Difference between sql 6.5 and 7.0

Hi,
I have a sql server 7.0 with some databases with
compatibility level 6.5.
I want to "upgrade" those databases to compatibility level
7.0. What kind of problems should i expect ?
My developers are asking me for some document with the
programming differences between 6.5 and 7.0, something
that works fine in 6.5 but doesn't work in 7.0.
Thanks,
JCI think that there are about 90 pages in SQL Server 7.0 Books Online about compatibility issues
between 6.5 and 7.0. This is the place for your developers.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"Julio Carvalho" <jc.carvalho@.terra.com.br> wrote in message
news:0d7501c3664e$cb490b70$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have a sql server 7.0 with some databases with
> compatibility level 6.5.
> I want to "upgrade" those databases to compatibility level
> 7.0. What kind of problems should i expect ?
> My developers are asking me for some document with the
> programming differences between 6.5 and 7.0, something
> that works fine in 6.5 but doesn't work in 7.0.
> Thanks,
> JC|||Of course, the 90 pages covers lots of issues that don't apply in this case
since the database is already in SQL Server 7.0. The issues of importance
are those covered by sp_dbcmptlevel 65, and it's a pretty small list, though
it could be a lot of work to address the issues in some applications. Books
Online is definitely the place to go for this information.
--
Hal Berenson, SQL Server MVP
True Mountain Group LLC
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor.please_reply_to_public_forum.karaszi@.cornerstone.se>
wrote in message news:%23v4dzMlZDHA.388@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I think that there are about 90 pages in SQL Server 7.0 Books Online about
compatibility issues
> between 6.5 and 7.0. This is the place for your developers.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as
ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
>
> "Julio Carvalho" <jc.carvalho@.terra.com.br> wrote in message
> news:0d7501c3664e$cb490b70$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have a sql server 7.0 with some databases with
> > compatibility level 6.5.
> >
> > I want to "upgrade" those databases to compatibility level
> > 7.0. What kind of problems should i expect ?
> >
> > My developers are asking me for some document with the
> > programming differences between 6.5 and 7.0, something
> > that works fine in 6.5 but doesn't work in 7.0.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > JC
>|||Ahh, thanks for catching that, Hal. Somewhere I missed the fact that it was already on 7.0...
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"Hal Berenson" <haroldb@.truemountainconsulting.com> wrote in message
news:%23kTObZtZDHA.1492@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Of course, the 90 pages covers lots of issues that don't apply in this case
> since the database is already in SQL Server 7.0. The issues of importance
> are those covered by sp_dbcmptlevel 65, and it's a pretty small list, though
> it could be a lot of work to address the issues in some applications. Books
> Online is definitely the place to go for this information.
> --
> Hal Berenson, SQL Server MVP
> True Mountain Group LLC
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor.please_reply_to_public_forum.karaszi@.cornerstone.se>
> wrote in message news:%23v4dzMlZDHA.388@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I think that there are about 90 pages in SQL Server 7.0 Books Online about
> compatibility issues
> > between 6.5 and 7.0. This is the place for your developers.
> >
> > --
> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> > Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as
> ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
> >
> >
> > "Julio Carvalho" <jc.carvalho@.terra.com.br> wrote in message
> > news:0d7501c3664e$cb490b70$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have a sql server 7.0 with some databases with
> > > compatibility level 6.5.
> > >
> > > I want to "upgrade" those databases to compatibility level
> > > 7.0. What kind of problems should i expect ?
> > >
> > > My developers are asking me for some document with the
> > > programming differences between 6.5 and 7.0, something
> > > that works fine in 6.5 but doesn't work in 7.0.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > JC
> >
> >
>sql

Diff versus Log

I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up to
one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss. Is
it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups or
does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?
Differentials only look at the changes in the data. If you make UPDATES,
then this may work for you. If you do a lot of INSERTS and DELETEs, then it
may not.
A differential is good from the last time it was backed up.
A transaciton log allows you to restore to a point in time. So you could
recover up to 20 mins ago when something bad happened. The Diff backup
won't allow you to do this. You can apply the diff backup from 1 hour ago
and lose everything up to the last 20 mins. (Unless you are doing log
backups as well. Then simply backup the log and restore it to 20 minutes
ago.)
Diff recoveries are faster than TLog recoveries in that you only have to
apply the last diff backup. With logs, you restore your last good database
backup and then run all the logs in between.
Sooo.. It depends on what you are after.
HTH
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
"G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up to
> one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
> willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss. Is
> it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups or
> does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?
|||Hi Rick
I'm not sure what you're saying here. As far as a differential backup is
concerned, updates are the same as inserts or deletes. Any change to an
extent is backed up in the differential, whether that changes comes from
updating existing rows, or from adding or removing rows.
HTH
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"Rick Sawtell" <r_sawtell@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ea6nwkHjEHA.3968@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Differentials only look at the changes in the data. If you make UPDATES,
> then this may work for you. If you do a lot of INSERTS and DELETEs, then
it
> may not.
> A differential is good from the last time it was backed up.
> A transaciton log allows you to restore to a point in time. So you could
> recover up to 20 mins ago when something bad happened. The Diff backup
> won't allow you to do this. You can apply the diff backup from 1 hour ago
> and lose everything up to the last 20 mins. (Unless you are doing log
> backups as well. Then simply backup the log and restore it to 20 minutes
> ago.)
>
> Diff recoveries are faster than TLog recoveries in that you only have to
> apply the last diff backup. With logs, you restore your last good
database
> backup and then run all the logs in between.
> Sooo.. It depends on what you are after.
> HTH
> Rick Sawtell
> MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
>
>
> "G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
>
|||So either solution should work for me since I've got a one
hour max?

>--Original Message--
>Hi Rick
>I'm not sure what you're saying here. As far as a
differential backup is
>concerned, updates are the same as inserts or deletes.
Any change to an
>extent is backed up in the differential, whether that
changes comes from[vbcol=seagreen]
>updating existing rows, or from adding or removing rows.
>--
>HTH
>--
>Kalen Delaney
>SQL Server MVP
>www.SolidQualityLearning.com
>
>"Rick Sawtell" <r_sawtell@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:ea6nwkHjEHA.3968@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
you make UPDATES,[vbcol=seagreen]
and DELETEs, then[vbcol=seagreen]
>it
up.[vbcol=seagreen]
time. So you could[vbcol=seagreen]
happened. The Diff backup[vbcol=seagreen]
backup from 1 hour ago[vbcol=seagreen]
you are doing log[vbcol=seagreen]
restore it to 20 minutes[vbcol=seagreen]
you only have to[vbcol=seagreen]
your last good[vbcol=seagreen]
>database
message[vbcol=seagreen]
to[vbcol=seagreen]
Is[vbcol=seagreen]
or
>
>.
>
|||I'm not sure what you mean by 'one hour max'. How often are you making backups? If a backup spans more than one hour, but you want to restore to a certain point in time, you need log backups.
There are many questions that must be answered to come up with the best backup strategy for you; amount of acceptable work loss is only one of the questions. Start by reading everything you can in Books Online about backup and restore, and then take a look at "Microsoft SQL Server 2000 High Availability" http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...349825-6773545
The chapter on Backup and Restore was written by Kimberly Tripp and it is the best part of the book!
HTH
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:02f101c48c7e$357192a0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> So either solution should work for me since I've got a one
> hour max?
> differential backup is
> Any change to an
> changes comes from
> you make UPDATES,
> and DELETEs, then
> up.
> time. So you could
> happened. The Diff backup
> backup from 1 hour ago
> you are doing log
> restore it to 20 minutes
> you only have to
> your last good
> message
> to
> Is
> or
|||If using a trx log approach, you will need to restore all logs from the last
full backup to the point in time you want to restore, while for a
differential backup, you only need to restore that single differential
backup.
Depending on the amount of changes in the database, the time taken to
perform each type of backup may also differ widely i.e. a differential
backup has to always record all changes since the last full backup, while a
trx log backup only records the changes since the last trx log backup. This
in turn will also affect the size of the backups and time to backup.
Peter Yeoh
http://www.yohz.com
Need smaller SQL2K backups? Use MiniSQLBackup Lite, free!
"G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up to
> one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
> willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss. Is
> it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups or
> does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?
|||But the short answer is yes, either will work for you as long as you do the
backup every hour... I suspect however that the log backup would be
preferable ( depending on the frequency of the full database backup.)
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up to
> one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
> willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss. Is
> it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups or
> does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?
sql

Diff versus Log

I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up to
one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss. Is
it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups or
does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?Differentials only look at the changes in the data. If you make UPDATES,
then this may work for you. If you do a lot of INSERTS and DELETEs, then it
may not.
A differential is good from the last time it was backed up.
A transaciton log allows you to restore to a point in time. So you could
recover up to 20 mins ago when something bad happened. The Diff backup
won't allow you to do this. You can apply the diff backup from 1 hour ago
and lose everything up to the last 20 mins. (Unless you are doing log
backups as well. Then simply backup the log and restore it to 20 minutes
ago.)
Diff recoveries are faster than TLog recoveries in that you only have to
apply the last diff backup. With logs, you restore your last good database
backup and then run all the logs in between.
Sooo.. It depends on what you are after.
HTH
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
"G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up to
> one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
> willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss. Is
> it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups or
> does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?|||Hi Rick
I'm not sure what you're saying here. As far as a differential backup is
concerned, updates are the same as inserts or deletes. Any change to an
extent is backed up in the differential, whether that changes comes from
updating existing rows, or from adding or removing rows.
HTH
--
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"Rick Sawtell" <r_sawtell@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ea6nwkHjEHA.3968@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Differentials only look at the changes in the data. If you make UPDATES,
> then this may work for you. If you do a lot of INSERTS and DELETEs, then
it
> may not.
> A differential is good from the last time it was backed up.
> A transaciton log allows you to restore to a point in time. So you could
> recover up to 20 mins ago when something bad happened. The Diff backup
> won't allow you to do this. You can apply the diff backup from 1 hour ago
> and lose everything up to the last 20 mins. (Unless you are doing log
> backups as well. Then simply backup the log and restore it to 20 minutes
> ago.)
>
> Diff recoveries are faster than TLog recoveries in that you only have to
> apply the last diff backup. With logs, you restore your last good
database
> backup and then run all the logs in between.
> Sooo.. It depends on what you are after.
> HTH
> Rick Sawtell
> MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
>
>
> "G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
>|||So either solution should work for me since I've got a one
hour max?

