Can not create a new instance

I have SBS2003. I am trying to install Panda Antivirus. It tries to create an
MSDE instance and fails with "setup failed to configure the server ...". I
have been through the process of deleting the previous MSDE instance
completely yet the problem still occurs. I have tried to create a manual
instance with a different name but get the same error.
Can anyone assist. I dont know where the MSDE install log file is either.
Note also that SBSmonitoring was removed and that too will not re-install
from the SBS CD.
Regards
Ian
hi Ian,
Ian wrote:
> I have SBS2003. I am trying to install Panda Antivirus. It tries to
> create an MSDE instance and fails with "setup failed to configure the
> server ...". I have been through the process of deleting the
> previous MSDE instance completely yet the problem still occurs. I
> have tried to create a manual instance with a different name but get
> the same error.
> Can anyone assist. I dont know where the MSDE install log file is
> either.
> Note also that SBSmonitoring was removed and that too will not
> re-install from the SBS CD.
>
please have a look at
http://support.microsoft.com/default...;EN-US;Q290991 for further
instructions on how manually remove a SQL Server/MSDE instance and related
clean up..
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.bizhttp://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.20.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.64.0 and further SQL Tools
-- remove DMO to reply
|||Thanks.
I have looked at the steps to remove a named instance of SQL and the
instance is not in the registry. I already have an instance named
MSSQL$SHAREPOINT which works ok so I do not want to remove all instances.
What else can I try?
"Andrea Montanari" wrote:

> hi Ian,
> Ian wrote:
> please have a look at
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...;EN-US;Q290991 for further
> instructions on how manually remove a SQL Server/MSDE instance and related
> clean up..
> --
> Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
> http://www.asql.bizhttp://italy.mvps.org
> DbaMgr2k ver 0.20.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.64.0 and further SQL Tools
> -- remove DMO to reply
>
>

Can not connect to SQL Express from a different computer

Hello,

I have the following problem: I can not connect to an instance of SQL Express from a computer different than the one that the SQL Express is installed on.

When trying to connect through Management Express Studio Express CTP I get the following error:

****

TITLE: Connect to Server

Cannot connect to (nameofserver)\SQLEXPRESS.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

An error has occurred while establishing a connection to the server. When connecting to SQL Server 2005, this failure may be caused by the fact that under the default settings SQL Server does not allow remote connections. (provider: SQL Network Interfaces, error: 26 - Error Locating Server/Instance Specified) (Microsoft SQL Server, Error: -1)

For help, click: http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink?ProdName=Microsoft+SQL+Server&EvtSrc=MSSQLServer&EvtID=-1&LinkId=20476

****

I can connect to the Express instance without problems from the same computer on which the server is installed on.

SQL Express is installed on a computer running Windows 2003 with SP1.

That computer also has SQL Server 2000, Workgroup Edition installed.

Both, SQL Express and Management Studio have been downloaded form the MSDN web site last week (so, I believe, they're the latest available versions).

In the SQL Server Configuration Manager, under SQL Server 2005 Network Configuration -> Protocols for SQLEXPRESS, Shared Memory, Named Pipes and TCP/IP are enabled, VIA is disabled.

In the SQL Server Configuration Manager, under SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration -> Client Protocols, Shared Memory, Named Pipes and TCP/IP are enabled, VIA is disabled.

After enabling these protocols the computer was restarted.

SQL Server Browser service is running.

Both, SQL Server and SQL Server Browser, were set to run under the deafult NetworkService account during setup.

There is a warning in the Event Log (Application section) logged by the SQLBrowser which says:

The configuration of the AdminConnection\TCP protocol in the SQL instance SQLEXPRESS is not valid.

I've searched a lot and tried a lot of different things, but I have not been able to resolve this issue. Please help.

Have you checked the following link: http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlexpress/archive/2005/05/05/415084.aspx ?|||

Thanks for the link.

I have already tried all the things listed in the article multiple times (enabled protocols, SQL Browser Service running, there is no firewall on the server, I disabled firewall on the client when trying to connect).

