Collation matter

Dear all,
We've got one db allocated in a SQL SERVER 7.0 and another one with
compatibility with 6.5 and now we want to move it to SQL SERVER 2000.
Change collation at server/db is easy, but problem is for all the columns.
Does anyone have any script for do that automatically?
Thanks a lot for any comment,See if this post is of any help:
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/mi...l=en&lr=&rnum=2
--
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
SQL Server Articles and Code Samples @. http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
"Enric" <Enric@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0487C7B1-398D-4A9A-824A-88B5A12DA542@.microsoft.com...
Dear all,
We've got one db allocated in a SQL SERVER 7.0 and another one with
compatibility with 6.5 and now we want to move it to SQL SERVER 2000.
Change collation at server/db is easy, but problem is for all the columns.
Does anyone have any script for do that automatically?
Thanks a lot for any comment,sqlsql

Collation issue

Dear fellows,
Sometimes when I obtain a script for tables and then I copy them to another
Sql Server, collation at field level is lost. Why?
Thank you very much,If no specifiy coallation is named on the column, it wont be scripted.
HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.
http://www.sqlserver2005.de
"Enric" <Enric@.discussions.microsoft.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:6322A9EB-4603-43C6-BC2C-09DBB81F45D3@.microsoft.com...
> Dear fellows,
> Sometimes when I obtain a script for tables and then I copy them to
> another
> Sql Server, collation at field level is lost. Why?
> Thank you very much,

Collation issue

Dear all,
I''ve got a database which own sql1_latin1_General_cp1_ci_as. That's fine.
I'd like to change the current collation for 'Traditional_Spanish_CI_AS'
using the following statements:
1-ALTER DATABASE bdtestman SET SINGLE_USER with rollback immediate
2-ALTER DATABASE bdtestman COLLATE Traditional_Spanish_CI_AS
3-ALTER DATABASE bdtestman Set MULTI_USER
2 failed and said me:
Server: Msg 5075, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
The column 'F211_Maastrich_OverallTestsResultsNoSha
ll.NOMPROYECTO' is
dependent on database collation.
Server: Msg 5075, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
The column 'F211_Maastrich_OverallTestsResultsNoSha
ll.NOMNIVEL' is dependent
on database collation.
Server: Msg 5075, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
The column 'F211_Maastrich_OverallTestsResultsNoSha
ll.NOMELEMENTO' is
dependent on database collation.
Server: Msg 5075, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
The column 'F211_Maastrich_OverallTestsResultsNoSha
ll.NOMPRUEBA' is
dependent on database collation.
Server: Msg 5075, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
The column 'F211_Maastrich_OverallTestsResultsNoSha
ll.NOMCASO' is dependent
on database collation.
Does anyone ever used this statement in order to change the current collatio
n?
Thanks for any input and regards,If F211_Maastrich_OverallTestsResultsNoShal
l is a view, drop it before you
try changing the database collation, then recreate it after the change is
made.
ML
http://milambda.blogspot.com/|||according to books online
You are the only one currently using the database.
No schema bound object is dependent on the collation of the database.
If the following objects, which are dependent on the database
collation, exist in the database, the ALTER DATABASE database COLLATE
statement will fail. SQL Server will return an error message for each
object blocking the ALTER action:
User-defined functions and views created with SCHEMABINDING.
Computed columns.
CHECK constraints.
Table-valued functions that return tables with character columns with
collations inherited from the default database collation.
Look at alter database in books onlne.
Regardssqlsql

Collapsable Columns not showing up in export to Excel

Dear Anyone,

I have created a report that has collapsable columns. We had used the visible toggle property in reporting services. While the colpsable column works well in report manager, it doesnt work anyone when we export the report to excel. Even of the report is expanded, the report in excel would always show up with just the columns that are the basis for the collapsable column.

Is this really the behavior when it comes to collapsable columns and exporting to excel?

Example:

Column A toggles Column B, Column C and Column D.

Thanks,

Joseph

I've solved this issue setting the hidden columns to be by defualt visible and then letting the user decide if to hide them or not.

In this way excel export it is correct.

HTH.

Alberto

|||

Hello Alberto,

Would you mind sharing your findings?

Thanks,

Joseph

|||I will appreciate if you could post the code and explanation how you did that.

Collapsable Columns not showing up in export to Excel

Dear Anyone,

I have created a report that has collapsable columns. We had used the visible toggle property in reporting services. While the colpsable column works well in report manager, it doesnt work anyone when we export the report to excel. Even of the report is expanded, the report in excel would always show up with just the columns that are the basis for the collapsable column.

Is this really the behavior when it comes to collapsable columns and exporting to excel?

Example:

Column A toggles Column B, Column C and Column D.

Thanks,

Joseph

I've solved this issue setting the hidden columns to be by defualt visible and then letting the user decide if to hide them or not.

In this way excel export it is correct.

HTH.

Alberto

|||

Hello Alberto,

Would you mind sharing your findings?

Thanks,

Joseph

|||I will appreciate if you could post the code and explanation how you did that.

Collapsable Columns not showing up in export to Excel

Dear Anyone,

I have created a report that has collapsable columns. We had used the visible toggle property in reporting services. While the colpsable column works well in report manager, it doesnt work anyone when we export the report to excel. Even of the report is expanded, the report in excel would always show up with just the columns that are the basis for the collapsable column.

Is this really the behavior when it comes to collapsable columns and exporting to excel?

Example:

Column A toggles Column B, Column C and Column D.

Thanks,

Joseph

I've solved this issue setting the hidden columns to be by defualt visible and then letting the user decide if to hide them or not.

In this way excel export it is correct.

HTH.

Alberto

|||

Hello Alberto,

Would you mind sharing your findings?

Thanks,

Joseph

|||I will appreciate if you could post the code and explanation how you did that.

Co-exist of SQL 2000 and 2005

Dear all,

I have SQL 2000 Enterprise mgr and Query Analyzer in my desktop, and I install SQL2005 Express Edition + Mgm Studio today, however, my SQL 2000 Enterprise mgr disappear and all my registered servers disappear too when I open up the SQL 2005 Mgm Studio. Is it mean that I no longer able to use SQL 2000? How can I rollback the installation of SQL 2005 because I still have to use Enterprise mgr to manage my existing database and clients. (Yes, I give up SQL 2005 now)

Thanks,
The 2 should work side by side just fine, there is no need to uninstall. What do you mean Enterprise Manager disapears? Did you do a sidebyside install or an upgrade?|||

You say 'when I open up 2005 Management Studio..'

If you did a sidebyside install, all your 2000 stuff is till there, but you still use 2000 EM for them, they aren't in Management Studio. Your old EM should still be available from the programs menu, and 2005 have it's own start menu.