>--Original Message--
>Hi Rick
>I'm not sure what you're saying here. As far as a
differential backup is
>concerned, updates are the same as inserts or deletes.
Any change to an
>extent is backed up in the differential, whether that
changes comes from
>updating existing rows, or from adding or removing rows.
>--
>HTH
>--
>Kalen Delaney
>SQL Server MVP
>www.SolidQualityLearning.com
>
>"Rick Sawtell" <r_sawtell@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:ea6nwkHjEHA.3968@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
you make UPDATES,[vbcol=seagreen]
and DELETEs, then[vbcol=seagreen]
>it
up.[vbcol=seagreen]
time. So you could[vbcol=seagreen]
happened. The Diff backup[vbcol=seagreen]
backup from 1 hour ago[vbcol=seagreen]
you are doing log[vbcol=seagreen]
restore it to 20 minutes[vbcol=seagreen]
you only have to[vbcol=seagreen]
your last good[vbcol=seagreen]
>database
message[vbcol=seagreen]
to[vbcol=seagreen]
Is[vbcol=seagreen]
or[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>.
>|||I'm not sure what you mean by 'one hour max'. How often are you making backu
ps? If a backup spans more than one hour, but you want to restore to a certa
in point in time, you need log backups.
There are many questions that must be answered to come up with the best backup strategy
for you; amount of acceptable work loss is only one of the questions. Start by reading
everything you can in Books Online about backup and restore, and then take a look at "
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 High Availability" detail/-/0735619204/104-2349825-6773545" target="_blank">http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...2349825-6773545
The chapter on Backup and Restore was written by Kimberly Tripp and it is th
e best part of the book!
--
HTH
--
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:02f101c48c7e$357192a0$a40
1280a@.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> So either solution should work for me since I've got a one
> hour max?
>
> differential backup is
> Any change to an
> changes comes from
> you make UPDATES,
> and DELETEs, then
> up.
> time. So you could
> happened. The Diff backup
> backup from 1 hour ago
> you are doing log
> restore it to 20 minutes
> you only have to
> your last good
> message
> to
> Is
> or|||If using a trx log approach, you will need to restore all logs from the last
full backup to the point in time you want to restore, while for a
differential backup, you only need to restore that single differential
backup.
Depending on the amount of changes in the database, the time taken to
perform each type of backup may also differ widely i.e. a differential
backup has to always record all changes since the last full backup, while a
trx log backup only records the changes since the last trx log backup. This
in turn will also affect the size of the backups and time to backup.
Peter Yeoh
http://www.yohz.com
Need smaller SQL2K backups? Use MiniSQLBackup Lite, free!
"G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up to
> one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
> willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss. Is
> it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups or
> does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?|||But the short answer is yes, either will work for you as long as you do the
backup every hour... I suspect however that the log backup would be
preferable ( depending on the frequency of the full database backup.)
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up to
> one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
> willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss. Is
> it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups or
> does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?

Diff versus Log

I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up to
one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss. Is
it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups or
does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?Differentials only look at the changes in the data. If you make UPDATES,
then this may work for you. If you do a lot of INSERTS and DELETEs, then it
may not.
A differential is good from the last time it was backed up.
A transaciton log allows you to restore to a point in time. So you could
recover up to 20 mins ago when something bad happened. The Diff backup
won't allow you to do this. You can apply the diff backup from 1 hour ago
and lose everything up to the last 20 mins. (Unless you are doing log
backups as well. Then simply backup the log and restore it to 20 minutes
ago.)
Diff recoveries are faster than TLog recoveries in that you only have to
apply the last diff backup. With logs, you restore your last good database
backup and then run all the logs in between.
Sooo.. It depends on what you are after.
HTH
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
"G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up to
> one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
> willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss. Is
> it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups or
> does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?|||Hi Rick
I'm not sure what you're saying here. As far as a differential backup is
concerned, updates are the same as inserts or deletes. Any change to an
extent is backed up in the differential, whether that changes comes from
updating existing rows, or from adding or removing rows.
--
HTH
--
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"Rick Sawtell" <r_sawtell@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ea6nwkHjEHA.3968@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Differentials only look at the changes in the data. If you make UPDATES,
> then this may work for you. If you do a lot of INSERTS and DELETEs, then
it
> may not.
> A differential is good from the last time it was backed up.
> A transaciton log allows you to restore to a point in time. So you could
> recover up to 20 mins ago when something bad happened. The Diff backup
> won't allow you to do this. You can apply the diff backup from 1 hour ago
> and lose everything up to the last 20 mins. (Unless you are doing log
> backups as well. Then simply backup the log and restore it to 20 minutes
> ago.)
>
> Diff recoveries are faster than TLog recoveries in that you only have to
> apply the last diff backup. With logs, you restore your last good
database
> backup and then run all the logs in between.
> Sooo.. It depends on what you are after.
> HTH
> Rick Sawtell
> MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
>
>
> "G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> > I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up to
> > one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
> > willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss. Is
> > it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups or
> > does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?
>|||So either solution should work for me since I've got a one
hour max?
>--Original Message--
>Hi Rick
>I'm not sure what you're saying here. As far as a
differential backup is
>concerned, updates are the same as inserts or deletes.
Any change to an
>extent is backed up in the differential, whether that
changes comes from
>updating existing rows, or from adding or removing rows.
>--
>HTH
>--
>Kalen Delaney
>SQL Server MVP
>www.SolidQualityLearning.com
>
>"Rick Sawtell" <r_sawtell@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:ea6nwkHjEHA.3968@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> Differentials only look at the changes in the data. If
you make UPDATES,
>> then this may work for you. If you do a lot of INSERTS
and DELETEs, then
>it
>> may not.
>> A differential is good from the last time it was backed
up.
>> A transaciton log allows you to restore to a point in
time. So you could
>> recover up to 20 mins ago when something bad
happened. The Diff backup
>> won't allow you to do this. You can apply the diff
backup from 1 hour ago
>> and lose everything up to the last 20 mins. (Unless
you are doing log
>> backups as well. Then simply backup the log and
restore it to 20 minutes
>> ago.)
>>
>> Diff recoveries are faster than TLog recoveries in that
you only have to
>> apply the last diff backup. With logs, you restore
your last good
>database
>> backup and then run all the logs in between.
>> Sooo.. It depends on what you are after.
>> HTH
>> Rick Sawtell
>> MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
>>
>>
>> "G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
>> news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
>> > I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up
to
>> > one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
>> > willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss.
Is
>> > it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups
or
>> > does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?
>>
>
>.
>|||This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--=_NextPart_000_0D00_01C48C67.9ED536F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm not sure what you mean by 'one hour max'. How often are you making =backups? If a backup spans more than one hour, but you want to restore =to a certain point in time, you need log backups.
There are many questions that must be answered to come up with the best =backup strategy for you; amount of acceptable work loss is only one of =the questions. Start by reading everything you can in Books Online about =backup and restore, and then take a look at "Microsoft SQL Server 2000 =High Availability" =http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0735619204/104-2349825-6773=
545
The chapter on Backup and Restore was written by Kimberly Tripp and it =is the best part of the book!
-- HTH
--
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message =news:02f101c48c7e$357192a0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> So either solution should work for me since I've got a one > hour max?
> > >--Original Message--
> >Hi Rick
> >
> >I'm not sure what you're saying here. As far as a > differential backup is
> >concerned, updates are the same as inserts or deletes. > Any change to an
> >extent is backed up in the differential, whether that > changes comes from
> >updating existing rows, or from adding or removing rows.
> >
> >-- > >HTH
> >--
> >Kalen Delaney
> >SQL Server MVP
> >www.SolidQualityLearning.com
> >
> >
> >"Rick Sawtell" <r_sawtell@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:ea6nwkHjEHA.3968@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> >> Differentials only look at the changes in the data. If > you make UPDATES,
> >> then this may work for you. If you do a lot of INSERTS > and DELETEs, then
> >it
> >> may not.
> >>
> >> A differential is good from the last time it was backed > up.
> >>
> >> A transaciton log allows you to restore to a point in > time. So you could
> >> recover up to 20 mins ago when something bad > happened. The Diff backup
> >> won't allow you to do this. You can apply the diff > backup from 1 hour ago
> >> and lose everything up to the last 20 mins. (Unless > you are doing log
> >> backups as well. Then simply backup the log and > restore it to 20 minutes
> >> ago.)
> >>
> >>
> >> Diff recoveries are faster than TLog recoveries in that > you only have to
> >> apply the last diff backup. With logs, you restore > your last good
> >database
> >> backup and then run all the logs in between.
> >>
> >> Sooo.. It depends on what you are after.
> >>
> >> HTH
> >>
> >> Rick Sawtell
> >> MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in > message
> >> news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> >> > I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up > to
> >> > one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
> >> > willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss. > Is
> >> > it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups > or
> >> > does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >.
> >
--=_NextPart_000_0D00_01C48C67.9ED536F0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
&