(I haven't tried the registry thing because I'm dealing with the final relase of SQL Express and not the CTP.)

I believe my problem has to do with the warning that's logged by the SQL Server Browser service in the Event Log:

The configuration of the AdminConnection\TCP protocol in the SQL instance SQLEXPRESS is not valid.

I have found a couple of references to the same message on the Internet, but none of them offered a solution.

Any other suggestions?

|||

I am also seeing these same symptoms, except I'm just trying to access SQL Express from the same machine it is installed on. I've followed all of the suggested steps I could find, and still get the error message about configuration of AdminConnection\TCP protocol not being valid. I've also, in desperation, disabled the firewall altogether: that didn't change the behavior at all.

I can't get a TCP Connect to SQL Express to work to save my soul.

Can not connect to non-default instance from remote computer

I installed SQL2005 as default instance.
After that I installed SQL2000 with instance name "SQL2K". Then I installed
SP4.
I can'not connect to SQL2K instance from remote machine. But if I log on at
machine on which SQL Server installed I can connect to instance.
And I can connect to default instance (SQL2005) from remote machine.
How to solve this problem?
Is the SQL Server Browser service running? It helps resolve names of named
instances to the port number. Since SQL Server 2005 is the default instance,
it is probably using port 1433. Therefore SQL Server 2000 must be using some
other port, but you don't know which port, but the SQL Server Browser
service will know.
Rick Byham
MCDBA, MCSE, MCSA
Lead Technical Writer,
Microsoft, SQL Server Books Online
This posting is provided "as is" with
no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Alexey Rokhin" <ar@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23PF4wc16FHA.1416@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>I installed SQL2005 as default instance.
> After that I installed SQL2000 with instance name "SQL2K". Then I
> installed SP4.
> I can'not connect to SQL2K instance from remote machine. But if I log on
> at machine on which SQL Server installed I can connect to instance.
> And I can connect to default instance (SQL2005) from remote machine.
> How to solve this problem?
>

Can not connect to non-default instance from remote computer

I installed SQL2005 as default instance.
After that I installed SQL2000 with instance name "SQL2K". Then I installed
SP4.
I can'not connect to SQL2K instance from remote machine. But if I log on at
machine on which SQL Server installed I can connect to instance.
And I can connect to default instance (SQL2005) from remote machine.
How to solve this problem?Is the SQL Server Browser service running? It helps resolve names of named
instances to the port number. Since SQL Server 2005 is the default instance,
it is probably using port 1433. Therefore SQL Server 2000 must be using some
other port, but you don't know which port, but the SQL Server Browser
service will know.
--
Rick Byham
MCDBA, MCSE, MCSA
Lead Technical Writer,
Microsoft, SQL Server Books Online
This posting is provided "as is" with
no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Alexey Rokhin" <ar@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23PF4wc16FHA.1416@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>I installed SQL2005 as default instance.
> After that I installed SQL2000 with instance name "SQL2K". Then I
> installed SP4.
> I can'not connect to SQL2K instance from remote machine. But if I log on
> at machine on which SQL Server installed I can connect to instance.
> And I can connect to default instance (SQL2005) from remote machine.
> How to solve this problem?
>

can not access clustering SQL Server after relocation

Hi all:

I have a clustering SQL Server on Node1 and Node2, the Node1 has named
Instance1 and Node2 has named Instance2, no default instance. We
tested it that everthing is OK, then we decide to move to DR location.

The relocation kept the same virtual and phusical server name, and we
did not change SQL Server server network utility. But server IP
addresses were changed(vitual and physical). We can start the
clustering SQL Server as before, and everything looks like well.

However the users can not access it remotely, and they did not change
the client network utility. But if I login the server,I can access it
from Query Analyzer even though ther is not client network utility
setup on the server. I can ping the vitual server name, how can I make
sure the ports are working well? (We did not use the default port for
named instance).

