Acces to a file that is locked by another process

I am writing a package to process perfmon logs. The issue I have come across is that the perfmon process holds onto the log file and SSIS fails because it wants to exclusive read access. Is there any way of getting SSIS to not take an exclusive read on the file.

I can read the file in notepad fine but not SSIS.

check by changing the isolation level of package by default its serialiazable

About sqlserver2000 error in application log

Hi !
i have a SQL 2000 A/P cluster with 4 CPU ancd 8 GByte with AWE enabled; my
db as work fine but from same day a error was dispaly in my application log
:
Event Type: Error
Event Source: MSSQLSERVER
Event Category: (2)
Event ID: 17052
Date: 28/07/2006
Time: 9.32.02
User: N/A
Computer: CLSSQL2000
Description:
Error: 1204, Severity: 19, State: 1
The SQL Server cannot obtain a LOCK resource at this time. Rerun your
statement when there are fewer active users or ask the system administrator
to check the SQL Server lock and memory configuration
I have check for memory free with taskmanager and there is 2 Gb yte frre (i
have awe with 6 Gbyte configured) and with spconfigure but the awe and
memory configuration seems ok.
But why this error occurred ? What happened ?
Thanks in advance!is there any long running store procedure / query running on that server
with following statement.
Select *... INTO <table1> FROM ...
When queries like that runs, it applies exclusive lock on the system tables.
you would get "SQL Server cannot obtain a LOCK resource at this time" error
on the database until the above sp/query is completed. you may get the same
error when you try to list the table in enterprise manager.
change the code by creating the table first and do the insert into, instead
of Select ... into ...
Create <table> ( field1...,
field2...)
Insert into <table> SELECT ... FROM ...
-Saravanan
<io.com@.newsgroup.nospam> wrote in message
news:ezy5pGWxGHA.5056@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Hi !
> i have a SQL 2000 A/P cluster with 4 CPU ancd 8 GByte with AWE enabled; my
> db as work fine but from same day a error was dispaly in my application
> log :
> Event Type: Error
> Event Source: MSSQLSERVER
> Event Category: (2)
> Event ID: 17052
> Date: 28/07/2006
> Time: 9.32.02
> User: N/A
> Computer: CLSSQL2000
> Description:
> Error: 1204, Severity: 19, State: 1
> The SQL Server cannot obtain a LOCK resource at this time. Rerun your
> statement when there are fewer active users or ask the system
> administrator to check the SQL Server lock and memory configuration
>
> I have check for memory free with taskmanager and there is 2 Gb yte frre
> (i have awe with 6 Gbyte configured) and with spconfigure but the awe and
> memory configuration seems ok.
> But why this error occurred ? What happened ?
> Thanks in advance!
>|||Hi,
Thanks Saravanan for greate suggestion. You can also refer to following
article:
323630 How to resolve blocking problems that are caused by lock escalation
in SQL Server
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;323630
Thanks.
Best regards,
Vincent Xu
Microsoft Online Partner Support
======================================================
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
======================================================When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others
may learn and benefit from this issue.
======================================================This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties,and confers no rights.
======================================================>>From: <io.com@.newsgroup.nospam>
>>Subject: About sqlserver2000 error in application log
>>Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 22:37:42 +0200
>>Lines: 30
>>X-Priority: 3
>>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>>X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869
>>X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
>>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962
>>Message-ID: <ezy5pGWxGHA.5056@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>
>>Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
>>NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.241.4.149
>>Path: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl
>>Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.server:442635
>>X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
>>Hi !
>>i have a SQL 2000 A/P cluster with 4 CPU ancd 8 GByte with AWE enabled;
my
>>db as work fine but from same day a error was dispaly in my application
log
>>:
>>Event Type: Error
>>Event Source: MSSQLSERVER
>>Event Category: (2)
>>Event ID: 17052
>>Date: 28/07/2006
>>Time: 9.32.02
>>User: N/A
>>Computer: CLSSQL2000
>>Description:
>>Error: 1204, Severity: 19, State: 1
>>The SQL Server cannot obtain a LOCK resource at this time. Rerun your
>>statement when there are fewer active users or ask the system
administrator
>>to check the SQL Server lock and memory configuration
>>
>>I have check for memory free with taskmanager and there is 2 Gb yte frre
(i
>>have awe with 6 Gbyte configured) and with spconfigure but the awe and
>>memory configuration seems ok.
>>But why this error occurred ? What happened ?
>>Thanks in advance!
>>