---

I'm not sure what you mean by 'one hour =max'. How often are you making backups? If a backup spans more than one hour, but =you want to restore to a certain point in time, you need log backups.
There are many questions that must be =answered to come up with the best backup strategy for you; amount of acceptable work =loss is only one of the questions. Start by reading everything you can in Books =Online about backup and restore, and then take a look at "Microsoft SQL Server =2000 High Availability" http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0735619204/104=-2349825-6773545
The chapter on Backup and Restore was =written by Kimberly Tripp and it is the best part of the book!
-- =HTH--Kalen DelaneySQL Server MVPwww.SolidQualityLearning.com
"G2SL" wrote in message news:02f101c48c7e$357192a0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...> So either =solution should work for me since I've got a one > hour max?> > >--Original Message--> >Hi Rick> >> =>I'm not sure what you're saying here. As far as a > differential =backup is> >concerned, updates are the same as inserts or deletes. => Any change to an> >extent is backed up in the differential, =whether that > changes comes from> >updating existing rows, or =from adding or removing rows.> >> >-- > =>HTH> >--> >Kalen Delaney> >SQL Server MVP> >www.SolidQualityLearning.com> >> =>> >"Rick Sawtell" wrote in message> >news:ea6nwkHjEHA.3968@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...> >> =Differentials only look at the changes in the data. If > you make UPDATES,> >> then this may work for you. If you do a =lot of INSERTS > and DELETEs, then> >it> >> may not.> >>> >> A differential is good from the =last time it was backed > up.> >>> >> A =transaciton log allows you to restore to a point in > time. So you =could> >> recover up to 20 mins ago when something bad > happened. The Diff backup> >> won't allow you =to do this. You can apply the diff > backup from 1 hour =ago> >> and lose everything up to the last 20 mins. (Unless => you are doing log> >> backups as well. Then simply backup =the log and > restore it to 20 minutes> >> ago.)> >>> >>> >> Diff recoveries are faster =than TLog recoveries in that > you only have to> >> apply the =last diff backup. With logs, you restore > your last =good> >database> >> backup and then run all the logs in between.> >>> >> Sooo.. It depends =on what you are after.> >>> >> HTH> =>>> >> Rick Sawtell> >> MCT, MCSD, MCDBA> =>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> =>> "G2SL" wrote in > message> >> news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...> >> > I'm confused. Let's say I want =to be able to back up > to> >> > one hour ago on several =critical databases, i.e. I'm> >> > willing to accept a maxiumum =of 1 hour of data loss. > Is> >> > it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups > or> >> > =does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?> =>>> >>> >> >> >.> >

---

--=_NextPart_000_0D00_01C48C67.9ED536F0--|||If using a trx log approach, you will need to restore all logs from the last
full backup to the point in time you want to restore, while for a
differential backup, you only need to restore that single differential
backup.
Depending on the amount of changes in the database, the time taken to
perform each type of backup may also differ widely i.e. a differential
backup has to always record all changes since the last full backup, while a
trx log backup only records the changes since the last trx log backup. This
in turn will also affect the size of the backups and time to backup.
--
Peter Yeoh
http://www.yohz.com
Need smaller SQL2K backups? Use MiniSQLBackup Lite, free!
"G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up to
> one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
> willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss. Is
> it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups or
> does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?|||But the short answer is yes, either will work for you as long as you do the
backup every hour... I suspect however that the log backup would be
preferable ( depending on the frequency of the full database backup.)
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"G2SL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:184301c48c72$89430e10$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> I'm confused. Let's say I want to be able to back up to
> one hour ago on several critical databases, i.e. I'm
> willing to accept a maxiumum of 1 hour of data loss. Is
> it better to use Differential backups or Log Backups or
> does it matter? What are some of the basic pros/cons?

Diff for tables *structures* rather than data

If I have two sql server databases that started out with identical
table/key/index structures, but were not properly kept in sync, is
there any way I can generate a table change script to essentially
'diff' the two databases and come up with table change scripts to
bring one in line with the other?

An answer to this age-old question of mine would make me very
happy...!

BrianERwin will do this easily for you (reverse engineer one database and then do
a compare with the other). PowerDesigner and ER/Studio will probably also
do it.

Downside? They're not free...

To find out what's different, you could do something like this:

select so.name, sc.name, sc.type from sysobject so inner join syscolumns sc
on so.id = sc.id
order by so.name, sc.name

in both databases, paste the output into .TXT files and then do a compare on
the .TXT files (WINDIFF utility) to get started. You'll have to generate
the change scripts by hand, of course.

You could completely script the databases and then WINDIFF the scripts.
However, the scripting order might be different between the two databases
and this may muddy the waters (you could rearrange the scripts by hand to
resolve some ordering problems).

If you have a little money, see if you can find a database consultant with
access to ERwin or one of the other tools to come in for a couple of hours
and use his tools to generate the scripts for you. It might save a lot of
time. You could ask him to print diagrams, too, which might be helpful down
the road.

If you have a fair amount of cash, consider buying one of these tools
yourself - they're very, very handy. ER/Studio used to offer a freely
downloadable demo; don't know about ERwin or PowerDesigner. It seems to me
that ERwin is something like $4000. I think ER/Studion was less, don't
recall about PowerDesigner.

DesktopDBA, if it's still around, may also offer some capability this way.

I suppose you could check C|Net, SQLServerCentral or some of the other
SQL-oriented group sites for freely downloadable utilities, too.

"Brian McGee" <brian.mcgee@.Sentrio.com> wrote in message
news:831a513c.0309110332.2184b751@.posting.google.c om...
> If I have two sql server databases that started out with identical
> table/key/index structures, but were not properly kept in sync, is
> there any way I can generate a table change script to essentially
> 'diff' the two databases and come up with table change scripts to
> bring one in line with the other?
> An answer to this age-old question of mine would make me very
> happy...!
> Brian|||In article <831a513c.0309110332.2184b751@.posting.google.com>,
brian.mcgee@.Sentrio.com says...
> If I have two sql server databases that started out with identical
> table/key/index structures, but were not properly kept in sync, is
> there any way I can generate a table change script to essentially
> 'diff' the two databases and come up with table change scripts to
> bring one in line with the other?

I like Red-gate Softwares "SQL Tools" product for that.
(http://www.red-gate.com) You can get a single-user license for the SQL
Compare portion of the product for about $200. That would bring the
table definitions in line. If you also want scripts to modify the
contents of the tables, that's another $200. Of course, at that point
you're better off with the bundle, which is $350 and includes DTS
Compare which diffs server settings, DTS packages, jobs and logins.

-- Rick

P.S. No affiliation at all with Red-Gate software but their product
saved my cojones once, so I'm just passing on my experience.

