What are the Differences between those two SQL versions
i mean except that with in the developer edition only 1 user can login
on what version is it better to develop ?
does the developer ver. include something that the entprise does not ? (or vice versa)
(say in theory i can choose on which version to work ;-))
thanx, max.Directly from Microsoft's site:
Developer edition is designed to allow developers to build any type of application on top of SQL Server. It includes all the functionality of Enterprise Edition but with a special development and test end-user license agreement (EULA) that prohibits production deployment. It is the ideal choice for Independent Software Vendors (ISVs), consultants, system integrators, solution providers, and corporate developers developing and testing applications because it is cost effective, runs on a variety of platforms, and can be upgraded for production use to SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition.
It is the only edition of SQL Server 2000 that gives the licensee the right to download and install SQL Server 2000 Windows CE Edition (SQL Server CE). The Developer Edition licensee also has the right to redistribute SQL Server CE-based applications to an unlimited number of devices at no additional cost beyond the purchase price of SQL Server 2000 Developer Edition.|||SQL Server 2000 has the following editions:
Personal Edition
Standard Edition
Enterprise Edition
Developer Edition
Desktop Engine
SQL Server CE
Evaluation Edition
Personal Edition can work on the Windows 98, Windows NT Server 4.0 with Service Pack 5 or later, Windows NT Workstation 4.0 with Service Pack 5 or later and on the all editions of Windows 2000. This edition is related to SQL Server 7.0 Desktop Edition.
This edition has some restrictions:
maximum 2 CPU
no Distributed Partitioned Views
no Log Shipping
no Parallel DBCC
no Parallel index creation
no Failover clustering
no publishing for transaction replication
maximum 2Gb RAM
Standard Edition can work on the Windows NT Server 4.0 with Service Pack 5, Windows NT Server 4.0 Enterprise Edition and on the Windows 2000 Server/Advanced Server/DataCenter.
This edition has the following restrictions:
maximum 4 CPU (up to 8 CPU on the Windows NT Enterprise Edition)
no Distributed Partitioned Views
no Log Shipping
no Parallel index creation
no Failover clustering
maximum 2Gb RAM
Enterprise Edition can work on the Windows NT Server 4.0 with Service Pack 5, Windows NT Server 4.0 Enterprise Edition and on the Windows 2000 Server/Advanced Server/DataCenter.
This edition can use:
up to 32 CPU on the Windows 2000 DataCenter up to 8 CPU on the Windows 2000 Advanced Server and on the Windows NT Server 4.0 Enterprise Edition up to 4 CPU on the Windows NT Server 4.0 and on the Windows 2000 Server
up to 64Gb RAM on the Windows 2000 DataCenter up to 8 Gb RAM on the Windows 2000 Advanced Server up to 4 Gb RAM on the Windows 2000 Server up to 3 Gb RAM on the Windows NT Server 4.0 Enterprise Edition up to 2 Gb RAM on the Windows NT Server 4.0
Distributed Partitioned Views
Log Shipping
Parallel index creation
Failover clustering
The Developer Edition can be used by developers to create and debug stored procedures and triggers. This edition comes with its own compact disc and can be upgraded to SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition.
The Desktop Engine has no graphical user interface and is related to the MSDE, not to the SQL Server 7.0 Desktop Edition. The size of Desktop Engine databases cannot exceed 2 GB. The Desktop Engine can use maximum 2 CPU.
The SQL Server CE edition can work only on the Microsoft Windows CE, so it has all restrictions of this operation system (can use only 1 CPU, no Parallel index creation, no Full-Text Search and so on).
The Evaluation Edition can be used only for the test purposes to learn more about the new features and enhancements and should be uninstalled after a 120-day evaluation period.
Showing posts with label sql2k. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sql2k. Show all posts
Thursday, March 29, 2012
difference between sql2k and sql2005
is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
differences between sql2k and sql2005?
tia,
dkYes. 2005 Books Online details the differences pretty explicitly. Be
prepared to spend several hours, because the information is several hundred
pages deep.
--
Mike
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole
views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person
or entity either by inference or direct reference.
"dk" <dk@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:215A1B80-81D1-4788-96A2-A63153EEB5C1@.microsoft.com...
> is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
> differences between sql2k and sql2005?
> tia,
> dk|||There is no simple answer as 2005 is a major upgrade and there are lots of
new features. One of the most interesting features involves CLR integration,
which lets you can code your stored procedures, functions, and triggers in
the .NET Framework language of your choice. Microsoft Visual Basic .NET and
the C#. Another major new feature is Database Mirroring and a complete
rewrite of DTS. DTS is now called SSIS (SQL Server Integration Services )
Lots of new features in reporting services and Business Intelligence. See
www.sqlservercentral for a bunch of great articles on 2005.