About sqlserver2000 error in application log

Hi !
i have a SQL 2000 A/P cluster with 4 CPU ancd 8 GByte with AWE enabled; my
db as work fine but from same day a error was dispaly in my application log
:
Event Type: Error
Event Source: MSSQLSERVER
Event Category: (2)
Event ID: 17052
Date: 28/07/2006
Time: 9.32.02
User: N/A
Computer: CLSSQL2000
Description:
Error: 1204, Severity: 19, State: 1
The SQL Server cannot obtain a LOCK resource at this time. Rerun your
statement when there are fewer active users or ask the system administrator
to check the SQL Server lock and memory configuration
I have check for memory free with taskmanager and there is 2 Gb yte frre (i
have awe with 6 Gbyte configured) and with spconfigure but the awe and
memory configuration seems ok.
But why this error occurred ? What happened ?
Thanks in advance!is there any long running store procedure / query running on that server
with following statement.
Select *... INTO <table1> FROM ...
When queries like that runs, it applies exclusive lock on the system tables.
you would get "SQL Server cannot obtain a LOCK resource at this time" error
on the database until the above sp/query is completed. you may get the same
error when you try to list the table in enterprise manager.
change the code by creating the table first and do the insert into, instead
of Select ... into ...
Create <table> ( field1...,
field2...)
Insert into <table> SELECT ... FROM ...
-Saravanan
<io.com@.newsgroup.nospam> wrote in message
news:ezy5pGWxGHA.5056@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Hi !
> i have a SQL 2000 A/P cluster with 4 CPU ancd 8 GByte with AWE enabled; my
> db as work fine but from same day a error was dispaly in my application
> log :
> Event Type: Error
> Event Source: MSSQLSERVER
> Event Category: (2)
> Event ID: 17052
> Date: 28/07/2006
> Time: 9.32.02
> User: N/A
> Computer: CLSSQL2000
> Description:
> Error: 1204, Severity: 19, State: 1
> The SQL Server cannot obtain a LOCK resource at this time. Rerun your
> statement when there are fewer active users or ask the system
> administrator to check the SQL Server lock and memory configuration
>
> I have check for memory free with taskmanager and there is 2 Gb yte frre
> (i have awe with 6 Gbyte configured) and with spconfigure but the awe and
> memory configuration seems ok.
> But why this error occurred ? What happened ?
> Thanks in advance!
>|||Hi,
Thanks Saravanan for greate suggestion. You can also refer to following
article:
323630 How to resolve blocking problems that are caused by lock escalation
in SQL Server
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;EN-US;323630
Thanks.
Best regards,
Vincent Xu
Microsoft Online Partner Support
========================================
==============
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
========================================
==============
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others
may learn and benefit from this issue.
========================================
==============
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties,and confers no rights.
========================================
==============
--[vbcol=seagreen]
my[vbcol=seagreen]
log[vbcol=seagreen]
administrator[vbcol=seagreen]
(i[vbcol=seagreen]

About sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db

Hello there,
Our database data and log files were stored on UNC directory on different
server, we are thinking to use sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db to move data and
log files from UNC to local disk. Becasuse we are not familiar about
application, any minor issue could stop applicaiton. Is there any issue could
happen on sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db?
Thanks very much
Lionel
I haven't had any problems using them properly (that is, attaching databases
with sp_attach_db that were detached using sp_detach_db), but that doesn't
mean there is no possibility of issues. As with anything else, back up
first just to be on the safe side.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.datamanipulation.net
"lionel" <lionel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3E57A4A7-8D73-4DD2-B6AB-562772BF86EA@.microsoft.com...
> Hello there,
> Our database data and log files were stored on UNC directory on different
> server, we are thinking to use sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db to move data
and
> log files from UNC to local disk. Becasuse we are not familiar about
> application, any minor issue could stop applicaiton. Is there any issue
could
> happen on sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db?
> Thanks very much
> Lionel
>
|||Thanks for your reply, One of the further questions is that I noticed one of
our database owner is "unknow", I wonder why it would be happed.
when we use sp_attach_db to change the database owner from "unknow" to "sa",
any issue could be?
Thanks again
Lionel
"Adam Machanic" wrote:

> I haven't had any problems using them properly (that is, attaching databases
> with sp_attach_db that were detached using sp_detach_db), but that doesn't
> mean there is no possibility of issues. As with anything else, back up
> first just to be on the safe side.
>
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> http://www.datamanipulation.net
> --
>
> "lionel" <lionel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:3E57A4A7-8D73-4DD2-B6AB-562772BF86EA@.microsoft.com...
> and
> could
>
>
|||You can restore user and owner settings on the target server using
sp_change_users_login and sp_changedbowner.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.datamanipulation.net
"lionel" <lionel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2220E2B9-D439-407A-9DE3-3D18AF490F46@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks for your reply, One of the further questions is that I noticed one
of
> our database owner is "unknow", I wonder why it would be happed.
> when we use sp_attach_db to change the database owner from "unknow" to
"sa",[vbcol=seagreen]
> any issue could be?
> Thanks again
> Lionel
>
> "Adam Machanic" wrote:
databases[vbcol=seagreen]
doesn't[vbcol=seagreen]
different[vbcol=seagreen]
data[vbcol=seagreen]
issue[vbcol=seagreen]
|||Hi,
Before detaching, I recommend you to do a Full database backup of your
database. So even if Attach wont work you
could use the backup to recover the database to local hard disk using
RESTORE DATABASE command.
After that as Adam suggested you could use sp_changedbowner to change the
database owner
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"lionel" <lionel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2220E2B9-D439-407A-9DE3-3D18AF490F46@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks for your reply, One of the further questions is that I noticed one
> of
> our database owner is "unknow", I wonder why it would be happed.
> when we use sp_attach_db to change the database owner from "unknow" to
> "sa",
> any issue could be?
> Thanks again
> Lionel
>
> "Adam Machanic" wrote:

About sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db

Hello there,
Our database data and log files were stored on UNC directory on different
server, we are thinking to use sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db to move data and
log files from UNC to local disk. Becasuse we are not familiar about
application, any minor issue could stop applicaiton. Is there any issue could
happen on sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db?
Thanks very much
LionelI haven't had any problems using them properly (that is, attaching databases
with sp_attach_db that were detached using sp_detach_db), but that doesn't
mean there is no possibility of issues. As with anything else, back up
first just to be on the safe side.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.datamanipulation.net
--
"lionel" <lionel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3E57A4A7-8D73-4DD2-B6AB-562772BF86EA@.microsoft.com...
> Hello there,
> Our database data and log files were stored on UNC directory on different
> server, we are thinking to use sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db to move data
and
> log files from UNC to local disk. Becasuse we are not familiar about
> application, any minor issue could stop applicaiton. Is there any issue
could
> happen on sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db?
> Thanks very much
> Lionel
>|||Thanks for your reply, One of the further questions is that I noticed one of
our database owner is "unknow", I wonder why it would be happed.
when we use sp_attach_db to change the database owner from "unknow" to "sa",
any issue could be?
Thanks again
Lionel
"Adam Machanic" wrote:
> I haven't had any problems using them properly (that is, attaching databases
> with sp_attach_db that were detached using sp_detach_db), but that doesn't
> mean there is no possibility of issues. As with anything else, back up
> first just to be on the safe side.
>
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> http://www.datamanipulation.net
> --
>
> "lionel" <lionel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:3E57A4A7-8D73-4DD2-B6AB-562772BF86EA@.microsoft.com...
> > Hello there,
> >
> > Our database data and log files were stored on UNC directory on different
> > server, we are thinking to use sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db to move data
> and
> > log files from UNC to local disk. Becasuse we are not familiar about
> > application, any minor issue could stop applicaiton. Is there any issue
> could
> > happen on sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db?
> >
> > Thanks very much
> >
> > Lionel
> >
> >
>
>|||You can restore user and owner settings on the target server using
sp_change_users_login and sp_changedbowner.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.datamanipulation.net
--
"lionel" <lionel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2220E2B9-D439-407A-9DE3-3D18AF490F46@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks for your reply, One of the further questions is that I noticed one
of
> our database owner is "unknow", I wonder why it would be happed.
> when we use sp_attach_db to change the database owner from "unknow" to
"sa",
> any issue could be?
> Thanks again
> Lionel
>
> "Adam Machanic" wrote:
> > I haven't had any problems using them properly (that is, attaching
databases
> > with sp_attach_db that were detached using sp_detach_db), but that
doesn't
> > mean there is no possibility of issues. As with anything else, back up
> > first just to be on the safe side.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Adam Machanic
> > SQL Server MVP
> > http://www.datamanipulation.net
> > --
> >
> >
> > "lionel" <lionel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:3E57A4A7-8D73-4DD2-B6AB-562772BF86EA@.microsoft.com...
> > > Hello there,
> > >
> > > Our database data and log files were stored on UNC directory on
different
> > > server, we are thinking to use sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db to move
data
> > and
> > > log files from UNC to local disk. Becasuse we are not familiar about
> > > application, any minor issue could stop applicaiton. Is there any
issue
> > could
> > > happen on sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db?
> > >
> > > Thanks very much
> > >
> > > Lionel
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >|||Hi,
Before detaching, I recommend you to do a Full database backup of your
database. So even if Attach wont work you
could use the backup to recover the database to local hard disk using
RESTORE DATABASE command.
After that as Adam suggested you could use sp_changedbowner to change the
database owner
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"lionel" <lionel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2220E2B9-D439-407A-9DE3-3D18AF490F46@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks for your reply, One of the further questions is that I noticed one
> of
> our database owner is "unknow", I wonder why it would be happed.
> when we use sp_attach_db to change the database owner from "unknow" to
> "sa",
> any issue could be?
> Thanks again
> Lionel
>
> "Adam Machanic" wrote:
>> I haven't had any problems using them properly (that is, attaching
>> databases
>> with sp_attach_db that were detached using sp_detach_db), but that
>> doesn't
>> mean there is no possibility of issues. As with anything else, back up
>> first just to be on the safe side.
>>
>> --
>> Adam Machanic
>> SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.datamanipulation.net
>> --
>>
>> "lionel" <lionel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:3E57A4A7-8D73-4DD2-B6AB-562772BF86EA@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hello there,
>> >
>> > Our database data and log files were stored on UNC directory on
>> > different
>> > server, we are thinking to use sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db to move
>> > data
>> and
>> > log files from UNC to local disk. Becasuse we are not familiar about
>> > application, any minor issue could stop applicaiton. Is there any issue
>> could
>> > happen on sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db?
>> >
>> > Thanks very much
>> >
>> > Lionel
>> >
>> >
>>

About sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db

Hello there,
Our database data and log files were stored on UNC directory on different
server, we are thinking to use sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db to move data an
d
log files from UNC to local disk. Becasuse we are not familiar about
application, any minor issue could stop applicaiton. Is there any issue coul
d
happen on sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db?
Thanks very much
LionelI haven't had any problems using them properly (that is, attaching databases
with sp_attach_db that were detached using sp_detach_db), but that doesn't
mean there is no possibility of issues. As with anything else, back up
first just to be on the safe side.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.datamanipulation.net
--
"lionel" <lionel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3E57A4A7-8D73-4DD2-B6AB-562772BF86EA@.microsoft.com...
> Hello there,
> Our database data and log files were stored on UNC directory on different
> server, we are thinking to use sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db to move data
and
> log files from UNC to local disk. Becasuse we are not familiar about
> application, any minor issue could stop applicaiton. Is there any issue
could
> happen on sp_detach_db and sp_attach_db?
> Thanks very much
> Lionel
>|||Thanks for your reply, One of the further questions is that I noticed one of
our database owner is "unknow", I wonder why it would be happed.
when we use sp_attach_db to change the database owner from "unknow" to "sa",
any issue could be?
Thanks again
Lionel
"Adam Machanic" wrote:

