Dear All,
I have an instance of SQL 2000 and while Installing another instance of SQL
Server2005 Standard Edition on Windows 2003 with SP1 on Dell Server, I am
getting error
Microsoft Visual C++ Runtime Library
Runtime Error!
Program: C:\WINDOWS\system32\MsiExec.exe
The application has requested the Runtime to terminate it in an
unusual way.
Please contact the application's support team for more information.
All the hardware and software requirements are already there.
Any suggestions!
TIA
KayHi Kay
A couple of this to check
Make sure that you are up-to-date with windows update. Your hardware drivers
are the latest (especially video!). Also check out the SQL Server
installation log files http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143702.aspx
John
"Kay" wrote:
> Dear All,
> I have an instance of SQL 2000 and while Installing another instance of SQL
> Server2005 Standard Edition on Windows 2003 with SP1 on Dell Server, I am
> getting error
> Microsoft Visual C++ Runtime Library
> Runtime Error!
> Program: C:\WINDOWS\system32\MsiExec.exe
> The application has requested the Runtime to terminate it in an
> unusual way.
> Please contact the application's support team for more information.
>
> All the hardware and software requirements are already there.
> Any suggestions!
> TIA
> Kay
>
>
Showing posts with label windows. Show all posts
Showing posts with label windows. Show all posts
Friday, March 30, 2012
Runtime error 3155 inserting to linked SQL tables from Access
I have suddenly started getting a runtime error 3155 when attempting to
insert new rows into a linked SQL (2000 on Windows 2003 server) database
table from Access (2002 under XP).
A new bit of code in the Access database attempts to insert a database login
record into table Logins, as follows
Set oNet = CreateObject("Wscript.Network")
If Err.Number <> 0 Then
MsgBox "Unable to create Wscript.WshNetwork object"
Wscript.Quit Err.Number
End If
sqlstr = "Insert into Logins (username, workstation, intime) values ( '" &
oNet.UserName & "','" & oNet.computername & "', now())"
DoCmd.RunSQL sqlstr
Oddly the code works perfectly if it is run using the Run sub button from a
vb window in Access, but it produces the error above if it is run from
another function called from the autoexec macro.
ThanksHave you identified which line of code produced the error?
Error 3155 is "Application-defined or object-defined error" so I suspect the
error is in the statement:
Set oNet ...
BTW, if you want to continue the code after the error (which you are trying
to check with the If statement), you need to use the statement:
On Error Resume Next
before the Set statement.
In addition, in the Access IDE, use the Menu Tools / Options / General tab /
Error trapping pane to see the error-trapping options (you need "Break on
Unhandled Errors" option)
If the code works in Access IDE but doesn't work when you call it via
AutoExec / function, I suspect that it is a timing issue when Access start
... I would try a few DoEvents statement to allow the OS completes some
pending jobs like:
DoEvents
DoEvents
On Error Resume Next
'{Your code here}
HTH
Van T. Dinh
MVP (Access)
"Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:C90D9F78-3421-407D-9906-60E7CC101383@.microsoft.com...
>I have suddenly started getting a runtime error 3155 when attempting to
> insert new rows into a linked SQL (2000 on Windows 2003 server) database
> table from Access (2002 under XP).
> A new bit of code in the Access database attempts to insert a database
> login
> record into table Logins, as follows
> Set oNet = CreateObject("Wscript.Network")
> If Err.Number <> 0 Then
> MsgBox "Unable to create Wscript.WshNetwork object"
> Wscript.Quit Err.Number
> End If
> sqlstr = "Insert into Logins (username, workstation, intime) values ( '" &
> oNet.UserName & "','" & oNet.computername & "', now())"
> DoCmd.RunSQL sqlstr
> Oddly the code works perfectly if it is run using the Run sub button from
> a
> vb window in Access, but it produces the error above if it is run from
> another function called from the autoexec macro.
> Thanks|||Sorry, I should have mentioned at the outset that the really odd thing about
this is that the error is:
"ODBC--insert on a linked table 'Logins' failed.
[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]INSERT permission
denied on
object 'Logins', database 'data', owner 'dbo'.
(#229)"
Needless to say, it occurs at the statement
DoCmd.RunSQL sqlstr
That's why it's odd that it works OK when run directly from the code window,
but not when it is called from the autoexec macro. It is attempting to inser
t
just a single record.
Thanks
Alistair
"Van T. Dinh" wrote:
> Have you identified which line of code produced the error?
> Error 3155 is "Application-defined or object-defined error" so I suspect t
he
> error is in the statement:
>|||Are you using Windows Authentication or SQL Server Authentication?
If the later, do you store the LoginID / Password in the ODBC DSN?
HTH
Van T. Dinh
MVP (Access)
"Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:6E8412D8-15BE-47C0-83D0-07878DEC7921@.microsoft.com...
> Sorry, I should have mentioned at the outset that the really odd thing
> about
> this is that the error is:
> "ODBC--insert on a linked table 'Logins' failed.
> [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]INSERT permissi
on denied on
> object 'Logins', database 'data', owner 'dbo'.
> (#229)"
> Needless to say, it occurs at the statement
> DoCmd.RunSQL sqlstr
> That's why it's odd that it works OK when run directly from the code
> window,
> but not when it is called from the autoexec macro. It is attempting to
> insert
> just a single record.
> Thanks
> Alistair
>|||I am using SQL authentication. The login/ password is not currently stored i
n
the dsn: the tables are either linked manually before opening the database,
or using a button which runs a macro from within the database. The odd thing
is that you could open the database with autoexec, and get the Insert error
message. If you then opened it again without autoexec, kept the tables linke
d
as they were, then ran the code manually it worked.
"Van T. Dinh" wrote:
> Are you using Windows Authentication or SQL Server Authentication?
> If the later, do you store the LoginID / Password in the ODBC DSN?