For the Microsoft perspective see
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/overview/whats-new-in-sqlserver2005.mspx
"dk" wrote:
> is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
> differences between sql2k and sql2005?
> tia,
> dk|||This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--020109090507080508080807
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In addition, Michael Otey (the Technical Director for SQLMag) wrote a
book about a year & a half ago (so it will be based on a Beta version I
think) published by Osborne called Microsoft SQL Server 2005 New
Features
<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0072227761/sr=1-1/qid=1138921308/ref=sr_1_1/102-3661316-4174542?%5Fencoding=UTF8>.
I haven't read it myself but it sounds like it might be right up your alley.
--
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Michael Hotek wrote:
>Yes. 2005 Books Online details the differences pretty explicitly. Be
>prepared to spend several hours, because the information is several hundred
>pages deep.
>
>
--020109090507080508080807
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<tt>In addition, Michael Otey (the Technical Director for </tt><tt>SQLMag</tt><tt>)
wrote a book about a year & a half ago (so it will be based on a
Beta version I think) published by Osborne called <a
href="http://links.10026.com/?link=Microsoft">http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0072227761/sr=1-1/qid=1138921308/ref=sr_1_1/102-3661316-4174542?%5Fencoding=UTF8">Microsoft
SQL Server 2005 New Features</a>. I haven't read it myself but it
sounds like it might be right up your alley.</tt><br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<p><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">--<br>
</font></span> <b><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">mike
hodgson</font></span></b><span lang="en-au"><br>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>
</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
Michael Hotek wrote:
<blockquote cite="midesC9ngBKGHA.3728@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Yes. 2005 Books Online details the differences pretty explicitly. Be
prepared to spend several hours, because the information is several hundred
pages deep.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--020109090507080508080807--
differences between sql2k and sql2005?
tia,
dkYes. 2005 Books Online details the differences pretty explicitly. Be
prepared to spend several hours, because the information is several hundred
pages deep.
--
Mike
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole
views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person
or entity either by inference or direct reference.
"dk" <dk@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:215A1B80-81D1-4788-96A2-A63153EEB5C1@.microsoft.com...
> is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
> differences between sql2k and sql2005?
> tia,
> dk|||There is no simple answer as 2005 is a major upgrade and there are lots of
new features. One of the most interesting features involves CLR integration,
which lets you can code your stored procedures, functions, and triggers in
the .NET Framework language of your choice. Microsoft Visual Basic .NET and
the C#. Another major new feature is Database Mirroring and a complete
rewrite of DTS. DTS is now called SSIS (SQL Server Integration Services )
Lots of new features in reporting services and Business Intelligence. See
www.sqlservercentral for a bunch of great articles on 2005.
For the Microsoft perspective see
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/overview/whats-new-in-sqlserver2005.mspx
"dk" wrote:
> is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
> differences between sql2k and sql2005?
> tia,
> dk|||This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--020109090507080508080807
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In addition, Michael Otey (the Technical Director for SQLMag) wrote a
book about a year & a half ago (so it will be based on a Beta version I
think) published by Osborne called Microsoft SQL Server 2005 New
Features
<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0072227761/sr=1-1/qid=1138921308/ref=sr_1_1/102-3661316-4174542?%5Fencoding=UTF8>.
I haven't read it myself but it sounds like it might be right up your alley.
--
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Michael Hotek wrote:
>Yes. 2005 Books Online details the differences pretty explicitly. Be
>prepared to spend several hours, because the information is several hundred
>pages deep.
>
>
--020109090507080508080807
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<tt>In addition, Michael Otey (the Technical Director for </tt><tt>SQLMag</tt><tt>)
wrote a book about a year & a half ago (so it will be based on a
Beta version I think) published by Osborne called <a
href="http://links.10026.com/?link=Microsoft">http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0072227761/sr=1-1/qid=1138921308/ref=sr_1_1/102-3661316-4174542?%5Fencoding=UTF8">Microsoft
SQL Server 2005 New Features</a>. I haven't read it myself but it
sounds like it might be right up your alley.</tt><br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<p><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">--<br>
</font></span> <b><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">mike
hodgson</font></span></b><span lang="en-au"><br>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>
</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
Michael Hotek wrote:
<blockquote cite="midesC9ngBKGHA.3728@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Yes. 2005 Books Online details the differences pretty explicitly. Be
prepared to spend several hours, because the information is several hundred
pages deep.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--020109090507080508080807--
difference between sql2k and sql2005
is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
differences between sql2k and sql2005?
tia,
dkYes. 2005 Books Online details the differences pretty explicitly. Be
prepared to spend several hours, because the information is several hundred
pages deep.