I remember I did input the virtual server IP address when I installed
the clustering SQL Server. Of course, it was change after relocation.
Is it the reason for failed remote login? If it is, how to fix it?

Does anyboday know there is document for clustering SQL Server
relocation?

Thanks
Williew2jin@.hotmail.com (willie) wrote in message news:<6610106b.0408251200.14624760@.posting.google.com>...
> Hi all:
> I have a clustering SQL Server on Node1 and Node2, the Node1 has named
> Instance1 and Node2 has named Instance2, no default instance. We
> tested it that everthing is OK, then we decide to move to DR location.
> The relocation kept the same virtual and phusical server name, and we
> did not change SQL Server server network utility. But server IP
> addresses were changed(vitual and physical). We can start the
> clustering SQL Server as before, and everything looks like well.
> However the users can not access it remotely, and they did not change
> the client network utility. But if I login the server,I can access it
> from Query Analyzer even though ther is not client network utility
> setup on the server. I can ping the vitual server name, how can I make
> sure the ports are working well? (We did not use the default port for
> named instance).
> I remember I did input the virtual server IP address when I installed
> the clustering SQL Server. Of course, it was change after relocation.
> Is it the reason for failed remote login? If it is, how to fix it?
> Does anyboday know there is document for clustering SQL Server
> relocation?
> Thanks
> Willie

This article might help:

http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...8&Product=sql2k

Simon

can not access clustering SQL Server after relocation

Hi all:
I have a clustering SQL Server on Node1 and Node2, the Node1 has named
Instance1 and Node2 has named Instance2, no default instance. We
tested it that everthing is OK, then we decide to move to DR location.
The relocation kept the same virtual and phusical server name, and we
did not change SQL Server server network utility. But server IP
addresses were changed(vitual and physical). We can start the
clustering SQL Server as before, and everything looks like well.
However the users can not access it remotely, and they did not change
the client network utility. But if I login the server,I can access it
from Query Analyzer even though ther is not client network utility
setup on the server. I can ping the vitual server name, how can I make
sure the ports are working well? (We did not use the default port for
named instance).
I remember I did input the virtual server IP address when I installed
the clustering SQL Server. Of course, it was change after relocation.
Is it the reason for failed remote login? If it is, how to fix it?
Does anyboday know there is document for clustering SQL Server
relocation?
Thanks
Williew2jin@.hotmail.com (willie) wrote in message news:<6610106b.0408251200.14624760@.posting.googl
e.com>...
> Hi all:
> I have a clustering SQL Server on Node1 and Node2, the Node1 has named
> Instance1 and Node2 has named Instance2, no default instance. We
> tested it that everthing is OK, then we decide to move to DR location.
> The relocation kept the same virtual and phusical server name, and we
> did not change SQL Server server network utility. But server IP
> addresses were changed(vitual and physical). We can start the
> clustering SQL Server as before, and everything looks like well.
> However the users can not access it remotely, and they did not change
> the client network utility. But if I login the server,I can access it
> from Query Analyzer even though ther is not client network utility
> setup on the server. I can ping the vitual server name, how can I make
> sure the ports are working well? (We did not use the default port for
> named instance).
> I remember I did input the virtual server IP address when I installed
> the clustering SQL Server. Of course, it was change after relocation.
> Is it the reason for failed remote login? If it is, how to fix it?
> Does anyboday know there is document for clustering SQL Server
> relocation?
> Thanks
> Willie
This article might help:
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...8&Product=sql2k
Simon