/Kenneth

|||Hi Ken,

Thanks for your advice, Maybe I select "upgrade" SQL 2000 to SQL 2005 in the installation process (is there an option like this?)... so everything gone and I can't see my SQL 2000 Enterprice Manaager and Query Analyzer (you know, these 2 tools are the best friend of DBA ;)

I tried to uninstall SQL 2005 and select "side by side" installation (is there a option like this?) but it create another problem: here.

My original database in SQL 2000 disappear even I re-install SQL 2000 EM, but the MDF and LDF are still in my machine, so I want to "attach" these database immediately, but I can't do so.. do you know why?

(Installation of SQL 2005 is quite problematic... and bring some other problems as well in my opinion.. I can use my EM and QA smoothly over the last few years)

Thanks!
|||So it sounds like you did an upgrade to SQL 2005. For the tools you can uninstall 2005 and then re-install 2000 and it should work, HOWEVER for your data this is a problem. Once a database has been touched by a 2005 server it can not be attached or restored on a 2000 machine. Your only choice is to export the data from a 2005 running copy of the database, out to csv/text etc and then load that on on the other side.|||

Oh my god... I just un-install the SQL 2005 and re-install SQL 2000, that's fine. I want to make everything back to normal first.

Next, I install a lite version of SQL 2005 Express instead (Yes, I'm afraid the SQL 2005 now), and I specifically choose NOT upgrade my existing database (Well, the upgrade option is disabled by default due to the limitation of SQL 2005 Express anyway, so I'm pretty sure it WON'T affect my existing SQL 2000 DBs and Enterprise Mgr, alright?)

However, the result is - It break all of my databases AGAIN. And an error message come out when I try to open my SQL 2000 Ent. Mgr:

Microsoft Management Console

Snap-in failed to initialize.
Name:<unknown>
CLSID:{00100100-1816-11D0-8EF5-00AA0062C58F}

I'm pretty sure the co-existence of SQL 2000 and SQL 2005 (any edition) is very poor.. I can't do any project against my SQL 2000 nor SQL 20005 db now. :(

Thanks,

|||

Sorry but you are wrong, SQL 2000 and 2005 work just fine together, it is unfortunate that you are having problems, btu I run 4 machiens with this config and they all work fine, as do 10,000s of others.

What do you mean the databases are broken, is there an error message?

To fix the mmc problem try and run regsvr32 on sqlmmc.dll

|||

I'm also running a few servers running both SQL2k and 2005 without problems. Servers did not upgrade the existing sql2k 's. I installed the 2005's as new instances.

Eralper

http://www.kodyaz.com

|||

Euan Garden wrote:

To fix the mmc problem try and run regsvr32 on sqlmmc.dll

I have more than 1 machine with SQL 2005 installed, and nearly 50% of them are facing various problem. I understand that there're 10000s installation successed, but you should be aware that there're also have another 10000s installation failed and looking for help here or other NGs everyday. This is a pain. Even 1 installation failed, this product is buggy.

The databases can't be attached or re-used anymore if SQL 2005 "touch" the db from SQL 2000, that's a famous bug since beta age.

The regsvr32 sqlmmc.dll and sqldmo.dll are no good...

Thanks,

|||

Sorry peter but there are not 1000's of installations which are failed.

Correct once a DB is touched by 2005 it can not be moved back, this is not a bug this is by design, we have to upgrade the format to be able to use the new features of SQL 2000, this has been this way for the last 4 versions of SQL Server and I believe is also true for other DB vendors.

When you say that sqlmmc and sqldmo are no good are you saying that you tried to re-reg and ti did not work?

|||

We have to buy all license and upgrade to SQL 2005 immmediately and we don't have any backward compatiability if we're using SQL 2000? Compatiability and stability are two of the key factors for any DB system.

re-reg doesn't help, SQL 2000 Enterprise Manager still messed up.

(Please see this MSDN blog for more info about this bug)

Thanks,

|||

First of all you don't have to buy new licenses and upgrade, SQL 2000 is a fine product and will be support for several years to come. However if you want to upgrade and get the new version you can.

Your definition of Back Compat differs from mine (and that of the SQL Server Team), apps that work against SQL2000/7 should work against SQL 2005 without changes, thats significant. SQL 2005 can used SQL 2000 as a linked server, it can consume backups, database files and data via OLE DB and ADO.Net. All of that is pretty impressive.

Your issue is that you have taken a SQL Server 2000 DB, and attached it to SQL 2005, obviously wanting to leverage the new features of SQL 2005, to do that means changes to the file format, making it impossible to use the file on 2000(but you can script out) just as if you had used one of the new T-SQL commands in your app, that would not run against a 2000 server. Just like a Winforms 2.0 app will not run against .Net 1.1, just as a etc etc. I'm sorry you disagree with the principle, but this decision/position does not imply anything related to the stability of the system, which is just fine.

I am very familiar with the "bug" and the blog entry you reference(hint take a look at the author of the entry), this is not the same bug. Re-registering DMO fixes the CTP bug you reference.

Now back to the original problem of EM not working. When you re-reg sqlmmc and sqldmo to they both register correctly or is there an error message? If they register correctly has the error message you get when trying to start EM the same or has it changed from the original post? Have you tried applying SP4 of SQL 2000 again?

|||Sorry to post this bug here, but this is the problem after my installation of SQL 2005. I don't want to upgrade my SQL 2000 database to SQL 2005 in fact, if you read my posts above.

The wizard drive me to this stage and now, the database can't be rollbacked to its original state, which is a backward process. Sorry that you have another definition of backward compatibility, but please be considerate when you reading post here, even you have your own definition in your own mind. You can't force others to follow your own definion and you don't have problem in the installation doesn't mean other 10000 people are as lucky as you.

The problem and error messages and all service pack installed. Please read the posts but don't just focus on what you like to see but ignore others' opinion.

Thanks,
|||

If you are playing around with

various versions or instances of MS SQL Server

you may hit the problem of

Microsoft Management Console

Snap-in failed to initialize.
Name:<unknown>
CLSID:{00100100-1816-11D0-8EF5-00AA0062C58F}

To fix the problem,

1. Click Start, click Run, type regedit, and then click OK. 2. Locate the following registry subkey:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools\ClientSetup

3. Right-click the ClientSetup registry subkey, point to New, and then click String Value. 4. Rename the registry subkey that you just created SqlPath, and then press ENTER. 5. Double-click the SqlPath registry subkey, and then type C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools in the Value data box. 6. Click OK, and then close Registry Editor. 7. Click Start, click Run, type regsvr32 "C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools\Binn\sqlmmc.dll", and then click OK.