Mike
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole
views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person
or entity either by inference or direct reference.
"dk" <dk@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:215A1B80-81D1-4788-96A2-A63153EEB5C1@.microsoft.com...
> is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
> differences between sql2k and sql2005?
> tia,
> dk|||There is no simple answer as 2005 is a major upgrade and there are lots of
new features. One of the most interesting features involves CLR integration
,
which lets you can code your stored procedures, functions, and triggers in
the .NET Framework language of your choice. Microsoft Visual Basic .NET and
the C#. Another major new feature is Database Mirroring and a complete
rewrite of DTS. DTS is now called SSIS (SQL Server Integration Services )
Lots of new features in reporting services and Business Intelligence. See
www.sqlservercentral for a bunch of great articles on 2005.
For the Microsoft perspective see
[url]http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/overview/whats-new-in-sqlserver2005.mspx[/ur
l]
"dk" wrote:
> is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
> differences between sql2k and sql2005?
> tia,
> dk|||In addition, Michael Otey (the Technical Director for SQLMag) wrote a
book about a year & a half ago (so it will be based on a Beta version I
think) published by Osborne called Microsoft SQL Server 2005 New
Features
<3661316-4174542?%5Fencoding=UTF8" target="_blank">http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/00...5Fencoding=UTF8>.
I haven't read it myself but it sounds like it might be right up your alley.
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Michael Hotek wrote:
>Yes. 2005 Books Online details the differences pretty explicitly. Be
>prepared to spend several hours, because the information is several hundred
>pages deep.
>
>sql
differences between sql2k and sql2005?
tia,
dkYes. 2005 Books Online details the differences pretty explicitly. Be
prepared to spend several hours, because the information is several hundred
pages deep.
Mike
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole
views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person
or entity either by inference or direct reference.
"dk" <dk@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:215A1B80-81D1-4788-96A2-A63153EEB5C1@.microsoft.com...
> is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
> differences between sql2k and sql2005?
> tia,
> dk|||There is no simple answer as 2005 is a major upgrade and there are lots of
new features. One of the most interesting features involves CLR integration
,
which lets you can code your stored procedures, functions, and triggers in
the .NET Framework language of your choice. Microsoft Visual Basic .NET and
the C#. Another major new feature is Database Mirroring and a complete
rewrite of DTS. DTS is now called SSIS (SQL Server Integration Services )
Lots of new features in reporting services and Business Intelligence. See
www.sqlservercentral for a bunch of great articles on 2005.
For the Microsoft perspective see
[url]http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/overview/whats-new-in-sqlserver2005.mspx[/ur
l]
"dk" wrote:
> is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
> differences between sql2k and sql2005?
> tia,
> dk|||In addition, Michael Otey (the Technical Director for SQLMag) wrote a
book about a year & a half ago (so it will be based on a Beta version I
think) published by Osborne called Microsoft SQL Server 2005 New
Features
<3661316-4174542?%5Fencoding=UTF8" target="_blank">http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/00...5Fencoding=UTF8>.
I haven't read it myself but it sounds like it might be right up your alley.
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Michael Hotek wrote:
>Yes. 2005 Books Online details the differences pretty explicitly. Be
>prepared to spend several hours, because the information is several hundred
>pages deep.
>
>sql
difference between sql2k and sql2005
is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
differences between sql2k and sql2005?
tia,
dk
Yes. 2005 Books Online details the differences pretty explicitly. Be
prepared to spend several hours, because the information is several hundred
pages deep.
Mike
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole
views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person
or entity either by inference or direct reference.
"dk" <dk@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:215A1B80-81D1-4788-96A2-A63153EEB5C1@.microsoft.com...
> is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
> differences between sql2k and sql2005?
> tia,
> dk
|||There is no simple answer as 2005 is a major upgrade and there are lots of
new features. One of the most interesting features involves CLR integration,
which lets you can code your stored procedures, functions, and triggers in
the .NET Framework language of your choice. Microsoft Visual Basic .NET and
the C#. Another major new feature is Database Mirroring and a complete
rewrite of DTS. DTS is now called SSIS (SQL Server Integration Services )
Lots of new features in reporting services and Business Intelligence. See
www.sqlservercentral for a bunch of great articles on 2005.
For the Microsoft perspective see
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...erver2005.mspx
"dk" wrote:
> is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
> differences between sql2k and sql2005?