Did Uninstall/Reinstall of SQL Server. Now databases are under WRONG servers

I have a Server Group with two servers; my "local" server (computer name)
and another "older" server that I was using for a particular purpose some
time ago. After doing an Uninstal/Reinstall the databases that WERE under
my "local" server are now attached to the other server! And the databases
from the older server are attached to my "local" server!
''?
TIA,
Larry WoodsDo you mean that the database file moved off to another machine and attached themselves to that
other machine? Or are you talking about instances? Perhaps there's some configuration in Client
Network Utility?
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"Larry Woods" <larry@.lwoods.com> wrote in message news:%23z3xmIEmDHA.3320@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> I have a Server Group with two servers; my "local" server (computer name)
> and another "older" server that I was using for a particular purpose some
> time ago. After doing an Uninstal/Reinstall the databases that WERE under
> my "local" server are now attached to the other server! And the databases
> from the older server are attached to my "local" server!
> ''?
> TIA,
> Larry Woods
>|||Hi Larry,
Is this issue related to the problem in your previous post? If so, I would
like to gather and research them together. If I have misunderstood, please
feel free to let me know.
What is the versions of SQL Server (Local and Older), Service Pack? I
understand that there are two servers under the server group in the SQL
Server Enterprise Manager. I would like you to provide more information so
that I can narrow down this issue.
1. Is the "older" server named instance? Are the Local Server and Older
Server installed on the same machine?
2. What do you mean that "Uninstall/Reinstall" database? Do you mean
detach/attach database? Can you describe it in detail?
3. According to your description, I am not sure what your exact problem is.
Please feel free to let us know your accurate concerns.
Here is a useful article below:
314546 HOW TO: Move Databases Between Computers That Are Running SQL Server
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=314546.
I am standing by for your response.
Regards,
Michael Shao
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.|||Please read my response to myself.
Thanks.
Larry Woods
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor.please_reply_to_public_forum.karaszi@.cornerstone.se>
wrote in message news:ehno7ZGmDHA.1072@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Do you mean that the database file moved off to another machine and
attached themselves to that
> other machine? Or are you talking about instances? Perhaps there's some
configuration in Client
> Network Utility?
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> Archive at:
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
>
> "Larry Woods" <larry@.lwoods.com> wrote in message
news:%23z3xmIEmDHA.3320@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > I have a Server Group with two servers; my "local" server (computer
name)
> > and another "older" server that I was using for a particular purpose
some
> > time ago. After doing an Uninstal/Reinstall the databases that WERE
under
> > my "local" server are now attached to the other server! And the
databases
> > from the older server are attached to my "local" server!
> >
> > ''?
> >
> > TIA,
> >
> > Larry Woods
> >
> >
>|||I need to apologize for my ignorance. First, I DO have two servers in my
group. One of the servers is on another computer. When I reinstalled SQL
Server it looks like it included a "default" set of databases, "overwriting"
the databases that were in my default (local) SQL Server. I did find the
"old" databases in my Data folder so I guess that I have to reattached each
one individually, right? And, what I had mistaken for "copying" databases
was incorrect. The databases in the "foreign" server (the other computer)
were approximately the same ones as I had in my local server so I
misinterpretted what I saw.
Please verify that the reinstallation of SQL Server includes a default set
of databases. True? Also, does my explanation of what seems to have
happened make sense?
Thanks again.
Larry Woods
"Larry Woods" <larry@.lwoods.com> wrote in message
news:%23z3xmIEmDHA.3320@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> I have a Server Group with two servers; my "local" server (computer name)
> and another "older" server that I was using for a particular purpose some
> time ago. After doing an Uninstal/Reinstall the databases that WERE under
> my "local" server are now attached to the other server! And the databases
> from the older server are attached to my "local" server!
> ''?
> TIA,
> Larry Woods
>|||Please read my response to myself.
Thanks.
Larry Woods
"Michael Shao [MSFT]" <v-yshao@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:t6L%233TLmDHA.1408@.cpmsftngxa06.phx.gbl...
> Hi Larry,
> Is this issue related to the problem in your previous post? If so, I would
> like to gather and research them together. If I have misunderstood, please
> feel free to let me know.
> What is the versions of SQL Server (Local and Older), Service Pack? I
> understand that there are two servers under the server group in the SQL
> Server Enterprise Manager. I would like you to provide more information so
> that I can narrow down this issue.
> 1. Is the "older" server named instance? Are the Local Server and Older
> Server installed on the same machine?
> 2. What do you mean that "Uninstall/Reinstall" database? Do you mean
> detach/attach database? Can you describe it in detail?
> 3. According to your description, I am not sure what your exact problem
is.
> Please feel free to let us know your accurate concerns.
> Here is a useful article below:
> 314546 HOW TO: Move Databases Between Computers That Are Running SQL
Server
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=314546.
> I am standing by for your response.
> Regards,
> Michael Shao
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
>|||Hi Larry,
Thanks for your feedback. According to your description, I apologize that I
am still not sure what the problem is. I think we need to make something
clear firstly.
1. What is the version of the both SQL Server (Service Pack)? Please review
[Item 1] to get the information about obtaining the version of SQL Server
(Service Pack).
2. You wrote "When I reinstalled SQL Serve", which Server you
"reinstalled"? Also you wrote: "One of the servers is on another computer".
Do you mean the "reinstall" indicate register SQL Server using SQL Server
Enterprise Manager?
For additional information regarding register SQL Server, please refer to
the following article on SQL Server Books Online.
Topic: "How to register a server (Enterprise Manager)"
Or you mean that you reinstall the SQL Server on the machine where the
local SQL Server located? Create a new instance or update the original
instance? If you create a new instance, you need to specify the reinstalled
SQL Server as named instance. Did you do it?
This step-by-step guide describes how to install a SQL Server 2000 basic
local installation.
303747 HOW TO: Install SQL Server 2000 - Basic Local Installation
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=303747
If I have misunderstood, please feel free to let me know and describe how
you reinstall the SQL Server.
Thank you for collecting the above information. It will definitely speed up
our progress. When we make the above things clear, we are able to
troubleshoot this problem more efficiently. Thanks for your understanding.
I am standing by for your response.
Regards,
Michael Shao
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
[Item 1]
How to obtain the version of SQL Server (Service Pack)?
Please perform the following SQL statements using Query Analyzer.
select @.@.version
go
select serverproperty('productlevel')
go
For additional information regarding obtaining the version of SQL Server
(Service Pack), please refer to the following article on SQL Server Books
Online:
Topic: "@.@.VERSION"
Topic: "SERVERPROPERTY"|||Hi Larry,
Thanks for your feedback. Now, I still do not know the version of SQL
Server you want to install and the original SQL Server version. I assume
that you want to install MSDE 2000 on your computer which already has SQL
Server 2000. If I have misunderstood, please feel free to let me know.
For additional information regarding identifying the version of SQL Server,
please refer to the following article:
321185 HOW TO: Identify Your SQL Server Service Pack Version and Edition
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=321185
To install MSDE 2000 onto a machine, which already has SQL Server, we need
to make it clear that this new instance is only able to be installed as a
named instance.
I performed a test trying to install the MSDE 2000 on my machine, which
already has SQL Server 2000.
1. Download SQL2KDeskSP3 at the following URL:
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 3
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&familyid=9032
f608-160a-4537-a2b6-4cb265b80766
SQL2kdesksp3.exe includes all of the files that are required to install a
new instance of Desktop Engine (.msi files), to upgrade all existing
instances of Desktop Engine (.msp files), as well as to consume merge
modules (.msm files) into applications.
2. Configure setup options for MSDE 2.0 in the file Setup.ini.
-- Setup.ini --
[Options]
TARGETDIR="C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\Mssql$MyInstance\Binn\"
DATADIR="C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\Mssql$MyInstance\Data\"
INSTANCENAME="MyInstance"
SAPWD="sytest"
--
"sytest" is the password of the sa account. "MyInstance" is the name of the
instance.
For additional information regarding Customizing Desktop Engine Setup.exe,
please refer to the following article at SQL Server Books Online.
Topic: "Customizing Desktop Engine Setup.exe"
3. Double click Setup.exe to install MSDE 2.0 (named instance).
We can check to see MSSQL$ MYINSTANCE service is in the Services list. We
can also register the new named instance using <Computer Name>\MYINSTANCE
as the instance name via SQL Server Enterprise Manager.
It works on my side. Does it work on your side?
Also, I found some related articles below:
317328 HOW TO: Troubleshoot a SQL Server Desktop Engine 2000 Installation
and
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=317328
324998 HOW TO: Obtain and Install SQL Server 2000 Desktop Engine (MSDE 2000)
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=324998
814463 HOWTO: Specify a Strong SA Password When You Install SQL Server 2000
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=814463
Please feel free to post in the group if this solves your problem or if you
would like further assistance.
Regards,
Michael Shao
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.|||I presently have SQL Server 2000 installed on my computer. I want to
install MSDE 2000. I will then be deploying MSDE 2000 with my application
at a later date. (Running XP Pro... The computer that will be receiving
MSDE will be running Win 2000 Server)
Thanks, again.
Larry
"Michael Shao [MSFT]" <v-yshao@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3eosgeSnDHA.2624@.cpmsftngxa06.phx.gbl...
> Hi Larry,
> Thanks for your feedback. Now, I still do not know the version of SQL
> Server you want to install and the original SQL Server version. I assume
> that you want to install MSDE 2000 on your computer which already has SQL
> Server 2000. If I have misunderstood, please feel free to let me know.
> For additional information regarding identifying the version of SQL
Server,
> please refer to the following article:
> 321185 HOW TO: Identify Your SQL Server Service Pack Version and Edition
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=321185
>
> To install MSDE 2000 onto a machine, which already has SQL Server, we need
> to make it clear that this new instance is only able to be installed as a
> named instance.
> I performed a test trying to install the MSDE 2000 on my machine, which
> already has SQL Server 2000.
> 1. Download SQL2KDeskSP3 at the following URL:
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 3
>
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&familyid=9032
> f608-160a-4537-a2b6-4cb265b80766
> SQL2kdesksp3.exe includes all of the files that are required to install a
> new instance of Desktop Engine (.msi files), to upgrade all existing
> instances of Desktop Engine (.msp files), as well as to consume merge
> modules (.msm files) into applications.
>
> 2. Configure setup options for MSDE 2.0 in the file Setup.ini.
> -- Setup.ini --