can not access clustering SQL Server after relocation

Hi all:
I have a clustering SQL Server on Node1 and Node2, the Node1 has named
Instance1 and Node2 has named Instance2, no default instance. We
tested it that everthing is OK, then we decide to move to DR location.
The relocation kept the same virtual and phusical server name, and we
did not change SQL Server server network utility. But server IP
addresses were changed(vitual and physical). We can start the
clustering SQL Server as before, and everything looks like well.
However the users can not access it remotely, and they did not change
the client network utility. But if I login the server,I can access it
from Query Analyzer even though ther is not client network utility
setup on the server. I can ping the vitual server name, how can I make
sure the ports are working well? (We did not use the default port for
named instance).
I remember I did input the virtual server IP address when I installed
the clustering SQL Server. Of course, it was change after relocation.
Is it the reason for failed remote login? If it is, how to fix it?
Does anyboday know there is document for clustering SQL Server
relocation?
Thanks
Williew2jin@.hotmail.com (willie) wrote in message news:<6610106b.0408251200.14624760@.posting.google.com>...
> Hi all:
> I have a clustering SQL Server on Node1 and Node2, the Node1 has named
> Instance1 and Node2 has named Instance2, no default instance. We
> tested it that everthing is OK, then we decide to move to DR location.
> The relocation kept the same virtual and phusical server name, and we
> did not change SQL Server server network utility. But server IP
> addresses were changed(vitual and physical). We can start the
> clustering SQL Server as before, and everything looks like well.
> However the users can not access it remotely, and they did not change
> the client network utility. But if I login the server,I can access it
> from Query Analyzer even though ther is not client network utility
> setup on the server. I can ping the vitual server name, how can I make
> sure the ports are working well? (We did not use the default port for
> named instance).
> I remember I did input the virtual server IP address when I installed
> the clustering SQL Server. Of course, it was change after relocation.
> Is it the reason for failed remote login? If it is, how to fix it?
> Does anyboday know there is document for clustering SQL Server
> relocation?
> Thanks
> Willie
This article might help:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;319578&Product=sql2k
Simonsql

can not access clustering SQL Server after relocation

Hi all:
I have a clustering SQL Server on Node1 and Node2, the Node1 has named
Instance1 and Node2 has named Instance2, no default instance. We
tested it that everthing is OK, then we decide to move to DR location.
The relocation kept the same virtual and phusical server name, and we
did not change SQL Server server network utility. But server IP
addresses were changed(vitual and physical). We can start the
clustering SQL Server as before, and everything looks like well.
However the users can not access it remotely, and they did not change
the client network utility. But if I login the server,I can access it
from Query Analyzer even though ther is not client network utility
setup on the server. I can ping the vitual server name, how can I make
sure the ports are working well? (We did not use the default port for
named instance).
I remember I did input the virtual server IP address when I installed
the clustering SQL Server. Of course, it was change after relocation.
Is it the reason for failed remote login? If it is, how to fix it?
Does anyboday know there is document for clustering SQL Server
relocation?
Thanks
Willie
w2jin@.hotmail.com (willie) wrote in message news:<6610106b.0408251200.14624760@.posting.google. com>...
> Hi all:
> I have a clustering SQL Server on Node1 and Node2, the Node1 has named
> Instance1 and Node2 has named Instance2, no default instance. We
> tested it that everthing is OK, then we decide to move to DR location.
> The relocation kept the same virtual and phusical server name, and we
> did not change SQL Server server network utility. But server IP
> addresses were changed(vitual and physical). We can start the
> clustering SQL Server as before, and everything looks like well.
> However the users can not access it remotely, and they did not change
> the client network utility. But if I login the server,I can access it
> from Query Analyzer even though ther is not client network utility
> setup on the server. I can ping the vitual server name, how can I make
> sure the ports are working well? (We did not use the default port for
> named instance).
> I remember I did input the virtual server IP address when I installed
> the clustering SQL Server. Of course, it was change after relocation.
> Is it the reason for failed remote login? If it is, how to fix it?
> Does anyboday know there is document for clustering SQL Server
> relocation?
> Thanks
> Willie
This article might help:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...&Product=sql2k
Simon