> tia,
> dk
|||In addition, Michael Otey (the Technical Director for SQLMag) wrote a
book about a year & a half ago (so it will be based on a Beta version I
think) published by Osborne called Microsoft SQL Server 2005 New
Features
<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/007...Fencoding=UTF8>.
I haven't read it myself but it sounds like it might be right up your alley.
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Michael Hotek wrote:
>Yes. 2005 Books Online details the differences pretty explicitly. Be
>prepared to spend several hours, because the information is several hundred
>pages deep.
>
>
differences between sql2k and sql2005?
tia,
dk
Yes. 2005 Books Online details the differences pretty explicitly. Be
prepared to spend several hours, because the information is several hundred
pages deep.
Mike
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole
views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person
or entity either by inference or direct reference.
"dk" <dk@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:215A1B80-81D1-4788-96A2-A63153EEB5C1@.microsoft.com...
> is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
> differences between sql2k and sql2005?
> tia,
> dk
|||There is no simple answer as 2005 is a major upgrade and there are lots of
new features. One of the most interesting features involves CLR integration,
which lets you can code your stored procedures, functions, and triggers in
the .NET Framework language of your choice. Microsoft Visual Basic .NET and
the C#. Another major new feature is Database Mirroring and a complete
rewrite of DTS. DTS is now called SSIS (SQL Server Integration Services )
Lots of new features in reporting services and Business Intelligence. See
www.sqlservercentral for a bunch of great articles on 2005.
For the Microsoft perspective see
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...erver2005.mspx
"dk" wrote:
> is there a good article or book or faq which highlights the
> differences between sql2k and sql2005?
> tia,
> dk
|||In addition, Michael Otey (the Technical Director for SQLMag) wrote a
book about a year & a half ago (so it will be based on a Beta version I
think) published by Osborne called Microsoft SQL Server 2005 New
Features
<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/007...Fencoding=UTF8>.
I haven't read it myself but it sounds like it might be right up your alley.
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Michael Hotek wrote:
>Yes. 2005 Books Online details the differences pretty explicitly. Be
>prepared to spend several hours, because the information is several hundred
>pages deep.
>
>
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Diff between xxx_data.mdf and xxx.mdf files
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I create
d, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database fi
le name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file n
ame as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows da
tabase na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the log
ic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004I don't think there is any specific logic behind the file names really, it's
just what the naming convention was at the time the databases were created.
The actual database name is independent of the file name (and a database ca
n consist of multiple files anyway, so it wouldn't make much sense to name t
he files after the database).
--
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Ashish Kanoongo" <ashishk@.armour.com> wrote in message news:e8c%23paoYEHA.3
988@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I create
d, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database fi
le name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file n
ame as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows da
tabase na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the log
ic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
d, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database fi
le name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file n
ame as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows da
tabase na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the log
ic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004I don't think there is any specific logic behind the file names really, it's
just what the naming convention was at the time the databases were created.
The actual database name is independent of the file name (and a database ca
n consist of multiple files anyway, so it wouldn't make much sense to name t
he files after the database).
--
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Ashish Kanoongo" <ashishk@.armour.com> wrote in message news:e8c%23paoYEHA.3
988@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I create
d, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database fi
le name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file n
ame as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows da
tabase na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the log
ic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
Diff between xxx_data.mdf and xxx.mdf files
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I created, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database file name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file name as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows database na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the logic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
I don't think there is any specific logic behind the file names really, it's just what the naming convention was at the time the databases were created. The actual database name is independent of the file name (and a database can consist of multiple files anyway, so it wouldn't make much sense to name the files after the database).
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Ashish Kanoongo" <ashishk@.armour.com> wrote in message news:e8c%23paoYEHA.3988@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I created, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database file name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file name as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows database na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the logic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the logic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
I don't think there is any specific logic behind the file names really, it's just what the naming convention was at the time the databases were created. The actual database name is independent of the file name (and a database can consist of multiple files anyway, so it wouldn't make much sense to name the files after the database).
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Ashish Kanoongo" <ashishk@.armour.com> wrote in message news:e8c%23paoYEHA.3988@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I created, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database file name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file name as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows database na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the logic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
Diff between xxx_data.mdf and xxx.mdf files
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I created, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database file name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file name as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows database na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the logic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
There is no special significance to the suffixes _data and _log. They are
just the naming conventions used when the database was created. You can name
database files as anything you like, however the standard extensions for SQL
Server files are .MDF for data files and .LDF for log files.
MDB is the standard name for Access databases and isn't normally used for
SQL Server files.