> I haven't had any problems using them properly (that is, attaching databas
es
> with sp_attach_db that were detached using sp_detach_db), but that doesn't
> mean there is no possibility of issues. As with anything else, back up
> first just to be on the safe side.
>
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> http://www.datamanipulation.net
> --
>
> "lionel" <lionel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:3E57A4A7-8D73-4DD2-B6AB-562772BF86EA@.microsoft.com...
> and
> could
>
>|||You can restore user and owner settings on the target server using
sp_change_users_login and sp_changedbowner.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.datamanipulation.net
--
"lionel" <lionel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2220E2B9-D439-407A-9DE3-3D18AF490F46@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks for your reply, One of the further questions is that I noticed one
of
> our database owner is "unknow", I wonder why it would be happed.
> when we use sp_attach_db to change the database owner from "unknow" to
"sa",[vbcol=seagreen]
> any issue could be?
> Thanks again
> Lionel
>
> "Adam Machanic" wrote:
>
databases[vbcol=seagreen]
doesn't[vbcol=seagreen]
different[vbcol=seagreen]
data[vbcol=seagreen]
issue[vbcol=seagreen]|||Hi,
Before detaching, I recommend you to do a Full database backup of your
database. So even if Attach wont work you
could use the backup to recover the database to local hard disk using
RESTORE DATABASE command.
After that as Adam suggested you could use sp_changedbowner to change the
database owner
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"lionel" <lionel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2220E2B9-D439-407A-9DE3-3D18AF490F46@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks for your reply, One of the further questions is that I noticed one
> of
> our database owner is "unknow", I wonder why it would be happed.
> when we use sp_attach_db to change the database owner from "unknow" to
> "sa",
> any issue could be?
> Thanks again
> Lionel
>
> "Adam Machanic" wrote:
>

About login into sql server via asp.net

I want to design a form with C# that will able me to log in to my sql server with my sql login name and password.This should be the entry point, which is like the "SqlWebAdmin", Where i login first then have a view of databases that i have permission. The problem first is how to login into the sql server via ASP .net without knowing prior which database is mine?Any help plz?Most apps put their connect information in web.config, and read it out at run time.

about log reader

Hi all Gurus
Will I have any problem for
stopping the log reader and then restarting it when the system clears up?
Thanks
As long as you don't leave it too long then it is ok. If you left it for
several days, you could find that when you start it, not all the commands
ultimately reach the subscriber. I was unfortunate to have this happen once
on an important system. This is because the distribution cleanup agent will
remove commands which exceed the transaction retention period, and each time
it runs, it'll delete some commands before the distribution agent can apply
them. So, it really depends on the transaction retention period you have and
how long it'll take to propagate the commands to determine how long you can
leave it.
Rgds,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com/default.asp
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
|||Thanks
"Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message
news:O$sIhwsPFHA.3156@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> As long as you don't leave it too long then it is ok. If you left it for
> several days, you could find that when you start it, not all the commands
> ultimately reach the subscriber. I was unfortunate to have this happen
once
> on an important system. This is because the distribution cleanup agent
will
> remove commands which exceed the transaction retention period, and each
time
> it runs, it'll delete some commands before the distribution agent can
apply
> them. So, it really depends on the transaction retention period you have
and
> how long it'll take to propagate the commands to determine how long you
can
> leave it.
> Rgds,
> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com/default.asp
> (recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
>

About difference between log shipping standby and active/passive c

Hi Guys,
What is difference between
log shipping standby and active/passive cluster? is there any difference for
the functionality? Thanks
Hi
In general an active/passive cluster will use SAN technology to replicate
your database from the active cluster to the passive one. The SAN is
replicated between two sites and all the databases etc on the SAN will be
copied. You may have local failover to a second local machine in the cluster
and remote failover to the remote cluster, giving a high degree of
resilience. The cost of this type of solution is usually quite high.
Log shipping is between two databases, not necessarily on different machines
or clusters and the logs will be shipped over the network. As this is a
database level it will need to be configured on all databases that you need
to copy. This solution is usually relatively cheap, but can still give you a
high level of resilience
HTH
John
"Iter" wrote:

> Hi Guys,
> What is difference between
> log shipping standby and active/passive cluster? is there any difference for
> the functionality? Thanks
>
|||An active passive cluster stores the actual data on a shared storage space,
usually a SAN. The active node accesses the data until it fails over at
which point the passive node accesses the data and becomes the active node.
If your shared storage area dies, your data is gone unless you have protected
it some other way. Clustering is more concerned with preventing downtime if
the failure is outside of the storage system.
Log shipping takes transaction log backups of one database and applies them
to a second database, effectively synching this second database to the first.
If the server that the primary database is on fails, you can activate the
secondary database to become the primary. Log shipping is often used to copy
data to a disaster recovery server and is more concerned with duplicating the
actual data.
Just a quick summary, and the emphasis of each method is my own opinion.
I hope that this helps,
Matt
MattMoneyDC @. Hotmail dot com
"Iter" wrote:

> Hi Guys,
> What is difference between
> log shipping standby and active/passive cluster? is there any difference for
> the functionality? Thanks
>
|||Hi
Something I forgot to say, was that you can also use both together, or you
could have two clusters that used log shipping to copy the database changes
between the
active and passive clusters instead of using SAN replication.
John
"John Bell" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi
> In general an active/passive cluster will use SAN technology to replicate
> your database from the active cluster to the passive one. The SAN is
> replicated between two sites and all the databases etc on the SAN will be
> copied. You may have local failover to a second local machine in the cluster
> and remote failover to the remote cluster, giving a high degree of
> resilience. The cost of this type of solution is usually quite high.
> Log shipping is between two databases, not necessarily on different machines
> or clusters and the logs will be shipped over the network. As this is a
> database level it will need to be configured on all databases that you need
> to copy. This solution is usually relatively cheap, but can still give you a
> high level of resilience
> HTH
> John
>
> "Iter" wrote:
|||"John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:B23570F5-7A32-4CAF-A788-DE8FE76CA973@.microsoft.com...
> Hi
> In general an active/passive cluster will use SAN technology to replicate
> your database from the active cluster to the passive one. The SAN is
> replicated between two sites and all the databases etc on the SAN will be
> copied. You may have local failover to a second local machine in the
> cluster
> and remote failover to the remote cluster, giving a high degree of
> resilience. The cost of this type of solution is usually quite high.
>
What you describe is a "Geo-Cluster", a special and especially expensive
type of clustering solution. In a "normal" MSCS Failover Cluster the SQL
Server binaries for the instance are installed on multiple computers (called
cluster nodes), but only running on one node at a time. A single copy of
the database resides on shared storage (SAN or SCSI), and in case of failure
of one node, the other node mounts the volumes where the databases live and
starts up the SQL Server Instance.
The cost is still much higher than Log Shipping, both for the hardware, the
setup and the administration. But it supports automatic failover, manual
failover, and rolling upgrades/patches.

> Log shipping is between two databases, not necessarily on different
> machines
> or clusters and the logs will be shipped over the network. As this is a
> database level it will need to be configured on all databases that you
> need
> to copy. This solution is usually relatively cheap, but can still give you
> a
> high level of resilience
>
Also note that SQL Server 2005's Database Mirroring can be thought of as
"Continuous Log Shipping". It's just as easy, has less latency, supports
simple failover and failback.
In general see
Microsoft SQL Server High Availability
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/technologies/highavailability/default.mspx
How to Attain SQL Server High Availability at Minimal Cost
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/sql_server_high_availability.asp
SQL Server 2005 Mission Critical High Availability
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/themes/high-availability.mspx
David
|||According john's notes, I can use log shipping work together with
active/passive cluster. How about active/active cluster? can it work together
with log shipping? Thanks.
"John Bell" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi
> Something I forgot to say, was that you can also use both together, or you
> could have two clusters that used log shipping to copy the database changes
> between the
> active and passive clusters instead of using SAN replication.
> John
> "John Bell" wrote:
|||Hi
Active/Active clusters are usually two instances one active on one cluster
with a passive failover on the other and the second instance active on the
other cluster with failover on the cluster where the other instance is
active. Therefore you may want to consider them as two active/passive
clusters thing sharing hardware.
John
"Iter" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> According john's notes, I can use log shipping work together with
> active/passive cluster. How about active/active cluster? can it work together
> with log shipping? Thanks.
> "John Bell" wrote:

About difference between log shipping standby and active/passive c

Hi Guys,
What is difference between
log shipping standby and active/passive cluster? is there any difference for
the functionality? ThanksHi
In general an active/passive cluster will use SAN technology to replicate
your database from the active cluster to the passive one. The SAN is
replicated between two sites and all the databases etc on the SAN will be
copied. You may have local failover to a second local machine in the cluster
and remote failover to the remote cluster, giving a high degree of
resilience. The cost of this type of solution is usually quite high.
Log shipping is between two databases, not necessarily on different machines
or clusters and the logs will be shipped over the network. As this is a
database level it will need to be configured on all databases that you need
to copy. This solution is usually relatively cheap, but can still give you a
high level of resilience
HTH
John
"Iter" wrote:

> Hi Guys,
> What is difference between
> log shipping standby and active/passive cluster? is there any difference f
or
> the functionality? Thanks
>|||An active passive cluster stores the actual data on a shared storage space,
usually a SAN. The active node accesses the data until it fails over at
which point the passive node accesses the data and becomes the active node.
If your shared storage area dies, your data is gone unless you have protecte
d
it some other way. Clustering is more concerned with preventing downtime if
the failure is outside of the storage system.
Log shipping takes transaction log backups of one database and applies them
to a second database, effectively synching this second database to the first
.
If the server that the primary database is on fails, you can activate the
secondary database to become the primary. Log shipping is often used to cop
y
data to a disaster recovery server and is more concerned with duplicating th
e
actual data.
Just a quick summary, and the emphasis of each method is my own opinion.
I hope that this helps,
Matt
MattMoneyDC @. Hotmail dot com
"Iter" wrote:

> Hi Guys,
> What is difference between
> log shipping standby and active/passive cluster? is there any difference f
or
> the functionality? Thanks
>|||"John Bell" <jbellnewsposts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:B23570F5-7A32-4CAF-A788-DE8FE76CA973@.microsoft.com...
> Hi
> In general an active/passive cluster will use SAN technology to replicate
> your database from the active cluster to the passive one. The SAN is
> replicated between two sites and all the databases etc on the SAN will be
> copied. You may have local failover to a second local machine in the
> cluster
> and remote failover to the remote cluster, giving a high degree of
> resilience. The cost of this type of solution is usually quite high.
>
What you describe is a "Geo-Cluster", a special and especially expensive
type of clustering solution. In a "normal" MSCS Failover Cluster the SQL
Server binaries for the instance are installed on multiple computers (called
cluster nodes), but only running on one node at a time. A single copy of
the database resides on shared storage (SAN or SCSI), and in case of failure
of one node, the other node mounts the volumes where the databases live and
starts up the SQL Server Instance.
The cost is still much higher than Log Shipping, both for the hardware, the
setup and the administration. But it supports automatic failover, manual
failover, and rolling upgrades/patches.

> Log shipping is between two databases, not necessarily on different
> machines
> or clusters and the logs will be shipped over the network. As this is a
> database level it will need to be configured on all databases that you
> need
> to copy. This solution is usually relatively cheap, but can still give you
> a
> high level of resilience
>
Also note that SQL Server 2005's Database Mirroring can be thought of as
"Continuous Log Shipping". It's just as easy, has less latency, supports
simple failover and failback.
In general see
Microsoft SQL Server High Availability
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techno...ty/default.mspx
How to Attain SQL Server High Availability at Minimal Cost
http://www.sql-server-performance.c...vailability.asp
SQL Server 2005 Mission Critical High Availability
[url]http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/themes/high-availability.mspx[/ur
l]
David

