Minimum rights for SQL Agent

Hi,
Here is a problem:
SQL 2000 servers on Win 2000 servers in NT4 Domain
Security restrictions exclude Everyone group from all the shares and
registries.
The SQL agent and SQL Server service accounts should NOT be Local or Domain
Administrative privileges.
What are the minimum rights and registry access required for these accounts
in order to operate?
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Regards,
JDHi,
Do not run SQL Server and SQL Agent services as local system, local
administrator, or domain administrator accounts.
If your services starts based on above, most of the jobs which require an OS
level admin previlages will fail.
Eg:
1. Using XP_CMDSHELL wrting into hard drives, Registry read/write/delete...
2. SQL Agent connection to SQL Server with Admini prev.
Go thru the below link for more information on setting up security,
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/tr...chnet/prodtechn
ol/sql/maintain/security/sp3sec/SP3SEC02.ASP
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Bruce Rhoades" <bruce.rhoades@.gdsinc.com> wrote in message
news:eI8S4C0#DHA.2484@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> Here is a problem:
> SQL 2000 servers on Win 2000 servers in NT4 Domain
> Security restrictions exclude Everyone group from all the shares and
> registries.
> The SQL agent and SQL Server service accounts should NOT be Local or
Domain
> Administrative privileges.
> What are the minimum rights and registry access required for these
accounts
> in order to operate?
> Any help is greatly appreciated.
> Regards,
> JD
>|||I disagree.
There are a large number of bad side effects if the SQL service account is
NOT a member of the local administrators group on a server. It needs to be
a domain account so you can access domain resources, but not necessarily a
domain admin. If the box is dedicated to SQL, then there is really no
seciruty risk. If not, then you are in for more problems anyway.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Bruce Rhoades" <bruce.rhoades@.gdsinc.com> wrote in message
news:eI8S4C0%23DHA.2484@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> Here is a problem:
> SQL 2000 servers on Win 2000 servers in NT4 Domain
> Security restrictions exclude Everyone group from all the shares and
> registries.
> The SQL agent and SQL Server service accounts should NOT be Local or
Domain
> Administrative privileges.
> What are the minimum rights and registry access required for these
accounts
> in order to operate?
> Any help is greatly appreciated.
> Regards,
> JD
>|||See the BOL topic "Setting up Windows Services Accounts" for more details
on the permissions needed. If you're on a cluster then the startup
accounts need to be local admins. There are a subset of activities outlined
in the above topic that also require a local admin. Otherwise, the
account(s) just needs to be added to SQL Server as sysadmins and have the
permissions outlined in the referenced topic. If you set the account
through Enterprise Manager then all the permissions are automatically set
for you.
Cindy Gross, MCDBA, MCSE
http://cindygross.tripod.com
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Minimum permission to attach / detach databases

Hi group,
I've got a problem determining permissions for users. I got one group
of users which only should have the abilitiy to attach / detach any
database to the SQL Server.
I just thought the SQL server wide user role dbcreator seems to be
sufficient for them but if I try to attach a database on which this
group does not have any permission within (its a database from an
external vendor), attaching the database fails.
Any hints on this?
Thanks,
HeikoHeiko
Can you elaborate a little bit?
>but if I try to attach a database on which this
> group does not have any permission within (its a database from an
> external vendor), attaching the database fails.
>
"Heiko Schuler" <hschuler@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1192693343.587584.291710@.v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> Hi group,
> I've got a problem determining permissions for users. I got one group
> of users which only should have the abilitiy to attach / detach any
> database to the SQL Server.
> I just thought the SQL server wide user role dbcreator seems to be
> sufficient for them but if I try to attach a database on which this
> group does not have any permission within (its a database from an
> external vendor), attaching the database fails.
>
> Any hints on this?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Heiko
>|||> Can you elaborate a little bit?
Sure - I got one user which has the database role "dbcreator". When I
now try to attach a database, I got an error. the strange thing is - I
got 2 different depending using the GUI or T-SQL.
When I use the GUI, after selecting the mdf file, I got the following
error:
"User 'guest' does not have permission to run DBCC checkprimeryfile.
OK, this error message itself is clear because only members of the
sysadmin or server admin role can run DBCC commands. But why does the
GUI wants to run DBCC checkprimeryfile?
When I try to attach the database via T-SQL with sp_attach_db in Query
Analyzer, I got the following error:
"Unable to open the physical fiel <path to the mdf>. Operating system
error 5 (error not found).
Depending on the message error message above I first thougt it was a
permisson error on the file system. But if I put the user in the
sysadmin server role - everything works fine. So NTFS permission on
the file system is OK.
Heiko