can not access clustering SQL Server after relocation

Hi all:
I have a clustering SQL Server on Node1 and Node2, the Node1 has named
Instance1 and Node2 has named Instance2, no default instance. We
tested it that everthing is OK, then we decide to move to DR location.
The relocation kept the same virtual and phusical server name, and we
did not change SQL Server server network utility. But server IP
addresses were changed(vitual and physical). We can start the
clustering SQL Server as before, and everything looks like well.
However the users can not access it remotely, and they did not change
the client network utility. But if I login the server,I can access it
from Query Analyzer even though ther is not client network utility
setup on the server. I can ping the vitual server name, how can I make
sure the ports are working well? (We did not use the default port for
named instance).
I remember I did input the virtual server IP address when I installed
the clustering SQL Server. Of course, it was change after relocation.
Is it the reason for failed remote login? If it is, how to fix it?
Does anyboday know there is document for clustering SQL Server
relocation?
Thanks
Willie
w2jin@.hotmail.com (willie) wrote in message news:<6610106b.0408251200.14624760@.posting.google. com>...
> Hi all:
> I have a clustering SQL Server on Node1 and Node2, the Node1 has named
> Instance1 and Node2 has named Instance2, no default instance. We
> tested it that everthing is OK, then we decide to move to DR location.
> The relocation kept the same virtual and phusical server name, and we
> did not change SQL Server server network utility. But server IP
> addresses were changed(vitual and physical). We can start the
> clustering SQL Server as before, and everything looks like well.
> However the users can not access it remotely, and they did not change
> the client network utility. But if I login the server,I can access it
> from Query Analyzer even though ther is not client network utility
> setup on the server. I can ping the vitual server name, how can I make
> sure the ports are working well? (We did not use the default port for
> named instance).
> I remember I did input the virtual server IP address when I installed
> the clustering SQL Server. Of course, it was change after relocation.
> Is it the reason for failed remote login? If it is, how to fix it?
> Does anyboday know there is document for clustering SQL Server
> relocation?
> Thanks
> Willie
This article might help:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...&Product=sql2k
Simon

Can multiple instance in a cluster share disk resources?

Is there a way for multiple SQL 2005 instances in a cluster to share drives for user databases.

Once we install our instances in the cluster using seperate disk resources. Can we then have multiple instances share the same physical disk for user databases only. This is for a test environment.

Thanks

Unfortunately that is not supported for each SQL instance you have to use a separate cluster group and it also means a separate shared drive.

Can multiple instance in a cluster share disk resources?

Is there a way for multiple SQL 2005 instances in a cluster to share drives for user databases.

Once we install our instances in the cluster using seperate disk resources. Can we then have multiple instances share the same physical disk for user databases only. This is for a test environment.

Thanks

Unfortunately that is not supported for each SQL instance you have to use a separate cluster group and it also means a separate shared drive.

Can I use 4 Gb memory for each instance of Standard Edition?

Hello!

I have installed SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition on 64 bit Windows 2003.

My question is if I can use more than 4 Gb Physical Memory?

Can I install another instance of SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition and use another 4 Gb Physical Memory for that instance?

Is the limitation of 4 Gb memory usage for the whole SQL Server or for each instance?

Hi Fari,

I am just curious as to why you would want multiple instances on one machine. Why dont you just have another database?|||

Hi!

It's "cheaper" to install another instance of sql server then buying another hardware and installing W2003! We are discussing differnt senarios. If buying another server is the only option, then thats the alternativ vi have to take.

|||

What is the physical memory available/installed on this server?

One of the article refers:

For 32-bit installations, the use of address windowing extensions (AWE) memory has been improved so that SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition can use more than 3GB of RAM. Also, with 64-bit processors increasingly more prolific and affordable, the benefits of 64-bit server installations are becoming much more accessible. A 64-bit architecture provides significantly larger directly addressable memory space (compared to 32-bit) for all database operations, and eliminates the need for the AWE mechanism.

|||

Hi!

We have 6 GB physical memory availabe on our 64- bit server.

I found in other places in books online that I can use as much memory as installed on the server and that I do not need to use AWE on the 64 bit server.

Is that true?

|||

Yes if its a 64 bit then need not use AWE settings.

Check on SQL Server properties about the memory settings to see how much is allocated, also run SYSMON to capture the resource usage.

|||Thanks for your help!

Can I tell when SQL Server was upgraded?