> --
> HTH
> Van T. Dinh
> MVP (Access)
>
> "Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:6E8412D8-15BE-47C0-83D0-07878DEC7921@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||I does sound that when you execute the insert in the AutoExec, the database
has not establish a connection to the SQL Server BE.
Perhaps, you should run code to create a dummy recordset just to establish
the connection to the BE before your insert action.
Stefan Hoffman posted this procedure in another newsgroup
****
Create a passthrough query, call it "qryLogin". Use a simple SELECT
statement like
SELECT * FROM dbo.Table WHERE 0=1
.
This code should do the login:
Dim db As DAO.Database
Set db = CurrentDb
db.QueryDefs.Item("qryLogin").Connect = _
db.TableDefs.Item("linkedTable").Connect & _
";UID=username;PWD=password"
db.OpenRecordset("qryLogin")
****
HTH
Van T. Dinh
MVP (Access)
"Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:08E0025C-A6C9-4780-84F3-DDB878288B4F@.microsoft.com...
>I am using SQL authentication. The login/ password is not currently stored
>in
> the dsn: the tables are either linked manually before opening the
> database,
> or using a button which runs a macro from within the database. The odd
> thing
> is that you could open the database with autoexec, and get the Insert
> error
> message. If you then opened it again without autoexec, kept the tables
> linked
> as they were, then ran the code manually it worked.
>|||Thanks for your suggestions.
I added this code just before the code which attempts to Insert to the
database. The passthrough query works perfectly, but the Insert still fails.
A manual Insert attempted subsequently does work, however. I have also
discovered that if I re-link the table into the database, I am then unable t
o
Insert to it even manually, until I have closed and re-opened the database.
"Van T. Dinh" wrote:
> I does sound that when you execute the insert in the AutoExec, the databas
e
> has not establish a connection to the SQL Server BE.
> Perhaps, you should run code to create a dummy recordset just to establish
> the connection to the BE before your insert action.
> Stefan Hoffman posted this procedure in another newsgroup
>
> ****
> Create a passthrough query, call it "qryLogin". Use a simple SELECT
> statement like
> SELECT * FROM dbo.Table WHERE 0=1
> ..
> This code should do the login:
> Dim db As DAO.Database
> Set db = CurrentDb
> db.QueryDefs.Item("qryLogin").Connect = _
> db.TableDefs.Item("linkedTable").Connect & _
> ";UID=username;PWD=password"
> db.OpenRecordset("qryLogin")
> ****
> --
> HTH
> Van T. Dinh
> MVP (Access)
>
> "Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:08E0025C-A6C9-4780-84F3-DDB878288B4F@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||I suspect that the Table Logins is still not linked correctly when the
insert code is executed.
Try using the RefreshLink method (check Access VB Help) on this Table and
then 1 or 2 DoEvents statements beore your DoCmd.RunSQL.
HTH
Van T. Dinh
MVP (Access)
"Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:6F567ABE-4307-4F49-A3D4-56CE7A0A6729@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks for your suggestions.
> I added this code just before the code which attempts to Insert to the
> database. The passthrough query works perfectly, but the Insert still
> fails.
> A manual Insert attempted subsequently does work, however. I have also
> discovered that if I re-link the table into the database, I am then unable
> to
> Insert to it even manually, until I have closed and re-opened the
> database.
>|||Refreshing the link immediately before the insert statements does seem to
work consistently, thanks. While the root cause of the insert problem is
still unknown, I am very grateful to have a working solution now.
Thanks
Alistair
"Van T. Dinh" wrote:
> I suspect that the Table Logins is still not linked correctly when the
> insert code is executed.
> Try using the RefreshLink method (check Access VB Help) on this Table and
> then 1 or 2 DoEvents statements beore your DoCmd.RunSQL.
> --
> HTH
> Van T. Dinh
> MVP (Access)
>
> "Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:6F567ABE-4307-4F49-A3D4-56CE7A0A6729@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||You're welcome ... Gald it finally worked for you ...
Van T. Dinh
MVP (Access)
"Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:46AE9D61-A29C-46CC-A44D-7C60E700C076@.microsoft.com...
> Refreshing the link immediately before the insert statements does seem to
> work consistently, thanks. While the root cause of the insert problem is
> still unknown, I am very grateful to have a working solution now.
> Thanks
> Alistair
>
insert new rows into a linked SQL (2000 on Windows 2003 server) database
table from Access (2002 under XP).
A new bit of code in the Access database attempts to insert a database login
record into table Logins, as follows
Set oNet = CreateObject("Wscript.Network")
If Err.Number <> 0 Then
MsgBox "Unable to create Wscript.WshNetwork object"
Wscript.Quit Err.Number
End If
sqlstr = "Insert into Logins (username, workstation, intime) values ( '" &
oNet.UserName & "','" & oNet.computername & "', now())"
DoCmd.RunSQL sqlstr
Oddly the code works perfectly if it is run using the Run sub button from a
vb window in Access, but it produces the error above if it is run from
another function called from the autoexec macro.
ThanksHave you identified which line of code produced the error?
Error 3155 is "Application-defined or object-defined error" so I suspect the
error is in the statement:
Set oNet ...
BTW, if you want to continue the code after the error (which you are trying
to check with the If statement), you need to use the statement:
On Error Resume Next
before the Set statement.
In addition, in the Access IDE, use the Menu Tools / Options / General tab /
Error trapping pane to see the error-trapping options (you need "Break on
Unhandled Errors" option)
If the code works in Access IDE but doesn't work when you call it via
AutoExec / function, I suspect that it is a timing issue when Access start
... I would try a few DoEvents statement to allow the OS completes some
pending jobs like:
DoEvents
DoEvents
On Error Resume Next
'{Your code here}
HTH
Van T. Dinh
MVP (Access)
"Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:C90D9F78-3421-407D-9906-60E7CC101383@.microsoft.com...