> [Options]
> TARGETDIR="C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\Mssql$MyInstance\Binn\"
> DATADIR="C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\Mssql$MyInstance\Data\"
> INSTANCENAME="MyInstance"
> SAPWD="sytest"
> --
> "sytest" is the password of the sa account. "MyInstance" is the name of
the
> instance.
> For additional information regarding Customizing Desktop Engine Setup.exe,
> please refer to the following article at SQL Server Books Online.
> Topic: "Customizing Desktop Engine Setup.exe"
> 3. Double click Setup.exe to install MSDE 2.0 (named instance).
> We can check to see MSSQL$ MYINSTANCE service is in the Services list. We
> can also register the new named instance using <Computer Name>\MYINSTANCE
> as the instance name via SQL Server Enterprise Manager.
> It works on my side. Does it work on your side?
> Also, I found some related articles below:
> 317328 HOW TO: Troubleshoot a SQL Server Desktop Engine 2000 Installation
> and
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=317328
> 324998 HOW TO: Obtain and Install SQL Server 2000 Desktop Engine (MSDE
2000)
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=324998
> 814463 HOWTO: Specify a Strong SA Password When You Install SQL Server
2000
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=814463
> Please feel free to post in the group if this solves your problem or if
you
> would like further assistance.
> Regards,
> Michael Shao
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
>|||As far as downloading products, I have an MSDN Universal subscription. Are
all of these files on my CD's?
Larry
"Michael Shao [MSFT]" <v-yshao@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3eosgeSnDHA.2624@.cpmsftngxa06.phx.gbl...
> Hi Larry,
> Thanks for your feedback. Now, I still do not know the version of SQL
> Server you want to install and the original SQL Server version. I assume
> that you want to install MSDE 2000 on your computer which already has SQL
> Server 2000. If I have misunderstood, please feel free to let me know.
> For additional information regarding identifying the version of SQL
Server,
> please refer to the following article:
> 321185 HOW TO: Identify Your SQL Server Service Pack Version and Edition
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=321185
>
> To install MSDE 2000 onto a machine, which already has SQL Server, we need
> to make it clear that this new instance is only able to be installed as a
> named instance.
> I performed a test trying to install the MSDE 2000 on my machine, which
> already has SQL Server 2000.
> 1. Download SQL2KDeskSP3 at the following URL:
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 3
>
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&familyid=9032
> f608-160a-4537-a2b6-4cb265b80766
> SQL2kdesksp3.exe includes all of the files that are required to install a
> new instance of Desktop Engine (.msi files), to upgrade all existing
> instances of Desktop Engine (.msp files), as well as to consume merge
> modules (.msm files) into applications.
>
> 2. Configure setup options for MSDE 2.0 in the file Setup.ini.
> -- Setup.ini --
> [Options]
> TARGETDIR="C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\Mssql$MyInstance\Binn\"
> DATADIR="C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\Mssql$MyInstance\Data\"
> INSTANCENAME="MyInstance"
> SAPWD="sytest"
> --
> "sytest" is the password of the sa account. "MyInstance" is the name of
the
> instance.
> For additional information regarding Customizing Desktop Engine Setup.exe,
> please refer to the following article at SQL Server Books Online.
> Topic: "Customizing Desktop Engine Setup.exe"
> 3. Double click Setup.exe to install MSDE 2.0 (named instance).
> We can check to see MSSQL$ MYINSTANCE service is in the Services list. We
> can also register the new named instance using <Computer Name>\MYINSTANCE
> as the instance name via SQL Server Enterprise Manager.
> It works on my side. Does it work on your side?
> Also, I found some related articles below:
> 317328 HOW TO: Troubleshoot a SQL Server Desktop Engine 2000 Installation
> and
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=317328
> 324998 HOW TO: Obtain and Install SQL Server 2000 Desktop Engine (MSDE
2000)
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=324998
> 814463 HOWTO: Specify a Strong SA Password When You Install SQL Server
2000
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=814463
> Please feel free to post in the group if this solves your problem or if
you
> would like further assistance.
> Regards,
> Michael Shao
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
>|||Hi Larry,
Thanks for your feedback.
Firstly I would like to make the following things clear in my previous post:
SQL2kdesksp3.exe includes a MSDE 2000 with SP3. This MSDE 2000 is installed
in my test in the previous post. It can be downloaded at following URL:
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 3
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&familyid=9032
f608-160a-4537-a2b6-4cb265b80766
I just installed a MSDE 2000 with SP3 in my test and did not only install
Service Pack 3. If you have any further concerns, please feel free to let
me know.
Then, I understand you installed SQL Server 2000 and two MSDE instances on
your machine. I am not sure if they are installed successfully only
according to the screen shot. Please check to see if the related services
are in the service list (Start-->Control Panel-->Administrative
Tools-->Services), such as MSSQLSERVER, MSSQL$<INSTANCE NAME>. In this
issue, there should be 3 services (MSSQLSERVER service, 2 MSSQL$<INSTANCE
NAME> services).
If these services are in the services list, please start these services and
try to register the related instances in the SQL Server Enterprise Manager.
For named instance, please use <Computer Name>\<Instance Name> to register.
After registering these three instances, please check to see if the
databases under these services are normal.
If the databases under the instance are abnormal or you cannot see the
above service in the service list, I would like you to provide the
sqldiag.txt file so that I can understand the system environment on your
side. For additional information regarding sqldiag utility, please review
[Item 1]. You can send it to me at v-yshao@.microsoft.com.
Also, if you only want to setup MSDE 2000 on the machine that already has
SQL Server 2000. You can uninstall these 2 MSDE from your machine and try
to install MSDE 2000 mentioned in my test in the previous post.
I am standing by for your response.
Regards,
Michael Shao
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
[Item 1]
How to obtain the Sqldiag.txt file
Please provide the Sqldiag.txt (by default located in \Mssql\Log) using
Sqldiag utility (Sqldiag.exe by default located in C:\Program
Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Binn). If you are unable to find the
Sqldiag.exe, please search the Sqldiag.exe file and run this utility. Then
please search the Sqldiag.txt file and provide it to me.|||Michael,
This is an important project for me but at the present time XP Pro is
"eating" my disk (6 Gig to 0 in less thatn 1 day--no reason!) and I am going
to be forced into reverting back to Windows 2000. This means rebuilding TWO
systems so I will be busy for a few days. I DEFINITELY will get back to
this as soon as I get rid of this "latest and greatest" of MS's operating
systems!!!!
Larry
"Michael Shao [MSFT]" <v-yshao@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:sdCKEEunDHA.1548@.cpmsftngxa06.phx.gbl...
> Hi Larry,
> Thanks for your feedback.
> Firstly I would like to make the following things clear in my previous
post:
> SQL2kdesksp3.exe includes a MSDE 2000 with SP3. This MSDE 2000 is
installed
> in my test in the previous post. It can be downloaded at following URL:
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 3
>
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&familyid=9032
> f608-160a-4537-a2b6-4cb265b80766
> I just installed a MSDE 2000 with SP3 in my test and did not only install
> Service Pack 3. If you have any further concerns, please feel free to let
> me know.
> Then, I understand you installed SQL Server 2000 and two MSDE instances on
> your machine. I am not sure if they are installed successfully only
> according to the screen shot. Please check to see if the related services
> are in the service list (Start-->Control Panel-->Administrative
> Tools-->Services), such as MSSQLSERVER, MSSQL$<INSTANCE NAME>. In this
> issue, there should be 3 services (MSSQLSERVER service, 2 MSSQL$<INSTANCE
> NAME> services).
> If these services are in the services list, please start these services
and
> try to register the related instances in the SQL Server Enterprise
Manager.
> For named instance, please use <Computer Name>\<Instance Name> to
register.
> After registering these three instances, please check to see if the
> databases under these services are normal.
> If the databases under the instance are abnormal or you cannot see the
> above service in the service list, I would like you to provide the
> sqldiag.txt file so that I can understand the system environment on your
> side. For additional information regarding sqldiag utility, please review
> [Item 1]. You can send it to me at v-yshao@.microsoft.com.
> Also, if you only want to setup MSDE 2000 on the machine that already has
> SQL Server 2000. You can uninstall these 2 MSDE from your machine and try
> to install MSDE 2000 mentioned in my test in the previous post.
> I am standing by for your response.
> Regards,
> Michael Shao
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
> [Item 1]
> How to obtain the Sqldiag.txt file
> Please provide the Sqldiag.txt (by default located in \Mssql\Log) using
> Sqldiag utility (Sqldiag.exe by default located in C:\Program
> Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Binn). If you are unable to find the
> Sqldiag.exe, please search the Sqldiag.exe file and run this utility. Then
> please search the Sqldiag.txt file and provide it to me.
>|||Hi Larry,
Thanks for your feedback. Your patience is appreciated.
For the problem with XP pro "eating" the disk, I would like you to check
the size of this folder (C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL\BACKUP). This folder usually contained all the SQL Server
backup files. According to your description, I suspected there are some
backup jobs performing on the background, which created the backup files
"eating" the disk. Does it resolve your problem?
If not, please check to see if there is worm virus on your computer.
Also, did you try my suggestions on your machine? I am standing by for your
response.
Regards,
Michael Shao
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.|||I don't think there is ANY connection between SQL Server and the loss of
disk space...but maybe there is. In any case, I threw in the towel and
rebuilt the system with Win 2000. I now have a SQL Server Group with two
servers: (local) and DEVELOPMENT\VSdotNET. DEVELOPMENT is the name of my
computer. When I checked the Properties of the "VSdotNET" server I see that
it is MSDE. Does all of this sound right?
Larry
"Michael Shao [MSFT]" <v-yshao@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:NAo8JWxnDHA.2148@.cpmsftngxa06.phx.gbl...
> Hi Larry,
> Thanks for your feedback. Your patience is appreciated.
> For the problem with XP pro "eating" the disk, I would like you to check
> the size of this folder (C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\MSSQL\BACKUP). This folder usually contained all the SQL Server
> backup files. According to your description, I suspected there are some
> backup jobs performing on the background, which created the backup files
> "eating" the disk. Does it resolve your problem?
> If not, please check to see if there is worm virus on your computer.
> Also, did you try my suggestions on your machine? I am standing by for
your
> response.
> Regards,
> Michael Shao
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
>|||Hi Larry,
Thanks for your feedback. It seems that you have rebuilt the system with
Win 2000 and the Windows XP has been removed. I understand that there are
two instances (Local and DEVELOPMENT\VSdotNET) in the SQL Server Group
using SQL Server Enterprise Manager. The DEVELOPMENT\VSdotNET instance's
version is MSDE. If I have misunderstood, please feel free to let me know.
Everything seems worked fine. According to your above description, I am
unable to find something abnormal. Currently, does any problem occur on
your side?
Please feel free to post it in the group if you need further assistance.
Regards,
Michael Shao
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.sql