Unusal question but I am trying to find out the date an instance of SQL
Server was upgraded from 7.0 to 2000.
It was probably about 6 months ago and I am trying to pin it down to a
specific date.
I thought that maybe the creation date of system tables in msdb or Master
would give me a clue but they all seem to be 8/6/2000 which is definitely
not correct.
The logs have long since recycled.
Does anyone have any other ideas?Wild guess, but search for iss files (the install directory for your
instance). I'm thinking that the upgrade will produce an ISS file and the
date for this can be the answer. My machine shows 2002-08-06 for my sp1
instance and 2003-03-22 for my sp3 instance. Note that the machine was most
probably installed after sp1 was released but before sp3 ...
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at:
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"DaveF" <davef@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:efck5Xj%23DHA.2808@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Unusal question but I am trying to find out the date an instance of SQL
> Server was upgraded from 7.0 to 2000.
> It was probably about 6 months ago and I am trying to pin it down to a
> specific date.
> I thought that maybe the creation date of system tables in msdb or Master
> would give me a clue but they all seem to be 8/6/2000 which is definitely
> not correct.
> The logs have long since recycled.
> Does anyone have any other ideas?
>
>|||You can also try looking for sqlstp.log which I think is in c:\winnt by
default.
--
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"DaveF" <davef@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:efck5Xj%23DHA.2808@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Unusal question but I am trying to find out the date an instance of SQL
> Server was upgraded from 7.0 to 2000.
> It was probably about 6 months ago and I am trying to pin it down to a
> specific date.
> I thought that maybe the creation date of system tables in msdb or Master
> would give me a clue but they all seem to be 8/6/2000 which is definitely
> not correct.
> The logs have long since recycled.
> Does anyone have any other ideas?
>
>

Can I tell when SQL Server was upgraded?

Unusal question but I am trying to find out the date an instance of SQL
Server was upgraded from 7.0 to 2000.
It was probably about 6 months ago and I am trying to pin it down to a
specific date.
I thought that maybe the creation date of system tables in msdb or Master
would give me a clue but they all seem to be 8/6/2000 which is definitely
not correct.
The logs have long since recycled.
Does anyone have any other ideas?Wild guess, but search for iss files (the install directory for your
instance). I'm thinking that the upgrade will produce an ISS file and the
date for this can be the answer. My machine shows 2002-08-06 for my sp1
instance and 2003-03-22 for my sp3 instance. Note that the machine was most
probably installed after sp1 was released but before sp3 ...
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at:
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=...ublic.sqlserver
"DaveF" <davef@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:efck5Xj%23DHA.2808@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Unusal question but I am trying to find out the date an instance of SQL
> Server was upgraded from 7.0 to 2000.
> It was probably about 6 months ago and I am trying to pin it down to a
> specific date.
> I thought that maybe the creation date of system tables in msdb or Master
> would give me a clue but they all seem to be 8/6/2000 which is definitely
> not correct.
> The logs have long since recycled.
> Does anyone have any other ideas?
>
>|||You can also try looking for sqlstp.log which I think is in c:\winnt by
default.
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"DaveF" <davef@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:efck5Xj%23DHA.2808@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Unusal question but I am trying to find out the date an instance of SQL
> Server was upgraded from 7.0 to 2000.
> It was probably about 6 months ago and I am trying to pin it down to a
> specific date.
> I thought that maybe the creation date of system tables in msdb or Master
> would give me a clue but they all seem to be 8/6/2000 which is definitely
> not correct.
> The logs have long since recycled.
> Does anyone have any other ideas?
>
>

Can I run both a SQL 2000 instance and SQL 2005 Instance on same two node cluster?