>I have suddenly started getting a runtime error 3155 when attempting to
> insert new rows into a linked SQL (2000 on Windows 2003 server) database
> table from Access (2002 under XP).
> A new bit of code in the Access database attempts to insert a database
> login
> record into table Logins, as follows
> Set oNet = CreateObject("Wscript.Network")
> If Err.Number <> 0 Then
> MsgBox "Unable to create Wscript.WshNetwork object"
> Wscript.Quit Err.Number
> End If
> sqlstr = "Insert into Logins (username, workstation, intime) values ( '" &
> oNet.UserName & "','" & oNet.computername & "', now())"
> DoCmd.RunSQL sqlstr
> Oddly the code works perfectly if it is run using the Run sub button from
> a
> vb window in Access, but it produces the error above if it is run from
> another function called from the autoexec macro.
> Thanks|||Sorry, I should have mentioned at the outset that the really odd thing about
this is that the error is:
"ODBC--insert on a linked table 'Logins' failed.
[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]INSERT permission
denied on
object 'Logins', database 'data', owner 'dbo'.
(#229)"
Needless to say, it occurs at the statement
DoCmd.RunSQL sqlstr
That's why it's odd that it works OK when run directly from the code window,
but not when it is called from the autoexec macro. It is attempting to inser
t
just a single record.
Thanks
Alistair
"Van T. Dinh" wrote:
> Have you identified which line of code produced the error?
> Error 3155 is "Application-defined or object-defined error" so I suspect t
he
> error is in the statement:
>|||Are you using Windows Authentication or SQL Server Authentication?
If the later, do you store the LoginID / Password in the ODBC DSN?
HTH
Van T. Dinh
MVP (Access)
"Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:6E8412D8-15BE-47C0-83D0-07878DEC7921@.microsoft.com...
> Sorry, I should have mentioned at the outset that the really odd thing
> about
> this is that the error is:
> "ODBC--insert on a linked table 'Logins' failed.
> [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]INSERT permissi
on denied on
> object 'Logins', database 'data', owner 'dbo'.
> (#229)"
> Needless to say, it occurs at the statement
> DoCmd.RunSQL sqlstr
> That's why it's odd that it works OK when run directly from the code
> window,
> but not when it is called from the autoexec macro. It is attempting to
> insert
> just a single record.
> Thanks
> Alistair
>|||I am using SQL authentication. The login/ password is not currently stored i
n
the dsn: the tables are either linked manually before opening the database,
or using a button which runs a macro from within the database. The odd thing
is that you could open the database with autoexec, and get the Insert error
message. If you then opened it again without autoexec, kept the tables linke
d
as they were, then ran the code manually it worked.
"Van T. Dinh" wrote:
> Are you using Windows Authentication or SQL Server Authentication?
> If the later, do you store the LoginID / Password in the ODBC DSN?
> --
> HTH
> Van T. Dinh
> MVP (Access)
>
> "Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:6E8412D8-15BE-47C0-83D0-07878DEC7921@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||I does sound that when you execute the insert in the AutoExec, the database
has not establish a connection to the SQL Server BE.
Perhaps, you should run code to create a dummy recordset just to establish
the connection to the BE before your insert action.
Stefan Hoffman posted this procedure in another newsgroup
****
Create a passthrough query, call it "qryLogin". Use a simple SELECT
statement like
SELECT * FROM dbo.Table WHERE 0=1
.
This code should do the login:
Dim db As DAO.Database
Set db = CurrentDb
db.QueryDefs.Item("qryLogin").Connect = _
db.TableDefs.Item("linkedTable").Connect & _
";UID=username;PWD=password"
db.OpenRecordset("qryLogin")
****
HTH
Van T. Dinh
MVP (Access)
"Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:08E0025C-A6C9-4780-84F3-DDB878288B4F@.microsoft.com...
>I am using SQL authentication. The login/ password is not currently stored
>in
> the dsn: the tables are either linked manually before opening the
> database,
> or using a button which runs a macro from within the database. The odd
> thing
> is that you could open the database with autoexec, and get the Insert
> error
> message. If you then opened it again without autoexec, kept the tables
> linked
> as they were, then ran the code manually it worked.
>|||Thanks for your suggestions.
I added this code just before the code which attempts to Insert to the
database. The passthrough query works perfectly, but the Insert still fails.
A manual Insert attempted subsequently does work, however. I have also
discovered that if I re-link the table into the database, I am then unable t
o
Insert to it even manually, until I have closed and re-opened the database.
"Van T. Dinh" wrote:
> I does sound that when you execute the insert in the AutoExec, the databas
e
> has not establish a connection to the SQL Server BE.
> Perhaps, you should run code to create a dummy recordset just to establish
> the connection to the BE before your insert action.
> Stefan Hoffman posted this procedure in another newsgroup
>
> ****
> Create a passthrough query, call it "qryLogin". Use a simple SELECT
> statement like
> SELECT * FROM dbo.Table WHERE 0=1
> ..
> This code should do the login:
> Dim db As DAO.Database
> Set db = CurrentDb
> db.QueryDefs.Item("qryLogin").Connect = _
> db.TableDefs.Item("linkedTable").Connect & _
> ";UID=username;PWD=password"
> db.OpenRecordset("qryLogin")
> ****
> --
> HTH
> Van T. Dinh
> MVP (Access)
>
> "Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:08E0025C-A6C9-4780-84F3-DDB878288B4F@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||I suspect that the Table Logins is still not linked correctly when the
insert code is executed.
Try using the RefreshLink method (check Access VB Help) on this Table and
then 1 or 2 DoEvents statements beore your DoCmd.RunSQL.
HTH
Van T. Dinh
MVP (Access)
"Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:6F567ABE-4307-4F49-A3D4-56CE7A0A6729@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks for your suggestions.
> I added this code just before the code which attempts to Insert to the
> database. The passthrough query works perfectly, but the Insert still
> fails.