(I've ignored your irrelevant cross-postings. Please don't cross-post. This
clearly has nothing to do with DTS, Clients or Connections so why post
there?)
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
|||I don't think there is any specific logic behind the file names really, it's just what the naming convention was at the time the databases were created. The actual database name is independent of the file name (and a database can consist of multiple files anyway, so it wouldn't make much sense to name the files after the database).
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Ashish Kanoongo" <ashishk@.armour.com> wrote in message news:e8c%23paoYEHA.3988@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I created, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database file name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file name as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows database na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the logic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
sql
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the logic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
There is no special significance to the suffixes _data and _log. They are
just the naming conventions used when the database was created. You can name
database files as anything you like, however the standard extensions for SQL
Server files are .MDF for data files and .LDF for log files.
MDB is the standard name for Access databases and isn't normally used for
SQL Server files.
(I've ignored your irrelevant cross-postings. Please don't cross-post. This
clearly has nothing to do with DTS, Clients or Connections so why post
there?)
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
|||I don't think there is any specific logic behind the file names really, it's just what the naming convention was at the time the databases were created. The actual database name is independent of the file name (and a database can consist of multiple files anyway, so it wouldn't make much sense to name the files after the database).
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Ashish Kanoongo" <ashishk@.armour.com> wrote in message news:e8c%23paoYEHA.3988@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I created, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database file name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file name as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows database na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the logic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
sql
Diff between xxx_data.mdf and xxx.mdf files
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I created, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database file name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file name as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows database na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the logic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
I don't think there is any specific logic behind the file names really, it's just what the naming convention was at the time the databases were created. The actual database name is independent of the file name (and a database can consist of multiple files anyway, so it wouldn't make much sense to name the files after the database).
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Ashish Kanoongo" <ashishk@.armour.com> wrote in message news:e8c%23paoYEHA.3988@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I created, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database file name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file name as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows database na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the logic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the logic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
I don't think there is any specific logic behind the file names really, it's just what the naming convention was at the time the databases were created. The actual database name is independent of the file name (and a database can consist of multiple files anyway, so it wouldn't make much sense to name the files after the database).
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Ashish Kanoongo" <ashishk@.armour.com> wrote in message news:e8c%23paoYEHA.3988@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I created, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database file name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file name as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows database na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the logic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
Diff between xxx_data.mdf and xxx.mdf files
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I create
d, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database fi
le name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file n
ame as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows da
tabase na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the log
ic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004There is no special significance to the suffixes _data and _log. They are
just the naming conventions used when the database was created. You can name
database files as anything you like, however the standard extensions for SQL
Server files are .MDF for data files and .LDF for log files.
MDB is the standard name for Access databases and isn't normally used for
SQL Server files.
(I've ignored your irrelevant cross-postings. Please don't cross-post. This
clearly has nothing to do with DTS, Clients or Connections so why post
there?)
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--|||I don't think there is any specific logic behind the file names really, it's
just what the naming convention was at the time the databases were created.
The actual database name is independent of the file name (and a database ca
n consist of multiple files anyway, so it wouldn't make much sense to name t
he files after the database).
--
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Ashish Kanoongo" <ashishk@.armour.com> wrote in message news:e8c%23paoYEHA.3
988@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I create
d, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database fi
le name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file n
ame as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows da
tabase na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the log
ic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
d, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database fi
le name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file n
ame as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows da
tabase na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the log
ic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004There is no special significance to the suffixes _data and _log. They are
just the naming conventions used when the database was created. You can name
database files as anything you like, however the standard extensions for SQL
Server files are .MDF for data files and .LDF for log files.
MDB is the standard name for Access databases and isn't normally used for
SQL Server files.
(I've ignored your irrelevant cross-postings. Please don't cross-post. This
clearly has nothing to do with DTS, Clients or Connections so why post
there?)
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--|||I don't think there is any specific logic behind the file names really, it's
just what the naming convention was at the time the databases were created.
The actual database name is independent of the file name (and a database ca
n consist of multiple files anyway, so it wouldn't make much sense to name t
he files after the database).
--
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Ashish Kanoongo" <ashishk@.armour.com> wrote in message news:e8c%23paoYEHA.3
988@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
What is difference between "xxx_data.mdf" and "xxxx.mdf"? IN Sql2k, I create
d, attach and detach database manytimes. SOme time its shows the database fi
le name as "xxx_data.mdb and xxx_log.mdb" and sometimes it only shows file n
ame as "xxx.mdf and xxx.ldf", why? However in Enterprise manager it shows da
tabase na as "xxx".
I just want to know difference these file name conventions, what was the log
ic behind this?
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 07/04/2004
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)