I'd like to run a SQL 2000 instance and a SQL2005 instance on the same
two node windows cluster.
Each would have it's own disk groups.
Basically mixed versions of instances on a cluster.
Does anyone know where I can get Microsoft's official statement on
this?
Has anyone done this before?
Yes. This is allowed and supported under most scenarios, but there are some
limitations.
The Microsoft SQL Server support policy for Microsoft Clustering
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/327518
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Sanctus" <mchi55@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1174503282.467053.80730@.l77g2000hsb.googlegro ups.com...
> I'd like to run a SQL 2000 instance and a SQL2005 instance on the same
> two node windows cluster.
> Each would have it's own disk groups.
> Basically mixed versions of instances on a cluster.
> Does anyone know where I can get Microsoft's official statement on
> this?
> Has anyone done this before?
>

Can I restore SQL Server 2005 backup to SQL Server Express 2005

I have a backup of a SQL Server 2005 DB. Can I restore this to an instance
of SQL Server Express 2005?"dbrook" <dbrook@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9BEE3184-9181-4C31-9535-8646207E114D@.microsoft.com...
>I have a backup of a SQL Server 2005 DB. Can I restore this to an instance
> of SQL Server Express 2005?
Provided it's smaller than the DB limit of SQL Server Express (which I
believe is 4 gig).|||Yes, You could well restore a SQL 2005 database backup in SQL Express
edition, but the limitation
in SQL express is 4 GB data size.
Thanks
Hari
"dbrook" <dbrook@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9BEE3184-9181-4C31-9535-8646207E114D@.microsoft.com...
>I have a backup of a SQL Server 2005 DB. Can I restore this to an instance
> of SQL Server Express 2005?

Can I link to tables in an instance of MSDE from Access 2003?

I have a small program that linked to ACT! version 6 dbf files. I now have
ACT!7 SQL version. This uses MSDE. I need to link to the ACT! tables in the
MSDE instance. Any hints? ACT! technical help says I can not link. I
thought I would ask the real MSDE experts instead.
hi Scott,
Scott wrote:
> I have a small program that linked to ACT! version 6 dbf files. I
> now have ACT!7 SQL version. This uses MSDE. I need to link to the
> ACT! tables in the MSDE instance. Any hints? ACT! technical help
> says I can not link. I thought I would ask the real MSDE experts
> instead.
what do you mean by "link"?
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.biz http://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.21.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.65.0 and further SQL Tools
-- remove DMO to reply
|||Access/JET supports linked tables as does SQL Server itself. This is mostly
a matter of setting up the links from within Access. I have not done this in
years so I can't help with the current versions, but I don't see a reason
why it can't be done unless the ACT! database rights have been tuned to
prevent this.
____________________________________
William (Bill) Vaughn
Author, Mentor, Consultant
Microsoft MVP
INETA Speaker
www.betav.com/blog/billva
www.betav.com
Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
__________________________________
Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest book:
Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition)
and Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition (EBook)
------
"Scott" <Scott@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D75B4CED-FF49-4CFC-BAB6-DE4538CBF476@.microsoft.com...
>I have a small program that linked to ACT! version 6 dbf files. I now have
> ACT!7 SQL version. This uses MSDE. I need to link to the ACT! tables in
> the
> MSDE instance. Any hints? ACT! technical help says I can not link. I
> thought I would ask the real MSDE experts instead.

Can I just make the necessary registry changes to turn on error reporting in SQL2000 SP3

http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;328446
The part that describes how to turn off Error Reporting for a default =
instance is unclear in this article. It looks to be missing stuff. So =
maybe all I have to do to enable Error Reporting, is to manually make =
the change in the registry. That way if I want to turn it off I just =
change 1 to 0 as is in the article. Is that OK will that be sufficient? =
Thanks.
--=20
George Hester
__________________________________
You are correct that the artilce is missing something. The proper method to
enable this is as follows:
To turn on error reporting by using SQL Server Enterprise
Manager or Analysis Manager, follow these steps:
1. Click to select the name of the server.
2. Right-click the server name, and then click Properties.
3. Click to select the Enable Error Reporting Feature check box.
It is always best to use the interface than to manually edit the registry.
Thanks for the catch. I am getting the article updated.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
|||Oh cool yeah I'd rather do it that way. Thanks.
--=20
George Hester
__________________________________
"Rand Boyd [MSFT]" <rboyd@.onlinemicrosoft.com> wrote in message =
news:#PLYRQnPEHA.1516@.cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl...
> You are correct that the artilce is missing something. The proper =
method to=20
> enable this is as follows:
>=20
> To turn on error reporting by using SQL Server Enterprise
> Manager or Analysis Manager, follow these steps:
>=20
> 1. Click to select the name of the server.
> 2. Right-click the server name, and then click Properties.
> 3. Click to select the Enable Error Reporting Feature check box.
>=20
> It is always best to use the interface than to manually edit the =
registry.
>=20
> Thanks for the catch. I am getting the article updated.
>=20
> Rand
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no =
rights.
>