Good Luck,

Alfred.

|||

well. . . unfortunately we have the same problem as well.

after having both SQL 2000 and 2005 we tried to uninstall 2005.

buggered the sql 2000 as noted

running the fix outlined above (as well as the othere method outlined in the kb article the above was copied from) we get:

DllRegisterServer in C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools\Binn\sqlmmc.dll failed.

Return code was: 0x8011041a

We need to get back to a totally clean state so we can do an install of just SQL 2000.

And dont just copy that other kb article 290991 as that didnt work either

Co-exist of SQL 2000 and 2005

Dear all,

I have SQL 2000 Enterprise mgr and Query Analyzer in my desktop, and I install SQL2005 Express Edition + Mgm Studio today, however, my SQL 2000 Enterprise mgr disappear and all my registered servers disappear too when I open up the SQL 2005 Mgm Studio. Is it mean that I no longer able to use SQL 2000? How can I rollback the installation of SQL 2005 because I still have to use Enterprise mgr to manage my existing database and clients. (Yes, I give up SQL 2005 now)

Thanks,The 2 should work side by side just fine, there is no need to uninstall. What do you mean Enterprise Manager disapears? Did you do a sidebyside install or an upgrade?|||

You say 'when I open up 2005 Management Studio..'

If you did a sidebyside install, all your 2000 stuff is till there, but you still use 2000 EM for them, they aren't in Management Studio. Your old EM should still be available from the programs menu, and 2005 have it's own start menu.

/Kenneth

|||Hi Ken,

Thanks for your advice, Maybe I select "upgrade" SQL 2000 to SQL 2005 in the installation process (is there an option like this?)... so everything gone and I can't see my SQL 2000 Enterprice Manaager and Query Analyzer (you know, these 2 tools are the best friend of DBA ;)

I tried to uninstall SQL 2005 and select "side by side" installation (is there a option like this?) but it create another problem: here.

My original database in SQL 2000 disappear even I re-install SQL 2000 EM, but the MDF and LDF are still in my machine, so I want to "attach" these database immediately, but I can't do so.. do you know why?

(Installation of SQL 2005 is quite problematic... and bring some other problems as well in my opinion.. I can use my EM and QA smoothly over the last few years)

Thanks!|||So it sounds like you did an upgrade to SQL 2005. For the tools you can uninstall 2005 and then re-install 2000 and it should work, HOWEVER for your data this is a problem. Once a database has been touched by a 2005 server it can not be attached or restored on a 2000 machine. Your only choice is to export the data from a 2005 running copy of the database, out to csv/text etc and then load that on on the other side.|||

Oh my god... I just un-install the SQL 2005 and re-install SQL 2000, that's fine. I want to make everything back to normal first.

Next, I install a lite version of SQL 2005 Express instead (Yes, I'm afraid the SQL 2005 now), and I specifically choose NOT upgrade my existing database (Well, the upgrade option is disabled by default due to the limitation of SQL 2005 Express anyway, so I'm pretty sure it WON'T affect my existing SQL 2000 DBs and Enterprise Mgr, alright?)

However, the result is - It break all of my databases AGAIN. And an error message come out when I try to open my SQL 2000 Ent. Mgr:

Microsoft Management Console

Snap-in failed to initialize.
Name:<unknown>
CLSID:{00100100-1816-11D0-8EF5-00AA0062C58F}

I'm pretty sure the co-existence of SQL 2000 and SQL 2005 (any edition) is very poor.. I can't do any project against my SQL 2000 nor SQL 20005 db now. :(

Thanks,

|||

Sorry but you are wrong, SQL 2000 and 2005 work just fine together, it is unfortunate that you are having problems, btu I run 4 machiens with this config and they all work fine, as do 10,000s of others.

What do you mean the databases are broken, is there an error message?

To fix the mmc problem try and run regsvr32 on sqlmmc.dll

|||

I'm also running a few servers running both SQL2k and 2005 without problems. Servers did not upgrade the existing sql2k 's. I installed the 2005's as new instances.

Eralper

http://www.kodyaz.com

|||

Euan Garden wrote:

To fix the mmc problem try and run regsvr32 on sqlmmc.dll

I have more than 1 machine with SQL 2005 installed, and nearly 50% of them are facing various problem. I understand that there're 10000s installation successed, but you should be aware that there're also have another 10000s installation failed and looking for help here or other NGs everyday. This is a pain. Even 1 installation failed, this product is buggy.

The databases can't be attached or re-used anymore if SQL 2005 "touch" the db from SQL 2000, that's a famous bug since beta age.

The regsvr32 sqlmmc.dll and sqldmo.dll are no good...

Thanks,

|||

Sorry peter but there are not 1000's of installations which are failed.

Correct once a DB is touched by 2005 it can not be moved back, this is not a bug this is by design, we have to upgrade the format to be able to use the new features of SQL 2000, this has been this way for the last 4 versions of SQL Server and I believe is also true for other DB vendors.

When you say that sqlmmc and sqldmo are no good are you saying that you tried to re-reg and ti did not work?

|||

We have to buy all license and upgrade to SQL 2005 immmediately and we don't have any backward compatiability if we're using SQL 2000? Compatiability and stability are two of the key factors for any DB system.

re-reg doesn't help, SQL 2000 Enterprise Manager still messed up.

(Please see this MSDN blog for more info about this bug)

Thanks,

|||

First of all you don't have to buy new licenses and upgrade, SQL 2000 is a fine product and will be support for several years to come. However if you want to upgrade and get the new version you can.

Your definition of Back Compat differs from mine (and that of the SQL Server Team), apps that work against SQL2000/7 should work against SQL 2005 without changes, thats significant. SQL 2005 can used SQL 2000 as a linked server, it can consume backups, database files and data via OLE DB and ADO.Net. All of that is pretty impressive.

Your issue is that you have taken a SQL Server 2000 DB, and attached it to SQL 2005, obviously wanting to leverage the new features of SQL 2005, to do that means changes to the file format, making it impossible to use the file on 2000(but you can script out) just as if you had used one of the new T-SQL commands in your app, that would not run against a 2000 server. Just like a Winforms 2.0 app will not run against .Net 1.1, just as a etc etc. I'm sorry you disagree with the principle, but this decision/position does not imply anything related to the stability of the system, which is just fine.

I am very familiar with the "bug" and the blog entry you reference(hint take a look at the author of the entry), this is not the same bug. Re-registering DMO fixes the CTP bug you reference.

Now back to the original problem of EM not working. When you re-reg sqlmmc and sqldmo to they both register correctly or is there an error message? If they register correctly has the error message you get when trying to start EM the same or has it changed from the original post? Have you tried applying SP4 of SQL 2000 again?

|||Sorry to post this bug here, but this is the problem after my installation of SQL 2005. I don't want to upgrade my SQL 2000 database to SQL 2005 in fact, if you read my posts above.