> A manual Insert attempted subsequently does work, however. I have also
> discovered that if I re-link the table into the database, I am then unable
> to
> Insert to it even manually, until I have closed and re-opened the
> database.
>|||Refreshing the link immediately before the insert statements does seem to
work consistently, thanks. While the root cause of the insert problem is
still unknown, I am very grateful to have a working solution now.
Thanks
Alistair
"Van T. Dinh" wrote:
> I suspect that the Table Logins is still not linked correctly when the
> insert code is executed.
> Try using the RefreshLink method (check Access VB Help) on this Table and
> then 1 or 2 DoEvents statements beore your DoCmd.RunSQL.
> --
> HTH
> Van T. Dinh
> MVP (Access)
>
> "Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:6F567ABE-4307-4F49-A3D4-56CE7A0A6729@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||You're welcome ... Gald it finally worked for you ...
Van T. Dinh
MVP (Access)
"Alistair Taylor" <AlistairTaylor@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:46AE9D61-A29C-46CC-A44D-7C60E700C076@.microsoft.com...
> Refreshing the link immediately before the insert statements does seem to
> work consistently, thanks. While the root cause of the insert problem is
> still unknown, I am very grateful to have a working solution now.
> Thanks
> Alistair
>
Run-time error (R6009)
I installed a program that put Microsoft SQL Server on my system, Windows XP. The next day I tried to load a MSDOS Database program, Nutplus (Ultrapls), now I get a Run-Time error, R6009. The program will not load. Please help!!!!!, Thank you in advance.This seems to be a third party application and if your query is not related to SQL Server then approach vendor for suitable fix.
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Running SQL Server on a Desktop Machine
Hi,
The company I work at was going to install SQL Server 2005 on a server running Windows Server 2000. However this server is no longer available, and due to cost restraints we are unable to purchase another server.
I still wish to get SQL Server 2005 running, and have a spare desktop computer avaible. This computer is a P4 3.2GHz with 1GB of RAM and 40GB hard disk.
I was thinking of adding RAM and a larger hard disk, and installing Windows Server 2003 on it.
Is it advisable to run SQL Server 2005 (and Server 2003) on a desktop computer? Any comments or experiences of similar situations would be appreciated.
Thanks,
MattThere's lots of issues here;
1 What's it for?
2 Version
You have not mentioned which version of SQL Server 2005
3 Capacity
Your hardware spec. meets the minimum requirements, you can install SQL 2005, but what you will actually be doing with it will determine the hardware.
4 Availability
Again, what do you need to do on this server; server hardware is built to serve mission critical applications, the numbers might not look as good but you generally get a system that allows for RAID, hot swapping HDDs and memory, etc.
5 Maintenance & Support
E.g. If a HDD fails, will your hardware guys fix it, or will they say - what's this mickey-mouse setup?
And so on...|||Thanks for the reply, sorry I should have been more specific.
The version used would be the Standard Edition.
I am responsible for the reporting of our organisation. Currently data is taken from the enterprise system and reported on using Microsoft Access and Excel. So if I upgraded to SQL Server then it would be used to implement a data warehousing solution. Table updates would run in the morning, along with the emailing/printing of several reports. After that most usage would be via Excel queries. There would be around 20-30 users doing this, with no more than 10 accessing the SQL Server concurrently.
Eventually the SQL Server system would be moved to a server, but this cannot happen until 8 months or so. I am ready to start going live with a SQL Server solution, and want to use to desktop machine as a temporary solution. I want to know whether using this desktop will provide a workable solution. I know it is far from perfect, but considering we are currently running Access as a reporting database server, will the solution work temporarily?
Regarding maintennance and support, seeing it is not a mission critical solution, I had planned to backup the data files and any code created in BIDS on a seperate server. In the event of a disaster this would allow me to recreate the data warehouse on another hard drive. Again, it is an imperfect solution but I am hoping it would do the job until a server machine becomes available.
Purchasing a server is not really an option due to the price. The cost of SQL Server has already been approved, and if I go with this desktop machine only another $1200 or so will be needed for Server 2003 and hardware upgrades.
Any help or opinions with this would be great.|||You haven't said anything that makes me think it won't be able to handle the capacity, but I still would worry about a live service on a server-under-the-desk scenario.
Apart from the issues I've alreay mentioned, make sure you aren't breaking any corporate standards, laws or regulatory requirements for the data you are handling.
Running SQL Server 6.5 on Win2K Server?
Is anyone here successfully running SQL Server 6.5 in a Windows 2000
Server??
We tried to and had some runtime problems relative to tempdb.(cdavis10717@.comcast.net) writes:
> Is anyone here successfully running SQL Server 6.5 in a Windows 2000
> Server??
> We tried to and had some runtime problems relative to tempdb.
Server??
We tried to and had some runtime problems relative to tempdb.(cdavis10717@.comcast.net) writes:
> Is anyone here successfully running SQL Server 6.5 in a Windows 2000
> Server??
> We tried to and had some runtime problems relative to tempdb.
I seem to recall that it is supported, provided that you have SP5a of
SQL 6.5.
But I have to admit that I once attempted to install SQL 6.5 on Win 2000
Pro, and I wasn't successful. When you say it, it might have been an
issue with tempdb. In my case, the problems occurred already during
installation.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp|||Erland Sommarskog wrote:
> (cdavis10717@.comcast.net) writes:
> > Is anyone here successfully running SQL Server 6.5 in a Windows
2000
> > Server??
> > We tried to and had some runtime problems relative to tempdb.
> I seem to recall that it is supported, provided that you have SP5a of
> SQL 6.5.
> But I have to admit that I once attempted to install SQL 6.5 on Win
2000
> Pro, and I wasn't successful. When you say it, it might have been an
> issue with tempdb. In my case, the problems occurred already during
> installation.