Minimium persmissions needed to Restore a DB

Hi,
I'm trying to set a domain group who connect using Windows authentication,
so that they can restore a database, i have read books online and do not
want to add them to the sysadmin and dbcreator fixed server roles.
I can see that the dbcreator fixed server role has a permission 'RESTORE
DATABASE', is it possible to grant this permission on a single database on
the server alone ?
Thanks in advance
PatNo...you can't assign this for a single database.
-Sue
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 09:04:42 +0100, "pmcg"
<pat@.nospam.nospam.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>I'm trying to set a domain group who connect using Windows authentication,
>so that they can restore a database, i have read books online and do not
>want to add them to the sysadmin and dbcreator fixed server roles.
>I can see that the dbcreator fixed server role has a permission 'RESTORE
>DATABASE', is it possible to grant this permission on a single database on
>the server alone ?
>
>Thanks in advance
>Pat
>

Min within a Group query

Hi
We have a table structure for storing away Hires in a SQL Server database.
Related to this table is another table that stores events/logs that have
occurred on the Hires table. I.e. Record Created, Modified, Price Changed,
etc. We are trying to do a query that will return the first log for each
hire and then return a few extra fields too. The basic table structure is
below
Hires
--
HireID
ClientID
Status
Cancelled
HireLog
--
HireLogID
HireID
LogDate
Comment
EventType
OperatorID
At first I thought we could do the following:
SELECT dbo.Hires.HireID, MIN(dbo.HireLog.HireLogID) AS HireLogID,
dbo.HireLog.LogDate, dbo.HireLog.Comment, dbo.HireLog.EventType,
dbo.HireLog.OperatorID
FROM dbo.Hires INNER JOIN dbo.HireLog ON dbo.Hires.HireID =
dbo.HireLog.HireID
GROUP BY dbo.Hires.HireID, dbo.HireLog.LogDate, dbo.HireLog.Comment,
dbo.HireLog.EventType, dbo.HireLog.OperatorID
ORDER BY dbo.Hires.HireID DESC
This works great with just the Hire ID field and the Min(HireLogID), but as
soon as you add the other fields the Group By causes the query to return all
the other Logs for the Hire too.
Is there any way around it?What is HireLogID? If that's an IDENTITY column then it's probably
unwise to rely on it to determine the earliest row. The reason is that
you don't always have full control over the order in which IDENTITY
values are assigned. IDENTITY should be used only as an arbitrary
surrogate key without any ascribed business meaning.
In this case it looks like you'll wanr to use LogDate to determine the
first row for each Hire. Declare (hireid, logdate) as unique to ensure
you have a unique sequence.
SELECT hireid, hirelogid, logdate, comment, eventtype, operatorid
FROM HireLog AS L
WHERE logdate =
(SELECT MIN(logdate)
FROM HireLog
WHERE hireid =L.hireid)
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--|||Chris,
Just one minor, (probably unnecessary) addition..
If you are storing Date and TIme in LogDate, then the chance of anyone
recording two records in HireLog with the same HireID and LogDate is very
unlikely, and probabl;y impossible, ignore this, David's solution should wor
k
fine...
but if your application logic is only storing the date, without the time
portion, in logDate, then you will need to handle the case where are multipl
e
records with the same value for both HireID and LogDate.
The only way to do that, given your schema, is to use the HireLogID as a
discriminant. (David's comment about no guarantees as to which is REALLY
earliest apply here, but, if you don;t have the time portion of the date
stored, then there's no way to distinquish among multiple records on a
specific day anyway.)
Select hirelogid, hireid, logdate,
comment, eventtype, operatorid
From HireLog L
Where hirelogid =
(Select Min(hirelogid)
From HireLog
Where hireid = L.hireid
And logdate = (Select Min(LogDate)
From HireLog
Where hireid = L.hireid))
"David Portas" wrote:

> What is HireLogID? If that's an IDENTITY column then it's probably
> unwise to rely on it to determine the earliest row. The reason is that
> you don't always have full control over the order in which IDENTITY
> values are assigned. IDENTITY should be used only as an arbitrary
> surrogate key without any ascribed business meaning.
> In this case it looks like you'll wanr to use LogDate to determine the
> first row for each Hire. Declare (hireid, logdate) as unique to ensure
> you have a unique sequence.
> SELECT hireid, hirelogid, logdate, comment, eventtype, operatorid
> FROM HireLog AS L
> WHERE logdate =
> (SELECT MIN(logdate)
> FROM HireLog
> WHERE hireid =L.hireid)
> --
> David Portas
> SQL Server MVP
> --
>|||Thanks for you help.
Chris
"David Portas" <REMOVE_BEFORE_REPLYING_dportas@.acm.org> wrote in message
news:1110365299.387914.40640@.g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> What is HireLogID? If that's an IDENTITY column then it's probably
> unwise to rely on it to determine the earliest row. The reason is that
> you don't always have full control over the order in which IDENTITY
> values are assigned. IDENTITY should be used only as an arbitrary
> surrogate key without any ascribed business meaning.
> In this case it looks like you'll wanr to use LogDate to determine the
> first row for each Hire. Declare (hireid, logdate) as unique to ensure
> you have a unique sequence.
> SELECT hireid, hirelogid, logdate, comment, eventtype, operatorid
> FROM HireLog AS L
> WHERE logdate =
> (SELECT MIN(logdate)
> FROM HireLog
> WHERE hireid =L.hireid)
> --
> David Portas
> SQL Server MVP
> --
>|||> but, if you don;t have the time portion of the date
> stored, then there's no way to distinquish among multiple records on
a
> specific day anyway
... and therefore the business requirement to display only the earliest
row would be fatally flawed, and anyway, what would be the natural key
of the table in that scenario? That is indeed the price you pay for
tables without proper keys.
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--|||This is a date + time field.
Thanks.
Chris
"David Portas" <REMOVE_BEFORE_REPLYING_dportas@.acm.org> wrote in message
news:1110367501.066963.91030@.z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> a
> ... and therefore the business requirement to display only the earliest
> row would be fatally flawed, and anyway, what would be the natural key
> of the table in that scenario? That is indeed the price you pay for
> tables without proper keys.
> --
> David Portas
> SQL Server MVP
> --
>

min with a bit

Hi,

I'm trying to grab records with a priority over those marked as yes (-1) in
a certain field.

Trying "select id, min(bit) from tab group by id" does not work, as the min
operator doesn't work on bits.

Is there an alternative to my query?

Many thanks,
Chrismin(cast(deleted as int))

"Not Me" <Not.Me@.faker.fake.fa.ke> wrote in message
news:buoari$thc$1@.ucsnew1.ncl.ac.uk...
> Hi,
> I'm trying to grab records with a priority over those marked as yes (-1)
in
> a certain field.
> Trying "select id, min(bit) from tab group by id" does not work, as the
min
> operator doesn't work on bits.
> Is there an alternative to my query?
> Many thanks,
> Chris|||"mountain man" <hobbit@.southern_seaweed.com.op> wrote in message
news:opOPb.23515$Wa.14455@.news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> "Not Me" <Not.Me@.faker.fake.fa.ke> wrote in message
> news:buoari$thc$1@.ucsnew1.ncl.ac.uk...

> > Trying "select id, min(bit) from tab group by id" does not work, as the
> min
> > operator doesn't work on bits.
> > Is there an alternative to my query?

> min(cast(deleted as int))

Thanks for that, I do though get an error when trying it, I guess it's
because I'm using an mdb file and linked tables to the sql server... any
other ideas? Could create a quick function I guess...