The wizard drive me to this stage and now, the database can't be rollbacked to its original state, which is a backward process. Sorry that you have another definition of backward compatibility, but please be considerate when you reading post here, even you have your own definition in your own mind. You can't force others to follow your own definion and you don't have problem in the installation doesn't mean other 10000 people are as lucky as you.

The problem and error messages and all service pack installed. Please read the posts but don't just focus on what you like to see but ignore others' opinion.

Thanks,|||

If you are playing around with

various versions or instances of MS SQL Server

you may hit the problem of

Microsoft Management Console

Snap-in failed to initialize.
Name:<unknown>
CLSID:{00100100-1816-11D0-8EF5-00AA0062C58F}

To fix the problem,

1.

Click Start, click Run, type regedit, and then click OK.

2.

Locate the following registry subkey:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools\ClientSetup

3.

Right-click the ClientSetup registry subkey, point to New, and then click String Value.

4.

Rename the registry subkey that you just created SqlPath, and then press ENTER.

5.

Double-click the SqlPath registry subkey, and then type C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools in the Value data box.

6.

Click OK, and then close Registry Editor.

7.

Click Start, click Run, type regsvr32 "C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools\Binn\sqlmmc.dll", and then click OK.

Good Luck,

Alfred.

|||

well. . . unfortunately we have the same problem as well.

after having both SQL 2000 and 2005 we tried to uninstall 2005.

buggered the sql 2000 as noted

running the fix outlined above (as well as the othere method outlined in the kb article the above was copied from) we get:

DllRegisterServer in C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools\Binn\sqlmmc.dll failed.

Return code was: 0x8011041a

We need to get back to a totally clean state so we can do an install of just SQL 2000.

And dont just copy that other kb article 290991 as that didnt work either

Co-exist of SQL 2000 and 2005

Dear all,

I have SQL 2000 Enterprise mgr and Query Analyzer in my desktop, and I install SQL2005 Express Edition + Mgm Studio today, however, my SQL 2000 Enterprise mgr disappear and all my registered servers disappear too when I open up the SQL 2005 Mgm Studio. Is it mean that I no longer able to use SQL 2000? How can I rollback the installation of SQL 2005 because I still have to use Enterprise mgr to manage my existing database and clients. (Yes, I give up SQL 2005 now)

Thanks,The 2 should work side by side just fine, there is no need to uninstall. What do you mean Enterprise Manager disapears? Did you do a sidebyside install or an upgrade?|||

You say 'when I open up 2005 Management Studio..'

If you did a sidebyside install, all your 2000 stuff is till there, but you still use 2000 EM for them, they aren't in Management Studio. Your old EM should still be available from the programs menu, and 2005 have it's own start menu.

/Kenneth

|||Hi Ken,

Thanks for your advice, Maybe I select "upgrade" SQL 2000 to SQL 2005 in the installation process (is there an option like this?)... so everything gone and I can't see my SQL 2000 Enterprice Manaager and Query Analyzer (you know, these 2 tools are the best friend of DBA ;)

I tried to uninstall SQL 2005 and select "side by side" installation (is there a option like this?) but it create another problem: here.

My original database in SQL 2000 disappear even I re-install SQL 2000 EM, but the MDF and LDF are still in my machine, so I want to "attach" these database immediately, but I can't do so.. do you know why?

(Installation of SQL 2005 is quite problematic... and bring some other problems as well in my opinion.. I can use my EM and QA smoothly over the last few years)

Thanks!|||So it sounds like you did an upgrade to SQL 2005. For the tools you can uninstall 2005 and then re-install 2000 and it should work, HOWEVER for your data this is a problem. Once a database has been touched by a 2005 server it can not be attached or restored on a 2000 machine. Your only choice is to export the data from a 2005 running copy of the database, out to csv/text etc and then load that on on the other side.|||

Oh my god... I just un-install the SQL 2005 and re-install SQL 2000, that's fine. I want to make everything back to normal first.

Next, I install a lite version of SQL 2005 Express instead (Yes, I'm afraid the SQL 2005 now), and I specifically choose NOT upgrade my existing database (Well, the upgrade option is disabled by default due to the limitation of SQL 2005 Express anyway, so I'm pretty sure it WON'T affect my existing SQL 2000 DBs and Enterprise Mgr, alright?)

However, the result is - It break all of my databases AGAIN. And an error message come out when I try to open my SQL 2000 Ent. Mgr:

Microsoft Management Console

Snap-in failed to initialize.
Name:<unknown>
CLSID:{00100100-1816-11D0-8EF5-00AA0062C58F}

I'm pretty sure the co-existence of SQL 2000 and SQL 2005 (any edition) is very poor.. I can't do any project against my SQL 2000 nor SQL 20005 db now. :(

Thanks,

|||

Sorry but you are wrong, SQL 2000 and 2005 work just fine together, it is unfortunate that you are having problems, btu I run 4 machiens with this config and they all work fine, as do 10,000s of others.

What do you mean the databases are broken, is there an error message?

To fix the mmc problem try and run regsvr32 on sqlmmc.dll

|||

I'm also running a few servers running both SQL2k and 2005 without problems. Servers did not upgrade the existing sql2k 's. I installed the 2005's as new instances.

Eralper

http://www.kodyaz.com

|||

Euan Garden wrote:

To fix the mmc problem try and run regsvr32 on sqlmmc.dll

I have more than 1 machine with SQL 2005 installed, and nearly 50% of them are facing various problem. I understand that there're 10000s installation successed, but you should be aware that there're also have another 10000s installation failed and looking for help here or other NGs everyday. This is a pain. Even 1 installation failed, this product is buggy.

The databases can't be attached or re-used anymore if SQL 2005 "touch" the db from SQL 2000, that's a famous bug since beta age.

The regsvr32 sqlmmc.dll and sqldmo.dll are no good...

Thanks,

|||

Sorry peter but there are not 1000's of installations which are failed.

Correct once a DB is touched by 2005 it can not be moved back, this is not a bug this is by design, we have to upgrade the format to be able to use the new features of SQL 2000, this has been this way for the last 4 versions of SQL Server and I believe is also true for other DB vendors.

When you say that sqlmmc and sqldmo are no good are you saying that you tried to re-reg and ti did not work?

|||

We have to buy all license and upgrade to SQL 2005 immmediately and we don't have any backward compatiability if we're using SQL 2000? Compatiability and stability are two of the key factors for any DB system.

re-reg doesn't help, SQL 2000 Enterprise Manager still messed up.

(Please see this MSDN blog for more info about this bug)

Thanks,

|||

First of all you don't have to buy new licenses and upgrade, SQL 2000 is a fine product and will be support for several years to come. However if you want to upgrade and get the new version you can.

