharepoint site is almost entirely static. I am
> the only person who publishes content, so the databases do not have many
> changes. System performance is not an issue.
> Don't ask why I am using Sharepoint like this; I inherited this beast. But
> i
> will say that because of the massive amount of custom programming done,
> you
> would never know you are looking at a sharepoint portal.
> So here is my thought:
> I have two different NIC teams in these servers.
> Set up replication between two sql servers and then join them in an NLB
> (Network Load Balancing) Cluster.
>
> Am I missing something? Will this work?

Clusters idea. Guidance Please.

i have been tasked to add fault tolerance to a SQL 2000 server we have that
holds the databases for a Sharepoint Server.
I am not going to get the funds to make it a SQL Cluster, and SQL 2005 is
just not going to be used ever, so that new funky disk mirroring is out.
The good news is that this Sharepoint site is almost entirely static. I am
the only person who publishes content, so the databases do not have many
changes. System performance is not an issue.
Don't ask why I am using Sharepoint like this; I inherited this beast. But i
will say that because of the massive amount of custom programming done, you
would never know you are looking at a sharepoint portal.
So here is my thought:
I have two different NIC teams in these servers.
Set up replication between two sql servers and then join them in an NLB
(Network Load Balancing) Cluster.
Am I missing something? Will this work?
Aside from the fact that replication in SQL 2000 does not include DDL
statements or stored procedures or views or a lot of other things, you have
a good idea. Seriously, fault tolerance is a very good idea. Fault
tolerance on zero budget is willful stupidity on the part of management. I
suggest researching all recovery scenarios, starting with backup-restore,
moving up to log shipping, then failover clustering. Show the pros and
cons, focusing on potential data loss and estimated recovery times. Include
realistic cost estimates for each option. You can even include Database
Mirroring as an option but with SQL 2005 as a pre-requisite. Also, examine
third-party options that do something akin to DB mirroring at the file
level. Some actually work, but make them demonstrate it befoer plunking
down your money.
Your job is not to make up something for nothing, it is to present realistic
options to the business decision makers and to implement their choices. If
they choose not to listen and to demand the impossible, then it is time to
find a job where failure isn't mandatory.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Manny Borges" <MannyBorges@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9FEEB93C-D3EB-4790-9379-6BD24531C0F1@.microsoft.com...
>i have been tasked to add fault tolerance to a SQL 2000 server we have that
> holds the databases for a Sharepoint Server.
> I am not going to get the funds to make it a SQL Cluster, and SQL 2005 is
> just not going to be used ever, so that new funky disk mirroring is out.
> The good news is that this Sharepoint site is almost entirely static. I am
> the only person who publishes content, so the databases do not have many
> changes. System performance is not an issue.
> Don't ask why I am using Sharepoint like this; I inherited this beast. But
> i
> will say that because of the massive amount of custom programming done,
> you
> would never know you are looking at a sharepoint portal.
> So here is my thought:
> I have two different NIC teams in these servers.
> Set up replication between two sql servers and then join them in an NLB
> (Network Load Balancing) Cluster.
>
> Am I missing something? Will this work?

clustered SQL web db

What is the best way to achieve high availability for a sql server databases
holding web data. Is SQL clustering still the preferred option? Are there
third party solutions that are preferable?
Thanks
jjSQL Server clustering is probably the best way to go.
"jj" wrote:
> What is the best way to achieve high availability for a sql server databases
> holding web data. Is SQL clustering still the preferred option? Are there
> third party solutions that are preferable?
> Thanks
> jj
>
>|||MS clustering is probably the best way to go
"jj" wrote:
> What is the best way to achieve high availability for a sql server databases
> holding web data. Is SQL clustering still the preferred option? Are there
> third party solutions that are preferable?
> Thanks
> jj
>
>|||Hi
Windows 2003 Clustering, with SQL Server 2000 running on it.
Once SQL Server 2005 arrives, Database Mirroring with a witness may become
an option.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"dridenour" <dridenour@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D561A2F8-E43B-44CC-8E0C-C913E821B63B@.microsoft.com...
> MS clustering is probably the best way to go
> "jj" wrote:
> > What is the best way to achieve high availability for a sql server
databases
> > holding web data. Is SQL clustering still the preferred option? Are
there
> > third party solutions that are preferable?
> >
> > Thanks
> > jj
> >
> >
> >|||"jj" <jeff_detoro@.urmc.rochester.edu> wrote in message
news:O2yw8iX2EHA.2568@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> What is the best way to achieve high availability for a sql server
databases
> holding web data. Is SQL clustering still the preferred option? Are there
> third party solutions that are preferable?
Depends.
What's your budget?
What are your real needs?
(I've found customers often want HA until they realize the cost and then
consider other options.)
> Thanks
> jj
>