Cheers,
Chris|||"Not Me" <Not.Me@.faker.fake.fa.ke> wrote in message news:<buocfi$ub9$1@.ucsnew1.ncl.ac.uk>...
> "mountain man" <hobbit@.southern_seaweed.com.op> wrote in message
> news:opOPb.23515$Wa.14455@.news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > "Not Me" <Not.Me@.faker.fake.fa.ke> wrote in message
> > news:buoari$thc$1@.ucsnew1.ncl.ac.uk...
> > > Trying "select id, min(bit) from tab group by id" does not work, as the
> min
> > > operator doesn't work on bits.
> > > > Is there an alternative to my query?
> > min(cast(deleted as int))
> Thanks for that, I do though get an error when trying it, I guess it's
> because I'm using an mdb file and linked tables to the sql server... any
> other ideas? Could create a quick function I guess...
> Cheers,
> Chris

Your question isn't really clear - a bit column can only hold 0,1 or
NULL. Perhaps the -1 is coming from Access, not from MSSQL? If it is
an MSSQL query, then please consider posting the CREATE TABLE
statement for your table, as well as the exact query that you're
using, and the output you expect (sample data would also be useful).

Simon|||How a bit could be (-1) ?

"Not Me" <Not.Me@.faker.fake.fa.ke> wrote in message
news:buoari$thc$1@.ucsnew1.ncl.ac.uk...
> Hi,
> I'm trying to grab records with a priority over those marked as yes (-1)
in
> a certain field.
> Trying "select id, min(bit) from tab group by id" does not work, as the
min
> operator doesn't work on bits.
> Is there an alternative to my query?
> Many thanks,
> Chris|||"Not Me" <Not.Me@.faker.fake.fa.ke> wrote in message
news:buocfi$ub9$1@.ucsnew1.ncl.ac.uk...
> "mountain man" <hobbit@.southern_seaweed.com.op> wrote in message
> news:opOPb.23515$Wa.14455@.news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > "Not Me" <Not.Me@.faker.fake.fa.ke> wrote in message
> > news:buoari$thc$1@.ucsnew1.ncl.ac.uk...
> > > Trying "select id, min(bit) from tab group by id" does not work, as
the
> > min
> > > operator doesn't work on bits.
> > > > Is there an alternative to my query?
> > min(cast(deleted as int))
> Thanks for that, I do though get an error when trying it, I guess it's
> because I'm using an mdb file and linked tables to the sql server... any
> other ideas? Could create a quick function I guess...

How about .... min(cast(bit as varchar(1))) ?

Pete Brown
Falls Creek
Oz|||When you move a database from MS Access to SQL-Server, then do not
translate MS-Access Boolean columns into SQL-Server Bit columns, but use
Tinyint or Char(1) columns instead (and add appropriate CHECK
constraints to limit the column to (0,1) or ('Y','N')).

HTH,
Gert-Jan

Not Me wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm trying to grab records with a priority over those marked as yes (-1) in
> a certain field.
> Trying "select id, min(bit) from tab group by id" does not work, as the min
> operator doesn't work on bits.
> Is there an alternative to my query?
> Many thanks,
> Chris|||"Igor Raytsin" <n&i@.cyberus.ca> wrote in message
news:400fee3f_1@.news.cybersurf.net...
> "Not Me" <Not.Me@.faker.fake.fa.ke> wrote in message
> news:buoari$thc$1@.ucsnew1.ncl.ac.uk...
> > I'm trying to grab records with a priority over those marked as yes (-1)
> in
> > a certain field.
> > Trying "select id, min(bit) from tab group by id" does not work, as the
> min
> > operator doesn't work on bits.
> > Is there an alternative to my query?
> How a bit could be (-1) ?

Ask Bill :o)

Chris|||"Simon Hayes" <sql@.hayes.ch> wrote in message
news:60cd0137.0401220728.58b967ae@.posting.google.c om...
> "Not Me" <Not.Me@.faker.fake.fa.ke> wrote in message
news:<buocfi$ub9$1@.ucsnew1.ncl.ac.uk>...
> > "mountain man" <hobbit@.southern_seaweed.com.op> wrote in message
> > news:opOPb.23515$Wa.14455@.news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > > "Not Me" <Not.Me@.faker.fake.fa.ke> wrote in message
> > > news:buoari$thc$1@.ucsnew1.ncl.ac.uk...
> > > > Trying "select id, min(bit) from tab group by id" does not work, as
the
> > min
> > > > operator doesn't work on bits.
> > > > > > Is there an alternative to my query?
> > > min(cast(deleted as int))
> > Thanks for that, I do though get an error when trying it, I guess it's
> > because I'm using an mdb file and linked tables to the sql server... any
> > other ideas? Could create a quick function I guess...
>
> Your question isn't really clear - a bit column can only hold 0,1 or
> NULL. Perhaps the -1 is coming from Access, not from MSSQL? If it is
> an MSSQL query, then please consider posting the CREATE TABLE
> statement for your table, as well as the exact query that you're
> using, and the output you expect (sample data would also be useful).