Your definition of Back Compat differs from mine (and that of the SQL Server Team), apps that work against SQL2000/7 should work against SQL 2005 without changes, thats significant. SQL 2005 can used SQL 2000 as a linked server, it can consume backups, database files and data via OLE DB and ADO.Net. All of that is pretty impressive.

Your issue is that you have taken a SQL Server 2000 DB, and attached it to SQL 2005, obviously wanting to leverage the new features of SQL 2005, to do that means changes to the file format, making it impossible to use the file on 2000(but you can script out) just as if you had used one of the new T-SQL commands in your app, that would not run against a 2000 server. Just like a Winforms 2.0 app will not run against .Net 1.1, just as a etc etc. I'm sorry you disagree with the principle, but this decision/position does not imply anything related to the stability of the system, which is just fine.

I am very familiar with the "bug" and the blog entry you reference(hint take a look at the author of the entry), this is not the same bug. Re-registering DMO fixes the CTP bug you reference.

Now back to the original problem of EM not working. When you re-reg sqlmmc and sqldmo to they both register correctly or is there an error message? If they register correctly has the error message you get when trying to start EM the same or has it changed from the original post? Have you tried applying SP4 of SQL 2000 again?

|||Sorry to post this bug here, but this is the problem after my installation of SQL 2005. I don't want to upgrade my SQL 2000 database to SQL 2005 in fact, if you read my posts above.

The wizard drive me to this stage and now, the database can't be rollbacked to its original state, which is a backward process. Sorry that you have another definition of backward compatibility, but please be considerate when you reading post here, even you have your own definition in your own mind. You can't force others to follow your own definion and you don't have problem in the installation doesn't mean other 10000 people are as lucky as you.

The problem and error messages and all service pack installed. Please read the posts but don't just focus on what you like to see but ignore others' opinion.

Thanks,|||

If you are playing around with

various versions or instances of MS SQL Server

you may hit the problem of

Microsoft Management Console

Snap-in failed to initialize.
Name:<unknown>
CLSID:{00100100-1816-11D0-8EF5-00AA0062C58F}

To fix the problem,

1.

Click Start, click Run, type regedit, and then click OK.

2.

Locate the following registry subkey:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools\ClientSetup

3.

Right-click the ClientSetup registry subkey, point to New, and then click String Value.

4.

Rename the registry subkey that you just created SqlPath, and then press ENTER.

5.

Double-click the SqlPath registry subkey, and then type C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools in the Value data box.

6.

Click OK, and then close Registry Editor.

7.

Click Start, click Run, type regsvr32 "C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools\Binn\sqlmmc.dll", and then click OK.

Good Luck,

Alfred.

|||

well. . . unfortunately we have the same problem as well.

after having both SQL 2000 and 2005 we tried to uninstall 2005.

buggered the sql 2000 as noted

running the fix outlined above (as well as the othere method outlined in the kb article the above was copied from) we get:

DllRegisterServer in C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools\Binn\sqlmmc.dll failed.

Return code was: 0x8011041a

We need to get back to a totally clean state so we can do an install of just SQL 2000.

And dont just copy that other kb article 290991 as that didnt work either

Code does not select any data for information from the different tables in the database

Dear list,

I am trying to get the names of the tables and the column names from the
code below for a database but it is not working. When I run the query
below the column titles are delivered but there is no data. I think this
might be a premissions issue. Has anyone run into this before?

Thanks in advance.

Use Test_db

/* Provides Table Name, Column Name, Extened Description */

Select a.name as tbl_name, b.name as column_name, d.name as data_type,
d.length as length, d.xprec as prec, d.scale as scale, b.usertype,
b.scale, c.value
from sysobjects as a inner join syscolumns as b on a.id=b.id inner join
sysproperties as c on b.colid=c.smallid and a.id=c.id
inner join systypes as d on b.xtype=d.xtypeJeff,

This query will only display rows for columns that have extended properties assigned to them with sp_addextendedproperty. If you need to
see all columns, you can use outer joins instead of inner joins.

For the record, the [sysproperties] table is undocumented and unsupported. Here's an alternative, though a messy one:

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=4...03-E3F3F8312314

Steve Kass
Drew University

Jeff Magouirk wrote:
> Dear list,
> I am trying to get the names of the tables and the column names from the
> code below for a database but it is not working. When I run the query
> below the column titles are delivered but there is no data. I think this
> might be a premissions issue. Has anyone run into this before?
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
> Use Test_db
> /* Provides Table Name, Column Name, Extened Description */
> Select a.name as tbl_name, b.name as column_name, d.name as data_type,
> d.length as length, d.xprec as prec, d.scale as scale, b.usertype,
> b.scale, c.value
> from sysobjects as a inner join syscolumns as b on a.id=b.id inner join
> sysproperties as c on b.colid=c.smallid and a.id=c.id
> inner join systypes as d on b.xtype=d.xtype
>|||Thank you for the answer, but I am new to the SQL Server world and I am
not sure how to apply the
extended properties with the sp_addextendedproperty function.

I have tried after reading the online books.

Thanks in advance.

Jeff

*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!

Clustering , how to start ?

Dear Friends,

i'm using windows 2003 server on both computers

i wanted to practice clustering with sql 200/2005 [two nodes] but it asks for a quorum disk as a shared disk between the two clustered nodes, i didn't know what a quorum disk it, the internet when i searched for says that

a quorum disk should be either a scsi or fiber channel disk, i've never seen a scsi disk, i'll purchase it today, but what i'm confused about is, how will i connect one single scsi disk two two computers/nodes ? i mean does a scsi disk have a long cable to connect to and if yes, then where does the cable fit in on either of the nodes, or is it not physcially shared then if it's logical then how do i configure it.

pls reply soon,

regards, and thanks

Gurjit Singh

Moving this thread to: SQL Server Disaster Recovery and Availability|||

I'd suggest that you start by reading up on the basics of MSCS failover clustering.

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms952401.aspx is one place to start, which describes clusters from an application standpoint.

Fundamentally, a cluster consists of 2 or more nodes on a common network, which can all physically access the same storage devices. An application (SQL in this case) is defined to the cluster as a newtork address and name by which that application will be known to the rest of the network, a set of one or more disks which are accessible to all nodes on which the application is allowed to run, and the application itself. When the application starts on a node, that node takes exclusive ownership of the resources defined for it, and starts the application.

This access to the storage is commonly via either SCSI or Fiberchannel. SCSI connections are physically a chain, with one or more "initiators" (the system controller), and one or more devices. There is a terminator on either end of this chain, or "bus".