Can I just make the necessary registry changes to turn on error reporting in SQL2000 SP3

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=3Dkb;en-us;328446
The part that describes how to turn off Error Reporting for a default = instance is unclear in this article. It looks to be missing stuff. So = maybe all I have to do to enable Error Reporting, is to manually make = the change in the registry. That way if I want to turn it off I just = change 1 to 0 as is in the article. Is that OK will that be sufficient? = Thanks.
-- George Hester
__________________________________You are correct that the artilce is missing something. The proper method to
enable this is as follows:
To turn on error reporting by using SQL Server Enterprise
Manager or Analysis Manager, follow these steps:
1. Click to select the name of the server.
2. Right-click the server name, and then click Properties.
3. Click to select the Enable Error Reporting Feature check box.
It is always best to use the interface than to manually edit the registry.
Thanks for the catch. I am getting the article updated.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.|||Oh cool yeah I'd rather do it that way. Thanks.
-- George Hester
__________________________________
"Rand Boyd [MSFT]" <rboyd@.onlinemicrosoft.com> wrote in message =news:#PLYRQnPEHA.1516@.cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl...
> You are correct that the artilce is missing something. The proper =method to > enable this is as follows:
> > To turn on error reporting by using SQL Server Enterprise
> Manager or Analysis Manager, follow these steps:
> > 1. Click to select the name of the server.
> 2. Right-click the server name, and then click Properties.
> 3. Click to select the Enable Error Reporting Feature check box.
> > It is always best to use the interface than to manually edit the =registry.
> > Thanks for the catch. I am getting the article updated.
> > Rand
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no =rights.
>

Can I just make the necessary registry changes to turn on error reporting in SQL2000 S

http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;328446
The part that describes how to turn off Error Reporting for a default =
instance is unclear in this article. It looks to be missing stuff. So =
maybe all I have to do to enable Error Reporting, is to manually make =
the change in the registry. That way if I want to turn it off I just =
change 1 to 0 as is in the article. Is that OK will that be sufficient? =
Thanks.
--=20
George Hester
__________________________________You are correct that the artilce is missing something. The proper method to
enable this is as follows:
To turn on error reporting by using SQL Server Enterprise
Manager or Analysis Manager, follow these steps:
1. Click to select the name of the server.
2. Right-click the server name, and then click Properties.
3. Click to select the Enable Error Reporting Feature check box.
It is always best to use the interface than to manually edit the registry.
Thanks for the catch. I am getting the article updated.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.|||Oh cool yeah I'd rather do it that way. Thanks.
--=20
George Hester
__________________________________
"Rand Boyd [MSFT]" <rboyd@.onlinemicrosoft.com> wrote in message =
news:#PLYRQnPEHA.1516@.cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl...
> You are correct that the artilce is missing something. The proper =
method to=20
> enable this is as follows:
>=20
> To turn on error reporting by using SQL Server Enterprise
> Manager or Analysis Manager, follow these steps:
>=20
> 1. Click to select the name of the server.
> 2. Right-click the server name, and then click Properties.
> 3. Click to select the Enable Error Reporting Feature check box.
>=20
> It is always best to use the interface than to manually edit the =
registry.
>=20
> Thanks for the catch. I am getting the article updated.
>=20
> Rand
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no =
rights.
>