Dialogue security Vs Transport Security

Hi

I'm designing a distributed application where I will have SQL Server 2005 distributed databases replicating data to my central hub which is again a SQL Server 2005 database using SQL Service Broker. Data will be sent from the central hub to the distributed sites and vice versa. I need to authenticate the communication and also secure the communication by encrypting the messages. Which security shall I use? Where do I configure the type of security being used? What is the difference between transport security Vs dialogue security - Full security model?

Thanks

Pl. chk the post

http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=608211&SiteID=1

http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=425871&SiteID=1

HTH

Paritosh

|||

Transport security only secures the TCP connections between two hosts. Dialog security secures the dialog end to end between services. Since dialogs can span multiple hosts (eg> when there are forwarders in the middle), there is a need to secure the communication end-to-end. Use full dialog security unless you have a reason to use anonymous or unsecure. Books online will tell you what are the special cases when you may not want full security.

Also, why are you using Service Broker instead of Replication Services for solving your problem?

|||

Thanks for the response.

Using Service broker because it is not just replication, sometime routing and other things have to be managed.

Other reason is the scale and complexity of the environment, we can have around 2500 SQL distributed databases all over converging in to one central database.

Cheers!

Dialogue security Vs Transport Security

Hi

I'm designing a distributed application where I will have SQL Server 2005 distributed databases replicating data to my central hub which is again a SQL Server 2005 database using SQL Service Broker. Data will be sent from the central hub to the distributed sites and vice versa. I need to authenticate the communication and also secure the communication by encrypting the messages. Which security shall I use? Where do I configure the type of security being used? What is the difference between transport security Vs dialogue security - Full security model?

Thanks

Pl. chk the post

http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=608211&SiteID=1

http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=425871&SiteID=1

HTH

Paritosh

|||

Transport security only secures the TCP connections between two hosts. Dialog security secures the dialog end to end between services. Since dialogs can span multiple hosts (eg> when there are forwarders in the middle), there is a need to secure the communication end-to-end. Use full dialog security unless you have a reason to use anonymous or unsecure. Books online will tell you what are the special cases when you may not want full security.

Also, why are you using Service Broker instead of Replication Services for solving your problem?

|||

Thanks for the response.

Using Service broker because it is not just replication, sometime routing and other things have to be managed.

Other reason is the scale and complexity of the environment, we can have around 2500 SQL distributed databases all over converging in to one central database.

Cheers!

Diagramming Multiple Databases

I have a database that contains a product listing. I also have several other
databases that looks at this product listing database. When diagramming one
of these databases that uses the product listing database is there a way to
add this product listing database to my diagram? I only see where you can add
tables from the one database that you are trying to diagram.
Thanks
I guess you are talking to EM diagrams. They are limited to a single
database only. Maybe you could use some other tool, like Visio?
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Mentor
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"GORAMS" <GORAMS@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:AFE58B3D-90CE-4775-BB5B-099F8B6E4414@.microsoft.com...
>I have a database that contains a product listing. I also have several
>other
> databases that looks at this product listing database. When diagramming
> one
> of these databases that uses the product listing database is there a way
> to
> add this product listing database to my diagram? I only see where you can
> add
> tables from the one database that you are trying to diagram.
> Thanks

diagraming databases

Are diagrams passive? What really holds the relationships between the
tables? I have to look at a legacy database in SQL2000 and the diagram does
not seem to match the behavor of the tables.
Diagrams do work if there is a relation established on the tables.
Just check if Primary Key - Foreign Key combination is correctly defined
regards
Chandra
"Rich" wrote:

> Are diagrams passive? What really holds the relationships between the
> tables? I have to look at a legacy database in SQL2000 and the diagram does
> not seem to match the behavor of the tables.
|||> Are diagrams passive?
Sort of. Possibly that EM tries to "synchronize" a diagram when you open it and you have performed
modifications in the database structure.

> What really holds the relationships between the
> tables?
Defined FOREIGN KEY constraints used in commands such as ALTER TABLE tblref ADD CONSTRAINT col
REFERENCES tblreferenced(col).
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Rich" <Rich@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6D4302AE-1F21-41A0-9125-AF8D6085F276@.microsoft.com...
> Are diagrams passive? What really holds the relationships between the
> tables? I have to look at a legacy database in SQL2000 and the diagram does
> not seem to match the behavor of the tables.

diagraming databases

Are diagrams passive? What really holds the relationships between the
tables? I have to look at a legacy database in SQL2000 and the diagram does
not seem to match the behavor of the tables.Diagrams do work if there is a relation established on the tables.
Just check if Primary Key - Foreign Key combination is correctly defined
regards
Chandra
"Rich" wrote:

> Are diagrams passive? What really holds the relationships between the
> tables? I have to look at a legacy database in SQL2000 and the diagram do
es
> not seem to match the behavor of the tables.|||> Are diagrams passive?
Sort of. Possibly that EM tries to "synchronize" a diagram when you open it
and you have performed
modifications in the database structure.

> What really holds the relationships between the
> tables?
Defined FOREIGN KEY constraints used in commands such as ALTER TABLE tblref
ADD CONSTRAINT col
REFERENCES tblreferenced(col).
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Rich" <Rich@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6D4302AE-1F21-41A0-9125-AF8D6085F276@.microsoft.com...
> Are diagrams passive? What really holds the relationships between the
> tables? I have to look at a legacy database in SQL2000 and the diagram do
es
> not seem to match the behavor of the tables.

diagraming databases

Are diagrams passive? What really holds the relationships between the
tables? I have to look at a legacy database in SQL2000 and the diagram does
not seem to match the behavor of the tables.Diagrams do work if there is a relation established on the tables.
Just check if Primary Key - Foreign Key combination is correctly defined
regards
Chandra
"Rich" wrote:
> Are diagrams passive? What really holds the relationships between the
> tables? I have to look at a legacy database in SQL2000 and the diagram does
> not seem to match the behavor of the tables.|||> Are diagrams passive?
Sort of. Possibly that EM tries to "synchronize" a diagram when you open it and you have performed
modifications in the database structure.
> What really holds the relationships between the
> tables?
Defined FOREIGN KEY constraints used in commands such as ALTER TABLE tblref ADD CONSTRAINT col
REFERENCES tblreferenced(col).
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Rich" <Rich@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6D4302AE-1F21-41A0-9125-AF8D6085F276@.microsoft.com...
> Are diagrams passive? What really holds the relationships between the
> tables? I have to look at a legacy database in SQL2000 and the diagram does
> not seem to match the behavor of the tables.

Diagram multiple database

Hi,
I have an application that use 2 databases. I would like to be able to
produce a diagram with tables from both databases. Is this possible ?
USE VISIO
"TheOne" <TheOne@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7081D496-9125-42E9-A670-AFA499487514@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I have an application that use 2 databases. I would like to be able to
> produce a diagram with tables from both databases. Is this possible ?
|||Hi Randy,
Thanks for your quick answer but I realized that I needed to
clarify my question. My goal is to apply referential integrity between two
tables that are not part of the same database.
"Randy Pitkin" wrote:

> USE VISIO
> "TheOne" <TheOne@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:7081D496-9125-42E9-A670-AFA499487514@.microsoft.com...
>
>

Diagram multiple database

Hi,
I have an application that use 2 databases. I would like to be able to
produce a diagram with tables from both databases. Is this possible ?USE VISIO
"TheOne" <TheOne@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7081D496-9125-42E9-A670-AFA499487514@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I have an application that use 2 databases. I would like to be able to
> produce a diagram with tables from both databases. Is this possible ?|||Hi Randy,
Thanks for your quick answer but I realized that I needed to
clarify my question. My goal is to apply referential integrity between two
tables that are not part of the same database.
"Randy Pitkin" wrote:
> USE VISIO
> "TheOne" <TheOne@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:7081D496-9125-42E9-A670-AFA499487514@.microsoft.com...
> > Hi,
> > I have an application that use 2 databases. I would like to be able to
> > produce a diagram with tables from both databases. Is this possible ?
>
>

Diagram bug in 2005 Developer edition

I have a few databases which were created using sql server 2000 developer
edition. I copied them to the directory where the sql server 2005 databases
are located. I used "Attach" by right clicking on databases and attached the
databases. When I went to view the diagrams, I got a message that database
diagram support can not be installed because the database does not have a
valid user. Strange I thought since I'm using a laptop and everything else
was installed under the same Windows XP login. So I changed the owner to 'sa
'
and I got the same error message. I fixed the problem by changing the
compatability from 8.0 to 9.0. I did not change the owner on the other
databases that I attached. I got a message for sql server to install object
support, I had it install it and then I could view the diagrams just fine.I don't know if it's considered a bug but it is documented
in the read me file - ReadMeSQL2005.htm which should be off
the root of your installation media. I believe the next
update to BOL will have this documented as well. In the read
me file, check section 4.8.1 titled
Considerations for Installing Database Diagram Support
-Sue
On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 10:22:01 -0700, Doctor Who
<DoctorWho@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>I have a few databases which were created using sql server 2000 developer
>edition. I copied them to the directory where the sql server 2005 databases
>are located. I used "Attach" by right clicking on databases and attached th
e
>databases. When I went to view the diagrams, I got a message that database
>diagram support can not be installed because the database does not have a
>valid user. Strange I thought since I'm using a laptop and everything else
>was installed under the same Windows XP login. So I changed the owner to 's
a'
>and I got the same error message. I fixed the problem by changing the
>compatability from 8.0 to 9.0. I did not change the owner on the other
>databases that I attached. I got a message for sql server to install object
>support, I had it install it and then I could view the diagrams just fine.