In a cluster then, a typical layout for a SCSI-based storage system would be to have an extra SCSI adapter on each node, with the chain of disks between the two nodes, and the chain ending at each node. There are other topologies possible, but this is a common one. Note that this bus MUST be separate from the bus on which local system storage (the C: drive, etc.) is located.

Again, this is the 100,000 foot level. There are many many details that need to be gotten right. It's not rocket science, but you do need to pay attention to details. Some reading is definitely in order.

Clustered Vrs Non Clustered Indexes

Dear All
I recently posted a message where I stated that a
clustered index is faster than a non clustered index, is
this correct or do I have my facts totally wrong ?
Thanks
Peter
Some definitions first:
An index doesn't have any speed to talk about; it isn't fast or slow. The optimizer generates
execution plans where those plans might use indexes in different ways. And when the execution engine
uses the plans, using an index or different index types influences performance.
A blanket statement like "clustered index are fasten than non-clustered indexes" is too much of a
generalization. There are cases where using a non-clustered index will result in fewer I/O
operations and shorter execution time compared to using a clustered index. One such example is where
a non-clustered index covers the query.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0d1201c514d6$150fc8c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Dear All
> I recently posted a message where I stated that a
> clustered index is faster than a non clustered index, is
> this correct or do I have my facts totally wrong ?
> Thanks
> Peter
|||Thanks Tibor,
Ah well, wrong again ;)
Peter

>--Original Message--
>Some definitions first:
>An index doesn't have any speed to talk about; it isn't
fast or slow. The optimizer generates
>execution plans where those plans might use indexes in
different ways. And when the execution engine
>uses the plans, using an index or different index types
influences performance.
>
>A blanket statement like "clustered index are fasten than
non-clustered indexes" is too much of a
>generalization. There are cases where using a non-
clustered index will result in fewer I/O
>operations and shorter execution time compared to using a
clustered index. One such example is where
>a non-clustered index covers the query.
>--
>Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
>"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message
>news:0d1201c514d6$150fc8c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
>
>.
>
|||I wouldn't say "wrong", Pete. But perhaps an over-generalization... :-)
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0d6f01c514e4$afc799c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks Tibor,
> Ah well, wrong again ;)
> Peter
>
> fast or slow. The optimizer generates
> different ways. And when the execution engine
> influences performance.
> non-clustered indexes" is too much of a
> clustered index will result in fewer I/O
> clustered index. One such example is where
> wrote in message
|||So far over its caused a capsize :-D

>--Original Message--
>I wouldn't say "wrong", Pete. But perhaps an over-
generalization... :-)
>--
>Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
>"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message[vbcol=seagreen]
>news:0d6f01c514e4$afc799c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
than[vbcol=seagreen]
a[vbcol=seagreen]
is
>
>.
>
|||Peter, Peter, Peter...
Don't be so hard on yourself.
Don't you remember what Einstein said?
He would rather have a watch that had stopped completely, than one that lost
a second a day.
A watch that had stopped would still show the correct time twice every day.
If you just keep saying that clustered indexes are faster than nonclustered,
you will occasionally be right.
:-)
HTH
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0efe01c51509$798a6890$a401280a@.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> So far over its caused a capsize :-D
>
> generalization... :-)
> wrote in message
> than
> a
> is
|||Mark Wilden wrote:
> "Kalen Delaney" <replies@.public_newsgroups.com> wrote in message
> news:%23r$pIsQFFHA.2600@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> I hope this is apocryphal or metaphorical or just a joke.
> Personally, I'd rather have a watch that lost a second a day.
Well, Einstein rode his bike to work every day because he was concerned
about all the moving parts in a car. He also had many copies of the same
suit to avoid having to make a decision about what suit to wear. He led
a simple life outside and a rather complex one inside. Most of us fall
somewhere in the middle. I'm with you on the watch.
David Gugick
Imceda Software
www.imceda.com
|||"David Gugick" <davidg-nospam@.imceda.com> wrote in message
news:Oc5GKHVFFHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Well, Einstein rode his bike to work every day because he was concerned
> about all the moving parts in a car. He also had many copies of the same
> suit to avoid having to make a decision about what suit to wear. He led
> a simple life outside and a rather complex one inside.
My favorite worst Einstein quote is the one about making things as simple as
possible, but no simpler. It's not really possible to make things simpler
than possible. You can replace "simple" in that quote with any "good"
quality and have an equally valid (and vacuous) statement.