Thanks for your help, yes the -1 just seems to be how access likes to
display the info.

The full problem, is that I have a table of, for example careers that people
have. In the table certain people (reference numbers) may have a current
job, and a number of non-current jobs. They may have no current job at all
but some past ones.

So, a table could show

id current job
#1 yes databases
#1 no graphics
#2 no statistics
#2 no games

and I would want to return one record for each id#, with a preference of a
current job (if no current job, any non-current job will do)

So far I've only managed to do a "select all current jobs union select all
non-current jobs that don't appear in the current jobs list" The problem
here is that it becomes very very slow when performing the "jobs that don't
appear in the current jobs list" (done by where x not in (select x from y)).

So my effort was to somehow group up the reference numbers, and display the
min(current) job, which would pick the current job as a preference. But the
problem here is I can't add min(job) to the list can I? because that will
not necessary return the correct job associated with the value of
min(current)..

Hope you understand the problem!!
Any help is greatly appreciated.

Cheers,
Chris|||Not Me (Not.Me@.faker.fake.fa.ke) writes:
> So, a table could show
> id current job
> #1 yes databases
> #1 no graphics
> #2 no statistics
> #2 no games
> and I would want to return one record for each id#, with a preference of a
> current job (if no current job, any non-current job will do)
> So far I've only managed to do a "select all current jobs union select
> all non-current jobs that don't appear in the current jobs list" The
> problem here is that it becomes very very slow when performing the "jobs
> that don't appear in the current jobs list" (done by where x not in
> (select x from y)).

Here is one way that you may want to try:

DECLARE @.temp TABLE (ident int IDENTITY,
id int NOT NULL,
current bit NOT NULL,
job varchar(29) NOT NULL)

INSERT @.temp(id, current, job)
SELECT id, current, job
FROM source_table
ORDER BY id, current DESC

SELECT t.id, c.current, t.job
FROM @.temp t
JOIN (SELECT id, minident = MIN(ident)
FROM @.temp
GROUP BY id) m ON t.ident = m.minident
ORDER BY t.id

By inserting the data into a table variable with an identity column,
the rows are numbered, and the first identity value for each id is the
row you want.

I should add that this trick is not foolproof. You are not really
guaranteed that the identity values actually reflects the ORDER BY
clause, but it works most of the time. Particularly, if there is
no parallelism. Here I am relying on that INSERT into a table variable
never uses parallelism.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, sommar@.algonet.se

Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp

Migration 2005 beta to 2005 release

Hi Group,
Three quick questions about the 2005 beta.
1) Is it likely that restoring a 2005 beta database backup to a 2005
release environment (when it is released) will produce errors?
2) Will the .Net framework 1.1 be able to call SQL server 2005 beta
stored procedures?
3) Can I use Visual Studio .Net 1.1 to administer a SQL Server 2005
beta environment?
Cheers,
Stewart"Stewart" <windsurfing_stew@.yahoo.com.au> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3e8a4d01.0504282031.4c10b786@.posting.google.com...
> Hi Group,
> Three quick questions about the 2005 beta.
> 1) Is it likely that restoring a 2005 beta database backup to a 2005
> release environment (when it is released) will produce errors?
There will be an whitepaper for the tap customers,perhpas that will be for
public download for release.

> 2) Will the .Net framework 1.1 be able to call SQL server 2005 beta
> stored procedures?
Sure.

> 3) Can I use Visual Studio .Net 1.1 to administer a SQL Server 2005
> beta environment?
Not sure, but I think thats possible, you only need to have to SQL Native
Client installed. I will try it on my box later.