> --
> Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
> Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp
Thank you. Yes, the running SQL Server 6.5 choked on tempdb. And even
starting sql server in minimal mode failed since tempdb would not
allocate in RAM. Oh, well, we are going back to SQL 6.5 on NT until we
can determine the databases that must be upgraded or dropped.
thank you again.|||(cdavis10717@.comcast.net) writes:
> Thank you. Yes, the running SQL Server 6.5 choked on tempdb. And even
> starting sql server in minimal mode failed since tempdb would not
> allocate in RAM. Oh, well, we are going back to SQL 6.5 on NT until we
> can determine the databases that must be upgraded or dropped.
> thank you again.
Allocating tempdb in RAM? Do you have that feature on? Or is that something
which happens when you start in single-user mode? I'm not using 6.5
much these days...
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp
Running SQL Server 2005 EE on Dual-Core CPU
Hello!
We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
16 GB RAM
4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
Intel or AMD?
Thank you in advance,
Igor
Hi
We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
happy with the performance.
Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
Regards--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>
|||I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
worth waiting for or not.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>
|||Mike,
Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005 on
our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL 2005/Dual
core CPU is stable enough configuration.
Igor
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:u$js9ES$FHA.3804@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
> happy with the performance.
> Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
> Regards--
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/ Dual
core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
Igor
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
>core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
>units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
>worth waiting for or not.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
|||"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ekH$VRb$FHA.328@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005
> on our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL
> 2005/Dual core CPU is stable enough configuration.
>
IMO Multi-Core x64 with 2 or 4 sockets is the basic hardware platform for
SQL Server 2005.
Talk to Dell or HP. The Dell PowerEdge 6850 and the HP DL580 or DL585 meet
your specs, and either one of them can help put your mind at ease about
running 64-bit Windows and 64-bit SQL Server 2005 in production.
David
|||I have seen both with no problems on either that I know of.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23xldESb$FHA.1288@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/
> Dual core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
>
> Igor
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
16 GB RAM
4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
Intel or AMD?
Thank you in advance,
Igor
Hi
We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
happy with the performance.
Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
Regards--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>
|||I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
worth waiting for or not.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>
|||Mike,
Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005 on
our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL 2005/Dual
core CPU is stable enough configuration.
Igor
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:u$js9ES$FHA.3804@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
> happy with the performance.
> Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
> Regards--
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/ Dual
core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
Igor
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
>core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
>units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
>worth waiting for or not.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
|||"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ekH$VRb$FHA.328@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005
> on our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL
> 2005/Dual core CPU is stable enough configuration.
>
IMO Multi-Core x64 with 2 or 4 sockets is the basic hardware platform for
SQL Server 2005.
Talk to Dell or HP. The Dell PowerEdge 6850 and the HP DL580 or DL585 meet
your specs, and either one of them can help put your mind at ease about
running 64-bit Windows and 64-bit SQL Server 2005 in production.
David
|||I have seen both with no problems on either that I know of.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23xldESb$FHA.1288@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/
> Dual core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
>
> Igor
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
Running SQL Server 2005 EE on Dual-Core CPU
Hello!
We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
16 GB RAM
4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
Intel or AMD?
Thank you in advance,
IgorHi
We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
happy with the performance.
Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
Regards--
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>|||I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
worth waiting for or not.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>|||Mike,
Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005 on
our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL 2005/Dual
core CPU is stable enough configuration.
Igor
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:u$js9ES$FHA.3804@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
> happy with the performance.
> Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
> Regards--
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Hello!
>> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
>> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
>> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
>> 16 GB RAM
>> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
>> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
>> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to
>> with Intel or AMD?
>> Thank you in advance,
>> Igor
>|||Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/ Dual
core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
Igor
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
>core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
>units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
>worth waiting for or not.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Hello!
>> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
>> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
>> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
>> 16 GB RAM
>> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
>> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
>> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to
>> with Intel or AMD?
>> Thank you in advance,
>> Igor
>|||"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ekH$VRb$FHA.328@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005
> on our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL
> 2005/Dual core CPU is stable enough configuration.
>
IMO Multi-Core x64 with 2 or 4 sockets is the basic hardware platform for
SQL Server 2005.
Talk to Dell or HP. The Dell PowerEdge 6850 and the HP DL580 or DL585 meet
your specs, and either one of them can help put your mind at ease about
running 64-bit Windows and 64-bit SQL Server 2005 in production.
David|||I have seen both with no problems on either that I know of.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23xldESb$FHA.1288@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/
> Dual core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
>
> Igor
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
>>core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
>>units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
>>worth waiting for or not.
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>>
>> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Hello!
>> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
>> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
>> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
>> 16 GB RAM
>> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
>> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
>> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to
>> with Intel or AMD?
>> Thank you in advance,
>> Igor
>>
>
We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
16 GB RAM
4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
Intel or AMD?
Thank you in advance,
IgorHi
We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
happy with the performance.
Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
Regards--
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>|||I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
worth waiting for or not.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>|||Mike,
Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005 on
our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL 2005/Dual
core CPU is stable enough configuration.
Igor
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:u$js9ES$FHA.3804@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
> happy with the performance.
> Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
> Regards--
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Hello!
>> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
>> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
>> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
>> 16 GB RAM
>> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
>> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
>> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to
>> with Intel or AMD?
>> Thank you in advance,
>> Igor
>|||Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/ Dual
core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
Igor
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
>core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
>units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
>worth waiting for or not.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Hello!
>> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
>> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
>> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
>> 16 GB RAM
>> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
>> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
>> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to
>> with Intel or AMD?
>> Thank you in advance,
>> Igor
>|||"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ekH$VRb$FHA.328@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005
> on our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL
> 2005/Dual core CPU is stable enough configuration.
>
IMO Multi-Core x64 with 2 or 4 sockets is the basic hardware platform for
SQL Server 2005.