Clustered Vrs Non Clustered Indexes

Dear All
I recently posted a message where I stated that a
clustered index is faster than a non clustered index, is
this correct or do I have my facts totally wrong ?
Thanks
PeterSome definitions first:
An index doesn't have any speed to talk about; it isn't fast or slow. The optimizer generates
execution plans where those plans might use indexes in different ways. And when the execution engine
uses the plans, using an index or different index types influences performance.
A blanket statement like "clustered index are fasten than non-clustered indexes" is too much of a
generalization. There are cases where using a non-clustered index will result in fewer I/O
operations and shorter execution time compared to using a clustered index. One such example is where
a non-clustered index covers the query.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0d1201c514d6$150fc8c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Dear All
> I recently posted a message where I stated that a
> clustered index is faster than a non clustered index, is
> this correct or do I have my facts totally wrong ?
> Thanks
> Peter|||Thanks Tibor,
Ah well, wrong again ;)
Peter
>--Original Message--
>Some definitions first:
>An index doesn't have any speed to talk about; it isn't
fast or slow. The optimizer generates
>execution plans where those plans might use indexes in
different ways. And when the execution engine
>uses the plans, using an index or different index types
influences performance.
>
>A blanket statement like "clustered index are fasten than
non-clustered indexes" is too much of a
>generalization. There are cases where using a non-
clustered index will result in fewer I/O
>operations and shorter execution time compared to using a
clustered index. One such example is where
>a non-clustered index covers the query.
>--
>Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
>"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message
>news:0d1201c514d6$150fc8c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Dear All
>> I recently posted a message where I stated that a
>> clustered index is faster than a non clustered index, is
>> this correct or do I have my facts totally wrong ?
>> Thanks
>> Peter
>
>.
>|||I wouldn't say "wrong", Pete. But perhaps an over-generalization... :-)
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0d6f01c514e4$afc799c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Tibor,
> Ah well, wrong again ;)
> Peter
>
>>--Original Message--
>>Some definitions first:
>>An index doesn't have any speed to talk about; it isn't
> fast or slow. The optimizer generates
>>execution plans where those plans might use indexes in
> different ways. And when the execution engine
>>uses the plans, using an index or different index types
> influences performance.
>>
>>A blanket statement like "clustered index are fasten than
> non-clustered indexes" is too much of a
>>generalization. There are cases where using a non-
> clustered index will result in fewer I/O
>>operations and shorter execution time compared to using a
> clustered index. One such example is where
>>a non-clustered index covers the query.
>>--
>>Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>>http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>>http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>>
>>"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
> wrote in message
>>news:0d1201c514d6$150fc8c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Dear All
>> I recently posted a message where I stated that a
>> clustered index is faster than a non clustered index, is
>> this correct or do I have my facts totally wrong ?
>> Thanks
>> Peter
>>
>>.|||So far over its caused a capsize :-D
>--Original Message--
>I wouldn't say "wrong", Pete. But perhaps an over-
generalization... :-)
>--
>Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
>"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message
>news:0d6f01c514e4$afc799c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Thanks Tibor,
>> Ah well, wrong again ;)
>> Peter
>>
>>--Original Message--
>>Some definitions first:
>>An index doesn't have any speed to talk about; it isn't
>> fast or slow. The optimizer generates
>>execution plans where those plans might use indexes in
>> different ways. And when the execution engine
>>uses the plans, using an index or different index types
>> influences performance.
>>
>>A blanket statement like "clustered index are fasten
than
>> non-clustered indexes" is too much of a
>>generalization. There are cases where using a non-
>> clustered index will result in fewer I/O
>>operations and shorter execution time compared to using
a
>> clustered index. One such example is where
>>a non-clustered index covers the query.
>>--
>>Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>>http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>>http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>>
>>"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
>> wrote in message
>>news:0d1201c514d6$150fc8c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Dear All
>> I recently posted a message where I stated that a
>> clustered index is faster than a non clustered index,
is
>> this correct or do I have my facts totally wrong ?
>> Thanks
>> Peter
>>
>>.
>
>.
>|||Peter, Peter, Peter...
Don't be so hard on yourself.
Don't you remember what Einstein said?
He would rather have a watch that had stopped completely, than one that lost
a second a day.
A watch that had stopped would still show the correct time twice every day.
If you just keep saying that clustered indexes are faster than nonclustered,
you will occasionally be right.
:-)
--
HTH
--
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0efe01c51509$798a6890$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> So far over its caused a capsize :-D
>
>>--Original Message--
>>I wouldn't say "wrong", Pete. But perhaps an over-
> generalization... :-)
>>--
>>Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>>http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>>http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>>
>>"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
> wrote in message
>>news:0d6f01c514e4$afc799c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Thanks Tibor,
>> Ah well, wrong again ;)
>> Peter
>>
>>--Original Message--
>>Some definitions first:
>>An index doesn't have any speed to talk about; it isn't
>> fast or slow. The optimizer generates
>>execution plans where those plans might use indexes in
>> different ways. And when the execution engine
>>uses the plans, using an index or different index types
>> influences performance.
>>
>>A blanket statement like "clustered index are fasten
> than
>> non-clustered indexes" is too much of a
>>generalization. There are cases where using a non-
>> clustered index will result in fewer I/O
>>operations and shorter execution time compared to using
> a
>> clustered index. One such example is where
>>a non-clustered index covers the query.
>>--
>>Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>>http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>>http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>>
>>"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
>> wrote in message
>>news:0d1201c514d6$150fc8c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Dear All
>> I recently posted a message where I stated that a
>> clustered index is faster than a non clustered index,
> is
>> this correct or do I have my facts totally wrong ?
>> Thanks
>> Peter
>>
>>.
>>
>>.|||"Kalen Delaney" <replies@.public_newsgroups.com> wrote in message
news:%23r$pIsQFFHA.2600@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Don't you remember what Einstein said?
> He would rather have a watch that had stopped completely, than one that
lost
> a second a day.
> A watch that had stopped would still show the correct time twice every
day.
I hope this is apocryphal or metaphorical or just a joke. :)
Personally, I'd rather have a watch that lost a second a day.|||Mark Wilden wrote:
> "Kalen Delaney" <replies@.public_newsgroups.com> wrote in message
> news:%23r$pIsQFFHA.2600@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> Don't you remember what Einstein said?
>> He would rather have a watch that had stopped completely, than one
>> that lost a second a day.
>> A watch that had stopped would still show the correct time twice
>> every day.
> I hope this is apocryphal or metaphorical or just a joke. :)
> Personally, I'd rather have a watch that lost a second a day.
Well, Einstein rode his bike to work every day because he was concerned
about all the moving parts in a car. He also had many copies of the same
suit to avoid having to make a decision about what suit to wear. He led
a simple life outside and a rather complex one inside. Most of us fall
somewhere in the middle. I'm with you on the watch.
--
David Gugick
Imceda Software
www.imceda.com|||"David Gugick" <davidg-nospam@.imceda.com> wrote in message
news:Oc5GKHVFFHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Well, Einstein rode his bike to work every day because he was concerned
> about all the moving parts in a car. He also had many copies of the same
> suit to avoid having to make a decision about what suit to wear. He led
> a simple life outside and a rather complex one inside.
My favorite worst Einstein quote is the one about making things as simple as
possible, but no simpler. It's not really possible to make things simpler
than possible. You can replace "simple" in that quote with any "good"
quality and have an equally valid (and vacuous) statement.

Clustered Vrs Non Clustered Indexes

Dear All
I recently posted a message where I stated that a
clustered index is faster than a non clustered index, is
this correct or do I have my facts totally wrong ?
Thanks
PeterSome definitions first:
An index doesn't have any speed to talk about; it isn't fast or slow. The op
timizer generates
execution plans where those plans might use indexes in different ways. And w
hen the execution engine
uses the plans, using an index or different index types influences performan
ce.
A blanket statement like "clustered index are fasten than non-clustered inde
xes" is too much of a
generalization. There are cases where using a non-clustered index will resul
t in fewer I/O
operations and shorter execution time compared to using a clustered index. O
ne such example is where
a non-clustered index covers the query.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0d1201c514d6$150fc8c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Dear All
> I recently posted a message where I stated that a
> clustered index is faster than a non clustered index, is
> this correct or do I have my facts totally wrong ?
> Thanks
> Peter|||Thanks Tibor,
Ah well, wrong again ;)
Peter

>--Original Message--
>Some definitions first:
>An index doesn't have any speed to talk about; it isn't
fast or slow. The optimizer generates
>execution plans where those plans might use indexes in
different ways. And when the execution engine
>uses the plans, using an index or different index types
influences performance.
>
>A blanket statement like "clustered index are fasten than
non-clustered indexes" is too much of a
>generalization. There are cases where using a non-
clustered index will result in fewer I/O
>operations and shorter execution time compared to using a
clustered index. One such example is where
>a non-clustered index covers the query.
>--
>Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
>"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message
>news:0d1201c514d6$150fc8c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
>
>.
>|||I wouldn't say "wrong", Pete. But perhaps an over-generalization... :-)
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0d6f01c514e4$afc799c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks Tibor,
> Ah well, wrong again ;)
> Peter
>
> fast or slow. The optimizer generates
> different ways. And when the execution engine
> influences performance.
> non-clustered indexes" is too much of a
> clustered index will result in fewer I/O
> clustered index. One such example is where
> wrote in message|||So far over its caused a capsize :-D