> Cheers,
> Stewart
HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.
http://www.sqlserver2005.de
--|||Hi
Just be aware, ADO.NET 1.1 does not support the new datatypes that exist in
SQL Server 2005.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Stewart" wrote:

> Hi Group,
> Three quick questions about the 2005 beta.
> 1) Is it likely that restoring a 2005 beta database backup to a 2005
> release environment (when it is released) will produce errors?
> 2) Will the .Net framework 1.1 be able to call SQL server 2005 beta
> stored procedures?
> 3) Can I use Visual Studio .Net 1.1 to administer a SQL Server 2005
> beta environment?
> Cheers,
> Stewart
>

Migration 2005 beta to 2005 release

Hi Group,
Three quick questions about the 2005 beta.
1) Is it likely that restoring a 2005 beta database backup to a 2005
release environment (when it is released) will produce errors?
2) Will the .Net framework 1.1 be able to call SQL server 2005 beta
stored procedures?
3) Can I use Visual Studio .Net 1.1 to administer a SQL Server 2005
beta environment?
Cheers,
Stewart
"Stewart" <windsurfing_stew@.yahoo.com.au> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3e8a4d01.0504282031.4c10b786@.posting.google.c om...
> Hi Group,
> Three quick questions about the 2005 beta.
> 1) Is it likely that restoring a 2005 beta database backup to a 2005
> release environment (when it is released) will produce errors?
There will be an whitepaper for the tap customers,perhpas that will be for
public download for release.

> 2) Will the .Net framework 1.1 be able to call SQL server 2005 beta
> stored procedures?
Sure.

> 3) Can I use Visual Studio .Net 1.1 to administer a SQL Server 2005
> beta environment?
Not sure, but I think thats possible, you only need to have to SQL Native
Client installed. I will try it on my box later.

> Cheers,
> Stewart
HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.
http://www.sqlserver2005.de
|||Hi
Just be aware, ADO.NET 1.1 does not support the new datatypes that exist in
SQL Server 2005.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Stewart" wrote:

> Hi Group,
> Three quick questions about the 2005 beta.
> 1) Is it likely that restoring a 2005 beta database backup to a 2005
> release environment (when it is released) will produce errors?
> 2) Will the .Net framework 1.1 be able to call SQL server 2005 beta
> stored procedures?
> 3) Can I use Visual Studio .Net 1.1 to administer a SQL Server 2005
> beta environment?
> Cheers,
> Stewart
>

Migration 2005 beta to 2005 release

Hi Group,
Three quick questions about the 2005 beta.
1) Is it likely that restoring a 2005 beta database backup to a 2005
release environment (when it is released) will produce errors?
2) Will the .Net framework 1.1 be able to call SQL server 2005 beta
stored procedures?
3) Can I use Visual Studio .Net 1.1 to administer a SQL Server 2005
beta environment?
Cheers,
Stewart"Stewart" <windsurfing_stew@.yahoo.com.au> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3e8a4d01.0504282031.4c10b786@.posting.google.com...
> Hi Group,
> Three quick questions about the 2005 beta.
> 1) Is it likely that restoring a 2005 beta database backup to a 2005
> release environment (when it is released) will produce errors?
There will be an whitepaper for the tap customers,perhpas that will be for
public download for release.
> 2) Will the .Net framework 1.1 be able to call SQL server 2005 beta
> stored procedures?
Sure.
> 3) Can I use Visual Studio .Net 1.1 to administer a SQL Server 2005
> beta environment?
Not sure, but I think thats possible, you only need to have to SQL Native
Client installed. I will try it on my box later.
> Cheers,
> Stewart
HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.
--
http://www.sqlserver2005.de
--|||Hi
Just be aware, ADO.NET 1.1 does not support the new datatypes that exist in
SQL Server 2005.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Stewart" wrote:
> Hi Group,
> Three quick questions about the 2005 beta.
> 1) Is it likely that restoring a 2005 beta database backup to a 2005
> release environment (when it is released) will produce errors?
> 2) Will the .Net framework 1.1 be able to call SQL server 2005 beta
> stored procedures?
> 3) Can I use Visual Studio .Net 1.1 to administer a SQL Server 2005
> beta environment?
> Cheers,
> Stewart
>