Diagram bug in 2005 Developer edition

I have a few databases which were created using sql server 2000 developer
edition. I copied them to the directory where the sql server 2005 databases
are located. I used "Attach" by right clicking on databases and attached the
databases. When I went to view the diagrams, I got a message that database
diagram support can not be installed because the database does not have a
valid user. Strange I thought since I'm using a laptop and everything else
was installed under the same windows xp login. So I changed the owner to 'sa'
and I got the same error message. I fixed the problem by changing the
compatability from 8.0 to 9.0. I did not change the owner on the other
databases that I attached. I got a message for sql server to install object
support, I had it install it and then I could view the diagrams just fine.I don't know if it's considered a bug but it is documented
in the read me file - ReadMeSQL2005.htm which should be off
the root of your installation media. I believe the next
update to BOL will have this documented as well. In the read
me file, check section 4.8.1 titled
Considerations for Installing Database Diagram Support
-Sue
On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 10:22:01 -0700, Doctor Who
<DoctorWho@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>I have a few databases which were created using sql server 2000 developer
>edition. I copied them to the directory where the sql server 2005 databases
>are located. I used "Attach" by right clicking on databases and attached the
>databases. When I went to view the diagrams, I got a message that database
>diagram support can not be installed because the database does not have a
>valid user. Strange I thought since I'm using a laptop and everything else
>was installed under the same windows xp login. So I changed the owner to 'sa'
>and I got the same error message. I fixed the problem by changing the
>compatability from 8.0 to 9.0. I did not change the owner on the other
>databases that I attached. I got a message for sql server to install object
>support, I had it install it and then I could view the diagrams just fine.

Development Problems

Hi
Hope someone can help. I have a few legacy databases running on SQL Server
(developed before my time) which have a # in the name of the database.
I have been trying to write some reports that run off these databases
however whenever I attempt to preview or deploy the report I get an error
"Unable to access '/c'". I have narrowed it down to being something to do
with the # sign through moving things onto a test rig and removing the #
from the DB names and all is fine, however this is not really an option on
the live system.
My question is, does anyone know a way that I can get round this problem in
Reporting Services so I dont have to go through the process of modifying
about 20 different systems?
Thanks in advance.You could try placing the dbname within [], as in [pubs]
The brackets should take away any special meaning.
"Steven Clark" <sjc@.nospam.uk-support.net> wrote in message
news:hOOdnWLBBO7bvXHcRVnyrQ@.eclipse.net.uk...
> Hi
> Hope someone can help. I have a few legacy databases running on SQL
> Server (developed before my time) which have a # in the name of the
> database.
> I have been trying to write some reports that run off these databases
> however whenever I attempt to preview or deploy the report I get an error
> "Unable to access '/c'". I have narrowed it down to being something to do
> with the # sign through moving things onto a test rig and removing the #
> from the DB names and all is fine, however this is not really an option on
> the live system.
> My question is, does anyone know a way that I can get round this problem
> in Reporting Services so I dont have to go through the process of
> modifying about 20 different systems?
> Thanks in advance.
>

Development & Lives databases

Hello all, apologies if i've posted this in the wrong forum!
I have 2 databases development and live. Development has the correct
structure (SP's and tables) and live has the correct data. I would like to
make live match the development database but not to loose any data. Is
replication the best method?
If so, any simple www's that could help me?
Thanks all,
Jon
you have to pick an authority. Sounds like you have to ensure that live has
the correct schema, and then push your live data to development.
Transactional replication is ideal for this. It does require that every
table has a pk though, which it should.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"Jon" <Jon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:128F3236-EBD2-4034-8A3A-A72248CD3011@.microsoft.com...
> Hello all, apologies if i've posted this in the wrong forum!
> I have 2 databases development and live. Development has the correct
> structure (SP's and tables) and live has the correct data. I would like to
> make live match the development database but not to loose any data. Is
> replication the best method?
> If so, any simple www's that could help me?
> Thanks all,
> Jon

Development - Test Environment Questions

Hi,
I've been given the task of creating a dev/test environment. Currently we
have several production applications using databases on a common SQL Server.
If changes are required, the developers are performing the changes on the
production system - yea I know BAD,BAD,BAD - but I didn't set this up but
instead inherited it. I'd like to configure a dev/test environment to move
the devs off of the production system and to faciliate their development of
future projects coming up soon.
How is your dev/test environment configured? I'm looking for a few examples
here that I can work with to implement our dev/test based on our budget and
system capabilities.
I.e., Each dev has their own sandbox or each dev shares a common dev env -
then changes are implemented to test env (and by who - dev or dba - and
how - scripts) etc... then scripted to deploy on prod systems etc... also
we image/ghost systems or use VMs and also we use Visual SourceSafe to...
Trying to come up with a solid game plan here.
Thanks for any input.
Jerry
Jerry Spivey wrote:
> Hi,
> I've been given the task of creating a dev/test environment. Currently
> we have several production applications using databases on
> a common SQL Server. If changes are required, the developers are
> performing the changes on the production system - yea I know
> BAD,BAD,BAD - but I didn't set this up but instead inherited it. I'd
> like to configure a dev/test environment to move the devs off of the
> production system and to faciliate their development of future
> projects coming up soon.
> How is your dev/test environment configured? I'm looking for a few
> examples here that I can work with to implement our dev/test based on
> our budget and system capabilities.
> I.e., Each dev has their own sandbox or each dev shares a common dev
> env - then changes are implemented to test env (and by who - dev or
> dba - and how - scripts) etc... then scripted to deploy on prod
> systems etc... also we image/ghost systems or use VMs and also we use
> Visual
> SourceSafe to...
> Trying to come up with a solid game plan here.
> Thanks for any input.
> Jerry
At most companies where I've worked in the past, we had development
servers that were used strictly for development. They generally
contained stripped down data from the production databases with any
customer sensitive data masked. Lead developers generally had dbo rights
and may even have admin rights depending on the size of the company.
Version control software was used for all object changes. Initial
application testing was done on the dev servers.
QA/Test servers were not managed by development. They were usually owned
by QA group. We would provide detailed scripts to update QA servers with
the necessary changes. Users would test the applications on QA servers.
QA servers have data that more closely mimics production in terms of
data value distribution and quantity and may even be created from
production backups. Sensitive data was not masked back then, as I
recall, but it may have to be today. QA has the ability to reload the
database in case the migration to QA fails. It's important to be able to
always start from an exact copy of the production database schema.
These days, you can use multiple SQL Server Instances to save hardware
(assuming you have the necessary memory). VMs, while convenient, are
probably not ideal for performance testing. But I'm not well informed
about the capabilites of the server VM products.
If everything tested ok, the updates were escalated to production.
David Gugick
Quest Software
www.imceda.com
www.quest.com
|||Thanks David.
Looking into using named instances with EE to help control costs. Will be
looking into implementing Visual SourceSafe as well.
I noticed you work for Quest. I have a few questions about the Quest
Central if you're open to them. Please email me if so.
Thanks
Jerry
"David Gugick" <david.gugick-nospam@.quest.com> wrote in message
news:%23YygmKIaFHA.1044@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Jerry Spivey wrote:
> At most companies where I've worked in the past, we had development
> servers that were used strictly for development. They generally contained
> stripped down data from the production databases with any customer
> sensitive data masked. Lead developers generally had dbo rights and may
> even have admin rights depending on the size of the company. Version
> control software was used for all object changes. Initial application
> testing was done on the dev servers.
> QA/Test servers were not managed by development. They were usually owned
> by QA group. We would provide detailed scripts to update QA servers with
> the necessary changes. Users would test the applications on QA servers. QA
> servers have data that more closely mimics production in terms of data
> value distribution and quantity and may even be created from production
> backups. Sensitive data was not masked back then, as I recall, but it may
> have to be today. QA has the ability to reload the database in case the
> migration to QA fails. It's important to be able to always start from an
> exact copy of the production database schema.
> These days, you can use multiple SQL Server Instances to save hardware
> (assuming you have the necessary memory). VMs, while convenient, are
> probably not ideal for performance testing. But I'm not well informed
> about the capabilites of the server VM products.
> If everything tested ok, the updates were escalated to production.
> --
> David Gugick
> Quest Software
> www.imceda.com
> www.quest.com
|||Jerry Spivey wrote:
> Thanks David.
> Looking into using named instances with EE to help control costs. Will
> be looking into implementing Visual SourceSafe as well.
> I noticed you work for Quest. I have a few questions about the Quest
> Central if you're open to them. Please email me if so.
> Thanks
> Jerry
>
The best way for you to get information and help with the Quest product
line is to contact sales. Our offices and numbers are located here:
http://www.quest.com/company/us_offices.asp
David Gugick
Quest Software
www.imceda.com
www.quest.com
|||Change management is the term.
http://www.innovartis.co.uk/pdf/Inno...ange_Mgt. pdf
This is a white paper on the subject using Source Control (Visual Source
Safe) as the back bone of the approach. The application DB Ghost
(www.dbghost.com) was built using this methodology.
regards,
Mark Baekdal
http://www.dbghost.com
http://www.innovartis.co.uk
+44 (0)208 241 1762
Build, Comparison and Synchronization from Source Control = Database change
management for SQL Server
"Jerry Spivey" wrote:

> Hi,
> I've been given the task of creating a dev/test environment. Currently we
> have several production applications using databases on a common SQL Server.
> If changes are required, the developers are performing the changes on the
> production system - yea I know BAD,BAD,BAD - but I didn't set this up but
> instead inherited it. I'd like to configure a dev/test environment to move
> the devs off of the production system and to faciliate their development of
> future projects coming up soon.
>
> How is your dev/test environment configured? I'm looking for a few examples
> here that I can work with to implement our dev/test based on our budget and
> system capabilities.
> I.e., Each dev has their own sandbox or each dev shares a common dev env -
> then changes are implemented to test env (and by who - dev or dba - and
> how - scripts) etc... then scripted to deploy on prod systems etc... also
> we image/ghost systems or use VMs and also we use Visual SourceSafe to...
> Trying to come up with a solid game plan here.
> Thanks for any input.
> Jerry
>
>

Development - Test Environment Questions

Hi,
I've been given the task of creating a dev/test environment. Currently we
have several production applications using databases on a common SQL Server.
If changes are required, the developers are performing the changes on the
production system - yea I know BAD,BAD,BAD - but I didn't set this up but
instead inherited it. I'd like to configure a dev/test environment to move
the devs off of the production system and to faciliate their development of
future projects coming up soon.
How is your dev/test environment configured? I'm looking for a few examples
here that I can work with to implement our dev/test based on our budget and
system capabilities.
I.e., Each dev has their own sandbox or each dev shares a common dev env -
then changes are implemented to test env (and by who - dev or dba - and
how - scripts) etc... then scripted to deploy on prod systems etc... also
we image/ghost systems or use VMs and also we use Visual SourceSafe to...
Trying to come up with a solid game plan here.
Thanks for any input.
JerryJerry Spivey wrote:
> Hi,
> I've been given the task of creating a dev/test environment. Currently
> we have several production applications using databases on
> a common SQL Server. If changes are required, the developers are
> performing the changes on the production system - yea I know
> BAD,BAD,BAD - but I didn't set this up but instead inherited it. I'd
> like to configure a dev/test environment to move the devs off of the
> production system and to faciliate their development of future
> projects coming up soon.
> How is your dev/test environment configured? I'm looking for a few
> examples here that I can work with to implement our dev/test based on
> our budget and system capabilities.
> I.e., Each dev has their own sandbox or each dev shares a common dev
> env - then changes are implemented to test env (and by who - dev or
> dba - and how - scripts) etc... then scripted to deploy on prod
> systems etc... also we image/ghost systems or use VMs and also we use
> Visual
> SourceSafe to...
> Trying to come up with a solid game plan here.
> Thanks for any input.
> Jerry
At most companies where I've worked in the past, we had development
servers that were used strictly for development. They generally
contained stripped down data from the production databases with any
customer sensitive data masked. Lead developers generally had dbo rights
and may even have admin rights depending on the size of the company.
Version control software was used for all object changes. Initial
application testing was done on the dev servers.
QA/Test servers were not managed by development. They were usually owned
by QA group. We would provide detailed scripts to update QA servers with
the necessary changes. Users would test the applications on QA servers.
QA servers have data that more closely mimics production in terms of
data value distribution and quantity and may even be created from
production backups. Sensitive data was not masked back then, as I
recall, but it may have to be today. QA has the ability to reload the
database in case the migration to QA fails. It's important to be able to
always start from an exact copy of the production database schema.
These days, you can use multiple SQL Server Instances to save hardware
(assuming you have the necessary memory). VMs, while convenient, are
probably not ideal for performance testing. But I'm not well informed
about the capabilites of the server VM products.
If everything tested ok, the updates were escalated to production.
--
David Gugick
Quest Software
www.imceda.com
www.quest.com|||Thanks David.
Looking into using named instances with EE to help control costs. Will be
looking into implementing Visual SourceSafe as well.
I noticed you work for Quest. I have a few questions about the Quest
Central if you're open to them. Please email me if so.
Thanks
Jerry
"David Gugick" <david.gugick-nospam@.quest.com> wrote in message
news:%23YygmKIaFHA.1044@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Jerry Spivey wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I've been given the task of creating a dev/test environment. Currently we
>> have several production applications using databases on
>> a common SQL Server. If changes are required, the developers are
>> performing the changes on the production system - yea I know
>> BAD,BAD,BAD - but I didn't set this up but instead inherited it. I'd
>> like to configure a dev/test environment to move the devs off of the
>> production system and to faciliate their development of future
>> projects coming up soon.
>> How is your dev/test environment configured? I'm looking for a few
>> examples here that I can work with to implement our dev/test based on
>> our budget and system capabilities.
>> I.e., Each dev has their own sandbox or each dev shares a common dev
>> env - then changes are implemented to test env (and by who - dev or
>> dba - and how - scripts) etc... then scripted to deploy on prod systems
>> etc... also we image/ghost systems or use VMs and also we use Visual
>> SourceSafe to...
>> Trying to come up with a solid game plan here.
>> Thanks for any input.
>> Jerry
> At most companies where I've worked in the past, we had development
> servers that were used strictly for development. They generally contained
> stripped down data from the production databases with any customer
> sensitive data masked. Lead developers generally had dbo rights and may
> even have admin rights depending on the size of the company. Version
> control software was used for all object changes. Initial application
> testing was done on the dev servers.
> QA/Test servers were not managed by development. They were usually owned
> by QA group. We would provide detailed scripts to update QA servers with
> the necessary changes. Users would test the applications on QA servers. QA
> servers have data that more closely mimics production in terms of data
> value distribution and quantity and may even be created from production
> backups. Sensitive data was not masked back then, as I recall, but it may
> have to be today. QA has the ability to reload the database in case the
> migration to QA fails. It's important to be able to always start from an
> exact copy of the production database schema.
> These days, you can use multiple SQL Server Instances to save hardware
> (assuming you have the necessary memory). VMs, while convenient, are
> probably not ideal for performance testing. But I'm not well informed
> about the capabilites of the server VM products.
> If everything tested ok, the updates were escalated to production.
> --
> David Gugick
> Quest Software
> www.imceda.com
> www.quest.com|||Jerry Spivey wrote:
> Thanks David.
> Looking into using named instances with EE to help control costs. Will
> be looking into implementing Visual SourceSafe as well.
> I noticed you work for Quest. I have a few questions about the Quest
> Central if you're open to them. Please email me if so.
> Thanks
> Jerry
>
The best way for you to get information and help with the Quest product
line is to contact sales. Our offices and numbers are located here:
http://www.quest.com/company/us_offices.asp
--
David Gugick
Quest Software
www.imceda.com
www.quest.com|||Change management is the term.
http://www.innovartis.co.uk/pdf/Innovartis_An_Automated_Approach_To_Do_Change_Mgt.pdf
This is a white paper on the subject using Source Control (Visual Source
Safe) as the back bone of the approach. The application DB Ghost
(www.dbghost.com) was built using this methodology.
regards,
Mark Baekdal
http://www.dbghost.com
http://www.innovartis.co.uk
+44 (0)208 241 1762
Build, Comparison and Synchronization from Source Control = Database change
management for SQL Server
"Jerry Spivey" wrote:
> Hi,
> I've been given the task of creating a dev/test environment. Currently we
> have several production applications using databases on a common SQL Server.
> If changes are required, the developers are performing the changes on the
> production system - yea I know BAD,BAD,BAD - but I didn't set this up but
> instead inherited it. I'd like to configure a dev/test environment to move
> the devs off of the production system and to faciliate their development of
> future projects coming up soon.
>
> How is your dev/test environment configured? I'm looking for a few examples
> here that I can work with to implement our dev/test based on our budget and
> system capabilities.
> I.e., Each dev has their own sandbox or each dev shares a common dev env -
> then changes are implemented to test env (and by who - dev or dba - and
> how - scripts) etc... then scripted to deploy on prod systems etc... also
> we image/ghost systems or use VMs and also we use Visual SourceSafe to...
> Trying to come up with a solid game plan here.
> Thanks for any input.
> Jerry
>
>