>--Original Message--
>I wouldn't say "wrong", Pete. But perhaps an over-
generalization... :-)
>--
>Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
>"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message
>news:0d6f01c514e4$afc799c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
than[vbcol=seagreen]
a[vbcol=seagreen]
is[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>.
>|||Peter, Peter, Peter...
Don't be so hard on yourself.
Don't you remember what Einstein said?
He would rather have a watch that had stopped completely, than one that lost
a second a day.
A watch that had stopped would still show the correct time twice every day.
If you just keep saying that clustered indexes are faster than nonclustered,
you will occasionally be right.
:-)
HTH
--
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"Peter The Spate" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0efe01c51509$798a6890$a401280a@.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> So far over its caused a capsize :-D
>
> generalization... :-)
> wrote in message
> than
> a
> is|||Mark Wilden wrote:
> "Kalen Delaney" <replies@.public_newsgroups.com> wrote in message
> news:%23r$pIsQFFHA.2600@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> I hope this is apocryphal or metaphorical or just a joke.
> Personally, I'd rather have a watch that lost a second a day.
Well, Einstein rode his bike to work every day because he was concerned
about all the moving parts in a car. He also had many copies of the same
suit to avoid having to make a decision about what suit to wear. He led
a simple life outside and a rather complex one inside. Most of us fall
somewhere in the middle. I'm with you on the watch.
David Gugick
Imceda Software
www.imceda.com|||"David Gugick" <davidg-nospam@.imceda.com> wrote in message
news:Oc5GKHVFFHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Well, Einstein rode his bike to work every day because he was concerned
> about all the moving parts in a car. He also had many copies of the same
> suit to avoid having to make a decision about what suit to wear. He led
> a simple life outside and a rather complex one inside.
My favorite worst Einstein quote is the one about making things as simple as
possible, but no simpler. It's not really possible to make things simpler
than possible. You can replace "simple" in that quote with any "good"
quality and have an equally valid (and vacuous) statement.

Clustered SQL Server shut down for third-party application install

Dear Sir,
If I needed to install something to the active then passive node one by one
and required to restart the server serveral times during install, what is the
procedures if I don't want SQL Server to auto startup during reboot?
Steps:
01) Offline "passive" node from cluster admin.
02) Shut down "passive" node server.
03) Offline "active" node SQL Server Group
04) From OS Services, change SQL Server to "Not auto startup"
05) Install application
06) Reboot active server
07) ....
Is the above procedures ok?
Please advise! Thanks!
Henry
cross-posted to microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
*mike hodgson*
blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Henry wrote:

>Dear Sir,
>If I needed to install something to the active then passive node one by one
>and required to restart the server serveral times during install, what is the
>procedures if I don't want SQL Server to auto startup during reboot?
>Steps:
>01) Offline "passive" node from cluster admin.
>02) Shut down "passive" node server.
>03) Offline "active" node SQL Server Group
>04) From OS Services, change SQL Server to "Not auto startup"
>05) Install application
>06) Reboot active server
>07) ....
> Is the above procedures ok?
>Please advise! Thanks!
>Henry
>
>

Clustered SQL Server shut down for third-party application install

Dear Sir,
If I needed to install something to the active then passive node one by one
and required to restart the server serveral times during install, what is the
procedures if I don't want SQL Server to auto startup during reboot?
Steps:
01) Offline "passive" node from cluster admin.
02) Shut down "passive" node server.
03) Offline "active" node SQL Server Group
04) From OS Services, change SQL Server to "Not auto startup"
05) Install application
06) Reboot active server
07) ....
Is the above procedures ok?
Please advise! Thanks!
HenryThis is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--030309070404030102020809
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cross-posted to microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
--
*mike hodgson*
blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Henry wrote:
>Dear Sir,
>If I needed to install something to the active then passive node one by one
>and required to restart the server serveral times during install, what is the
>procedures if I don't want SQL Server to auto startup during reboot?
>Steps:
>01) Offline "passive" node from cluster admin.
>02) Shut down "passive" node server.
>03) Offline "active" node SQL Server Group
>04) From OS Services, change SQL Server to "Not auto startup"
>05) Install application
>06) Reboot active server
>07) ....
> Is the above procedures ok?
>Please advise! Thanks!
>Henry
>
>
--030309070404030102020809
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<tt>cross-posted to microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering</tt><br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<p><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">--<br>
</font></span> <b><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">mike
hodgson</font></span></b><span lang="en-au"><br>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2">blog:</font><font face="Tahoma" size="2"> <a
href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>
</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
Henry wrote:
<blockquote cite="midE64C9F95-F0A5-42B5-A7AD-3CE7515EB4FE@.microsoft.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Dear Sir,
If I needed to install something to the active then passive node one by one
and required to restart the server serveral times during install, what is the
procedures if I don't want SQL Server to auto startup during reboot?
Steps:
01) Offline "passive" node from cluster admin.
02) Shut down "passive" node server.
03) Offline "active" node SQL Server Group
04) From OS Services, change SQL Server to "Not auto startup"
05) Install application
06) Reboot active server
07) ....
Is the above procedures ok?
Please advise! Thanks!
Henry
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--030309070404030102020809--

Clustered SQL Server shut down for third-party application install

Dear Sir,
If I needed to install something to the active then passive node one by one
and required to restart the server serveral times during install, what is th
e
procedures if I don't want SQL Server to auto startup during reboot?
Steps:
01) Offline "passive" node from cluster admin.
02) Shut down "passive" node server.
03) Offline "active" node SQL Server Group
04) From OS Services, change SQL Server to "Not auto startup"
05) Install application
06) Reboot active server
07) ....
Is the above procedures ok?
Please advise! Thanks!
Henrycross-posted to microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
*mike hodgson*
blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Henry wrote:

>Dear Sir,
>If I needed to install something to the active then passive node one by one
>and required to restart the server serveral times during install, what is t
he
>procedures if I don't want SQL Server to auto startup during reboot?
>Steps:
>01) Offline "passive" node from cluster admin.
>02) Shut down "passive" node server.
>03) Offline "active" node SQL Server Group
>04) From OS Services, change SQL Server to "Not auto startup"
>05) Install application
>06) Reboot active server
>07) ....
> Is the above procedures ok?
>Please advise! Thanks!
>Henry
>
>