Talk to Dell or HP. The Dell PowerEdge 6850 and the HP DL580 or DL585 meet
your specs, and either one of them can help put your mind at ease about
running 64-bit Windows and 64-bit SQL Server 2005 in production.
David|||I have seen both with no problems on either that I know of.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23xldESb$FHA.1288@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/
> Dual core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
>
> Igor
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
>>core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
>>units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
>>worth waiting for or not.
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>>
>> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Hello!
>> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
>> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
>> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
>> 16 GB RAM
>> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
>> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
>> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to
>> with Intel or AMD?
>> Thank you in advance,
>> Igor
>>
>
Running SQL Server 2005 EE on Dual-Core CPU
Hello!
We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
16 GB RAM
4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
Intel or AMD?
Thank you in advance,
IgorHi
We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
happy with the performance.
Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
Regards--
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>|||I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
worth waiting for or not.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>|||Mike,
Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005 on
our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL 2005/Dual
core CPU is stable enough configuration.
Igor
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:u$js9ES$FHA.3804@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
> happy with the performance.
> Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
> Regards--
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>|||Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/ Dual
core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
Igor
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
>core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
>units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
>worth waiting for or not.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>|||"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ekH$VRb$FHA.328@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005
> on our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL
> 2005/Dual core CPU is stable enough configuration.
>
IMO Multi-Core x64 with 2 or 4 sockets is the basic hardware platform for
SQL Server 2005.
Talk to Dell or HP. The Dell PowerEdge 6850 and the HP DL580 or DL585 meet
your specs, and either one of them can help put your mind at ease about
running 64-bit Windows and 64-bit SQL Server 2005 in production.
David|||I have seen both with no problems on either that I know of.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23xldESb$FHA.1288@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/
> Dual core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
>
> Igor
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
16 GB RAM
4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
Intel or AMD?
Thank you in advance,
IgorHi
We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
happy with the performance.
Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
Regards--
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>|||I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
worth waiting for or not.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello!
> We are planning following setup for our production SQL Server:
> OS - Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition
> 16 GB RAM
> 4 Dual-Core CPUs 64 bit
> I was wondering if anybody is running SQL Server 2005 on Dual-Core 64
> bit CPUs. Are there any know issues with this? Would it be better to with
> Intel or AMD?
> Thank you in advance,
> Igor
>|||Mike,
Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005 on
our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL 2005/Dual
core CPU is stable enough configuration.
Igor
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:u$js9ES$FHA.3804@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> We are running SQL Server 2000 on HP 585's, 4 AMD Dual cores. We are very
> happy with the performance.
> Still awaiting the Intel Dual Core range, so no comparison yet.
> Regards--
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>|||Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/ Dual
core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
Igor
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I haven't seen any Intel dual cores yet but I have seen several AMD dual
>core servers and they work very well. From what I have heard the Intel
>units will be a little faster than the AMD's but I don't know if that is
>worth waiting for or not.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23v5j5%23R$FHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>|||"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ekH$VRb$FHA.328@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> Thanks a lot for your feedback. Since we are planning to run SQL 2005
> on our production env., it is critical for us to know whether SQL
> 2005/Dual core CPU is stable enough configuration.
>
IMO Multi-Core x64 with 2 or 4 sockets is the basic hardware platform for
SQL Server 2005.
Talk to Dell or HP. The Dell PowerEdge 6850 and the HP DL580 or DL585 meet
your specs, and either one of them can help put your mind at ease about
running 64-bit Windows and 64-bit SQL Server 2005 in production.
David|||I have seen both with no problems on either that I know of.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"imarchenko" <igormarchenko@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23xldESb$FHA.1288@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thanks, Andrew. Would you happen to know if anyone is running SQL 2005/
> Dual core CPU configuration? Is this a stable enough environment?
>
> Igor
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23pR7nOU$FHA.3908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
Running SQL Server 2000 with Win2003 Server
I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start some where.
Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Server Standard Editi
on and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried to install both of
these onto a development s
erver and the autorun on the SQL Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run
with any service pack below service pack 2. So we installed the database se
rver along with service packs 1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the databa
se server on the local mach
ine proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise
manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and trie
d to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the client
machines, it just returns "
Server non-existing or access denied" error, even when the password and user
name is correct (user logins set at the development server). Did we miss any
thing that we need to set or have we done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody
help?Are the clients able to access the server in other ways such as ping or smb?
If not, it might be the built-in firewall in 2003. You can find it by going
into the properties of the network connection.
"Chris" <honchein.choi@.newera.edu.my> wrote in message
news:514C4401-60B6-4D19-9605-34E2A5D01BB9@.microsoft.com...
> I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start some
where. Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Server
Standard Edition and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried to
install both of these onto a development server and the autorun on the SQL
Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack below
service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service packs
1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local machine
proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise
manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and
tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the
client machines, it just returns "Server non-existing or access denied"
error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set at
the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have we
done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?|||I'm sure that all clients can't access to the database server, enterprise ma
nager, query analyzer, odbc connections, etc. i've checked the properties of
the network connection and the firewall wasn't activated automatically and
i can ping the server throu
gh tcp/ip protocol. that's y i dunno wut's wrong here. any ideas?
-- Johan wrote: --
Are the clients able to access the server in other ways such as ping or smb?
If not, it might be the built-in firewall in 2003. You can find it by going
into the properties of the network connection.
"Chris" <honchein.choi@.newera.edu.my> wrote in message
news:514C4401-60B6-4D19-9605-34E2A5D01BB9@.microsoft.com...
> I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start some
where. Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Server
Standard Edition and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried to
install both of these onto a development server and the autorun on the SQL
Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack below
service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service packs
1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local machine
proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise
manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and
tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the
client machines, it just returns "Server non-existing or access denied"
error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set at
the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have we
done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?
Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Server Standard Editi
on and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried to install both of
these onto a development s
erver and the autorun on the SQL Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run
with any service pack below service pack 2. So we installed the database se
rver along with service packs 1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the databa
se server on the local mach
ine proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise
manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and trie
d to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the client
machines, it just returns "
Server non-existing or access denied" error, even when the password and user
name is correct (user logins set at the development server). Did we miss any
thing that we need to set or have we done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody
help?Are the clients able to access the server in other ways such as ping or smb?
If not, it might be the built-in firewall in 2003. You can find it by going
into the properties of the network connection.
"Chris" <honchein.choi@.newera.edu.my> wrote in message
news:514C4401-60B6-4D19-9605-34E2A5D01BB9@.microsoft.com...
> I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start some
where. Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Server
Standard Edition and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried to
install both of these onto a development server and the autorun on the SQL
Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack below
service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service packs
1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local machine
proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise
manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and
tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the
client machines, it just returns "Server non-existing or access denied"
error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set at
the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have we
done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?|||I'm sure that all clients can't access to the database server, enterprise ma
nager, query analyzer, odbc connections, etc. i've checked the properties of
the network connection and the firewall wasn't activated automatically and
i can ping the server throu
gh tcp/ip protocol. that's y i dunno wut's wrong here. any ideas?
-- Johan wrote: --
Are the clients able to access the server in other ways such as ping or smb?
If not, it might be the built-in firewall in 2003. You can find it by going
into the properties of the network connection.
"Chris" <honchein.choi@.newera.edu.my> wrote in message
news:514C4401-60B6-4D19-9605-34E2A5D01BB9@.microsoft.com...
> I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start some
where. Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Server
Standard Edition and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried to
install both of these onto a development server and the autorun on the SQL
Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack below
service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service packs
1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local machine
proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise
manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and
tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the
client machines, it just returns "Server non-existing or access denied"
error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set at
the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have we
done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?
Running SQL Server 2000 with Win2003 Server
I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start some where. Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Server Standard Edition and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried to install both of these onto a development s
erver and the autorun on the SQL Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack below service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service packs 1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local mach
ine proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the client machines, it just returns "
Server non-existing or access denied" error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set at the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have we done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?
Are the clients able to access the server in other ways such as ping or smb?
If not, it might be the built-in firewall in 2003. You can find it by going
into the properties of the network connection.
"Chris" <honchein.choi@.newera.edu.my> wrote in message
news:514C4401-60B6-4D19-9605-34E2A5D01BB9@.microsoft.com...
> I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start some
where. Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Server
Standard Edition and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried to
install both of these onto a development server and the autorun on the SQL
Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack below
service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service packs
1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local machine
proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise
manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and
tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the
client machines, it just returns "Server non-existing or access denied"
error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set at
the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have we
done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?
|||I'm sure that all clients can't access to the database server, enterprise manager, query analyzer, odbc connections, etc. i've checked the properties of the network connection and the firewall wasn't activated automatically and i can ping the server throu
gh tcp/ip protocol. that's y i dunno wut's wrong here. any ideas?
-- Johan wrote: --
Are the clients able to access the server in other ways such as ping or smb?
If not, it might be the built-in firewall in 2003. You can find it by going
into the properties of the network connection.
"Chris" <honchein.choi@.newera.edu.my> wrote in message
news:514C4401-60B6-4D19-9605-34E2A5D01BB9@.microsoft.com...
> I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start some
where. Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Server
Standard Edition and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried to
install both of these onto a development server and the autorun on the SQL
Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack below
service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service packs
1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local machine
proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise
manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and
tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the
client machines, it just returns "Server non-existing or access denied"
error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set at
the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have we
done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?
erver and the autorun on the SQL Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack below service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service packs 1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local mach
ine proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the client machines, it just returns "
Server non-existing or access denied" error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set at the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have we done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?
Are the clients able to access the server in other ways such as ping or smb?
If not, it might be the built-in firewall in 2003. You can find it by going
into the properties of the network connection.
"Chris" <honchein.choi@.newera.edu.my> wrote in message
news:514C4401-60B6-4D19-9605-34E2A5D01BB9@.microsoft.com...
> I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start some
where. Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Server
Standard Edition and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried to
install both of these onto a development server and the autorun on the SQL
Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack below
service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service packs
1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local machine
proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise
manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and
tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the
client machines, it just returns "Server non-existing or access denied"
error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set at
the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have we
done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?
|||I'm sure that all clients can't access to the database server, enterprise manager, query analyzer, odbc connections, etc. i've checked the properties of the network connection and the firewall wasn't activated automatically and i can ping the server throu
gh tcp/ip protocol. that's y i dunno wut's wrong here. any ideas?
-- Johan wrote: --
Are the clients able to access the server in other ways such as ping or smb?
If not, it might be the built-in firewall in 2003. You can find it by going
into the properties of the network connection.
"Chris" <honchein.choi@.newera.edu.my> wrote in message
news:514C4401-60B6-4D19-9605-34E2A5D01BB9@.microsoft.com...
> I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start some
where. Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Server
Standard Edition and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried to
install both of these onto a development server and the autorun on the SQL
Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack below
service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service packs
1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local machine
proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise
manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and
tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the
client machines, it just returns "Server non-existing or access denied"
error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set at
the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have we
done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?
Running SQL Server 2000 with Win2003 Server
I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start some where. Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Server Standard Edition and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried to install both of these onto a development server and the autorun on the SQL Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack below service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service packs 1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local machine proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the client machines, it just returns "Server non-existing or access denied" error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set at the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have we done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?Are the clients able to access the server in other ways such as ping or smb?
If not, it might be the built-in firewall in 2003. You can find it by going
into the properties of the network connection.
"Chris" <honchein.choi@.newera.edu.my> wrote in message
news:514C4401-60B6-4D19-9605-34E2A5D01BB9@.microsoft.com...