About change simple recovery modle to full recovery modle

Hi Guys,
I changed simple recovery modle to full recovery modle, but I monitor ther
log file still not to be increased. IN the beginning it is increased, but
after seconds,, in go back to original. Like simples modle. Can someone tell
hwo to change it? Thanks.The log is in "auto-truncate mode" until you do a database backup of the database.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Iter" <Iter@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D334D2F3-9DB4-465D-A94D-EE7F34A86B64@.microsoft.com...
> Hi Guys,
> I changed simple recovery modle to full recovery modle, but I monitor ther
> log file still not to be increased. IN the beginning it is increased, but
> after seconds,, in go back to original. Like simples modle. Can someone tell
> hwo to change it? Thanks.|||Hello,
Add on to Tibor, to create the backup chain you will have to do a full
database backup after changing your recovery model from
SIMPLE to FULL. Make sure after this you schedule the transaction log backup
in frequent intervals.
Thanks
Hari
"Iter" <Iter@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D334D2F3-9DB4-465D-A94D-EE7F34A86B64@.microsoft.com...
> Hi Guys,
> I changed simple recovery modle to full recovery modle, but I monitor
> ther
> log file still not to be increased. IN the beginning it is increased, but
> after seconds,, in go back to original. Like simples modle. Can someone
> tell
> hwo to change it? Thanks.

About change log file folder after database was created

Hi Guys,
Can I change log file folder after database was created? I want to move log
file to other folder, how do I do? Thanks.
You could use detach and attach:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187858.aspx
Alternatively if you have just made a backup you could use RESTORE with
MOVE. Please look at example D here:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms186858.aspx
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com .

About change log file folder after database was created

Hi Guys,
Can I change log file folder after database was created? I want to move log
file to other folder, how do I do? Thanks.You could use detach and attach:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187858.aspx
Alternatively if you have just made a backup you could use RESTORE with
MOVE. Please look at example D here:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms186858.aspx
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com .

about Alert

Hi all:
I want to create a Alert,which can email to me when
my log file is attach to 90% full.
How can I do?
Is there Any samples?
Thank you!!
ArronHi:
Follow the list steps, you can create the alert:
1. Start the Enterprize Manager
2. Browser the server you want to create alert
3. Browser the "Management" and right click "Alert"
4. Select "New Alert" to start the alert
5. Change the Types: to "Sql Server perfermence condition alert"
6. Change the objcet to "Sql Server:Databases"
7. Change the counter to "Percentage Log Used"
8. Set the other value as you expect
9. Switch to Response tab
10. Click the "New Operator" and set the e-mail adress
After these steps, the alert should be OK
Best Wishes
Wei Ci Zhou|||Before that, please check if you set the mail profile|||Setting up the mail profile is documented in SQL books online... It requires
that Outlook be installed on the SQL Server... If you may not, or do not
wish to install Outlook, you may go to www.sqldev.com and there is a mail
dll, and sample stored procedures that will allow you to do SMTP
mail...(instead of MAPI mail).
--
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Computer Education Services Corporation (CESC), Charlotte, NC
www.computeredservices.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
"Arron" <9144492@.pchome.com.tw> wrote in message
news:578601c3e56a$804b52e0$a001280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi all:
> I want to create a Alert,which can email to me when
> my log file is attach to 90% full.
> How can I do?
> Is there Any samples?
> Thank you!!
> Arron

about Alert

Hi all:
I want to create a Alert,which can email to me when
my log file is attach to 90% full.
How can I do?
Is there Any samples?
Thank you!!
ArronHi:
Follow the list steps, you can create the alert:
1. Start the Enterprize Manager
2. Browser the server you want to create alert
3. Browser the "Management" and right click "Alert"
4. Select "New Alert" to start the alert
5. Change the Types: to "Sql Server perfermence condition alert"
6. Change the objcet to "Sql Server:Databases"
7. Change the counter to "Percentage Log Used"
8. Set the other value as you expect
9. Switch to Response tab
10. Click the "New Operator" and set the e-mail adress
After these steps, the alert should be OK
Best Wishes
Wei Ci Zhou|||Before that, please check if you set the mail profile|||Setting up the mail profile is documented in SQL books online... It requires
that Outlook be installed on the SQL Server... If you may not, or do not
wish to install Outlook, you may go to www.sqldev.com and there is a mail
dll, and sample stored procedures that will allow you to do SMTP
mail...(instead of MAPI mail).
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Computer Education Services Corporation (CESC), Charlotte, NC
www.computeredservices.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
"Arron" <9144492@.pchome.com.tw> wrote in message
news:578601c3e56a$804b52e0$a001280a@.phx.gbl...

quote:

---

> Hi all:
> I want to create a Alert,which can email to me when
> my log file is attach to 90% full.
> How can I do?
> Is there Any samples?
> Thank you!!
> Arron

---