> I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start some
where. Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Server
Standard Edition and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried to
install both of these onto a development server and the autorun on the SQL
Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack below
service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service packs
1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local machine
proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise
manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and
tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the
client machines, it just returns "Server non-existing or access denied"
error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set at
the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have we
done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?|||I'm sure that all clients can't access to the database server, enterprise manager, query analyzer, odbc connections, etc. i've checked the properties of the network connection and the firewall wasn't activated automatically and i can ping the server through tcp/ip protocol. that's y i dunno wut's wrong here. any ideas
-- Johan wrote: --
Are the clients able to access the server in other ways such as ping or smb
If not, it might be the built-in firewall in 2003. You can find it by goin
into the properties of the network connection
"Chris" <honchein.choi@.newera.edu.my> wrote in messag
news:514C4401-60B6-4D19-9605-34E2A5D01BB9@.microsoft.com..
> I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start som
where. Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Serve
Standard Edition and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried t
install both of these onto a development server and the autorun on the SQ
Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack belo
service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service pack
1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local machin
proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterpris
manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines an
tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on th
client machines, it just returns "Server non-existing or access denied
error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set a
the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have w
done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?
If not, it might be the built-in firewall in 2003. You can find it by going
into the properties of the network connection.
"Chris" <honchein.choi@.newera.edu.my> wrote in message
news:514C4401-60B6-4D19-9605-34E2A5D01BB9@.microsoft.com...
> I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start some
where. Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Server
Standard Edition and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried to
install both of these onto a development server and the autorun on the SQL
Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack below
service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service packs
1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local machine
proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterprise
manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines and
tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on the
client machines, it just returns "Server non-existing or access denied"
error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set at
the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have we
done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?|||I'm sure that all clients can't access to the database server, enterprise manager, query analyzer, odbc connections, etc. i've checked the properties of the network connection and the firewall wasn't activated automatically and i can ping the server through tcp/ip protocol. that's y i dunno wut's wrong here. any ideas
-- Johan wrote: --
Are the clients able to access the server in other ways such as ping or smb
If not, it might be the built-in firewall in 2003. You can find it by goin
into the properties of the network connection
"Chris" <honchein.choi@.newera.edu.my> wrote in messag
news:514C4401-60B6-4D19-9605-34E2A5D01BB9@.microsoft.com..
> I'm not sure if i'm asking in the right place but I've to start som
where. Recently our company got our hands on the Windows 2003 Serve
Standard Edition and also SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. We've tried t
install both of these onto a development server and the autorun on the SQ
Server 2000 CD prompts that it will not run with any service pack belo
service pack 2. So we installed the database server along with service pack
1, 2 and 3 into the server. Running the database server on the local machin
proves that nothing is wrong where everything can run on the enterpris
manager and query analyzer. But when we turn to the client machines an
tried to register the SQL Server instance with enterprise manager on th
client machines, it just returns "Server non-existing or access denied
error, even when the password and username is correct (user logins set a
the development server). Did we miss anything that we need to set or have w
done the whole thing wrong? Can anybody help?
Running SQL Server 2000 on a Windows XP platform
I have been checking through the literature and do not see
anything regarding installing and running SQL Server 2000
on a Windows XP platform. Does anyone know where I can
find information about this? In particular, whether or
not you can run SQL Server 2000 on a Windows XP platform?
Thanks.You can not run SQL Server Standard Edition or Enterprise Edition on Windows
XP. They only run on a server OS (Windows 2000 or 2003 Server).
All other editions, Personal Edition, Developer Edition, MSDE I think
including the Evalution Edition, run on Windows Xp.
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"James T. Fowler" <fowlerjames1101@.juno.com> wrote in message
news:04e001c38ea3$a1238960$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> I have been checking through the literature and do not see
> anything regarding installing and running SQL Server 2000
> on a Windows XP platform. Does anyone know where I can
> find information about this? In particular, whether or
> not you can run SQL Server 2000 on a Windows XP platform?
> Thanks.|||Only certain versions can be installed on a desktop operating system, since
SQL Server is a *SERVER*... see the following URL for details:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/sysreqs/2000/default.asp
"James T. Fowler" <fowlerjames1101@.juno.com> wrote in message
news:04e001c38ea3$a1238960$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> I have been checking through the literature and do not see
> anything regarding installing and running SQL Server 2000
> on a Windows XP platform. Does anyone know where I can
> find information about this? In particular, whether or
> not you can run SQL Server 2000 on a Windows XP platform?
> Thanks.
anything regarding installing and running SQL Server 2000
on a Windows XP platform. Does anyone know where I can
find information about this? In particular, whether or
not you can run SQL Server 2000 on a Windows XP platform?
Thanks.You can not run SQL Server Standard Edition or Enterprise Edition on Windows
XP. They only run on a server OS (Windows 2000 or 2003 Server).
All other editions, Personal Edition, Developer Edition, MSDE I think
including the Evalution Edition, run on Windows Xp.
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"James T. Fowler" <fowlerjames1101@.juno.com> wrote in message
news:04e001c38ea3$a1238960$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> I have been checking through the literature and do not see
> anything regarding installing and running SQL Server 2000
> on a Windows XP platform. Does anyone know where I can
> find information about this? In particular, whether or
> not you can run SQL Server 2000 on a Windows XP platform?
> Thanks.|||Only certain versions can be installed on a desktop operating system, since
SQL Server is a *SERVER*... see the following URL for details:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/sysreqs/2000/default.asp
"James T. Fowler" <fowlerjames1101@.juno.com> wrote in message
news:04e001c38ea3$a1238960$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> I have been checking through the literature and do not see
> anything regarding installing and running SQL Server 2000
> on a Windows XP platform. Does anyone know where I can
> find information about this? In particular, whether or
> not you can run SQL Server 2000 on a Windows XP platform?
> Thanks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)