Migrating to SQL 2005: company

Showing posts with label company. Show all posts

Monday, March 26, 2012

mirror

I would like to set up a new SQL server on a completely different box in a
different location in the company (perhaps even offsite). I want this new
server to be a mirror of the original SQL server, such that when data in the
original server is updated the data in the new one is also updated etc...
I would like to do this for security reasons, such that if the original
server goes up in flames, I can recover all the data and quickly switch to
the new server.
I have only ever had to deal with one SQL server at once before, so what I
want to know is:
Is this the best way to ensure against catastrophic failure of the server.
What do I need to read up on to achieve this.
Thanks.Hi
There are different options available depending on which version of SQL
Server you are running and what your system configuration is. With SQL 7 -
2005 you can use log shipping or replication. SQL 2005 has database
mirroring. There are also options that require specific hardware such as
failover clustering and SAN replication.
You may want to check out
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/technologies/highavailability/default.mspx for
an introduction.
John
"JosephByrns" wrote:
> I would like to set up a new SQL server on a completely different box in a
> different location in the company (perhaps even offsite). I want this new
> server to be a mirror of the original SQL server, such that when data in the
> original server is updated the data in the new one is also updated etc...
> I would like to do this for security reasons, such that if the original
> server goes up in flames, I can recover all the data and quickly switch to
> the new server.
> I have only ever had to deal with one SQL server at once before, so what I
> want to know is:
> Is this the best way to ensure against catastrophic failure of the server.
> What do I need to read up on to achieve this.
> Thanks.
>
>|||Bear in mind that there is a Microsoft article on Mirroring that stipulates
that they do not recommend database mirroring in a production environment,
and should only be used in development and test environments.
Please see this article.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/dbmirror.mspx
AndyP,
Sr. Database Administrator,
MCDBA 2003
"John Bell" wrote:
> Hi
> There are different options available depending on which version of SQL
> Server you are running and what your system configuration is. With SQL 7 -
> 2005 you can use log shipping or replication. SQL 2005 has database
> mirroring. There are also options that require specific hardware such as
> failover clustering and SAN replication.
> You may want to check out
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/technologies/highavailability/default.mspx for
> an introduction.
> John
> "JosephByrns" wrote:
> > I would like to set up a new SQL server on a completely different box in a
> > different location in the company (perhaps even offsite). I want this new
> > server to be a mirror of the original SQL server, such that when data in the
> > original server is updated the data in the new one is also updated etc...
> > I would like to do this for security reasons, such that if the original
> > server goes up in flames, I can recover all the data and quickly switch to
> > the new server.
> >
> > I have only ever had to deal with one SQL server at once before, so what I
> > want to know is:
> >
> > Is this the best way to ensure against catastrophic failure of the server.
> > What do I need to read up on to achieve this.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
> >|||Thank you both for the info, this is on SQL Server 2000, so I guess
mirriring doesn't apply here.
"AndyP" <AndyP@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:16EFB1CD-473F-4FE6-92FF-9B8D7979D1F9@.microsoft.com...
> Bear in mind that there is a Microsoft article on Mirroring that
> stipulates
> that they do not recommend database mirroring in a production environment,
> and should only be used in development and test environments.
> Please see this article.
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/dbmirror.mspx
>
> --
> AndyP,
> Sr. Database Administrator,
> MCDBA 2003
>
> "John Bell" wrote:
>> Hi
>> There are different options available depending on which version of SQL
>> Server you are running and what your system configuration is. With SQL
>> 7 -
>> 2005 you can use log shipping or replication. SQL 2005 has database
>> mirroring. There are also options that require specific hardware such as
>> failover clustering and SAN replication.
>> You may want to check out
>> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/technologies/highavailability/default.mspx
>> for
>> an introduction.
>> John
>> "JosephByrns" wrote:
>> > I would like to set up a new SQL server on a completely different box
>> > in a
>> > different location in the company (perhaps even offsite). I want this
>> > new
>> > server to be a mirror of the original SQL server, such that when data
>> > in the
>> > original server is updated the data in the new one is also updated
>> > etc...
>> > I would like to do this for security reasons, such that if the original
>> > server goes up in flames, I can recover all the data and quickly switch
>> > to
>> > the new server.
>> >
>> > I have only ever had to deal with one SQL server at once before, so
>> > what I
>> > want to know is:
>> >
>> > Is this the best way to ensure against catastrophic failure of the
>> > server.
>> > What do I need to read up on to achieve this.
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>> >
>> >
>> >|||OK, it looks like log shipping will do what I want, unfortunately it appears
that Log Shipping is only available to SQL 2000 Enterprise (I have
Professional), can you confirm this is true? Will I require enterprise for
the replication approach?
Thanks.
"AndyP" <AndyP@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:16EFB1CD-473F-4FE6-92FF-9B8D7979D1F9@.microsoft.com...
> Bear in mind that there is a Microsoft article on Mirroring that
> stipulates
> that they do not recommend database mirroring in a production environment,
> and should only be used in development and test environments.
> Please see this article.
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/dbmirror.mspx
>
> --
> AndyP,
> Sr. Database Administrator,
> MCDBA 2003
>
> "John Bell" wrote:
>> Hi
>> There are different options available depending on which version of SQL
>> Server you are running and what your system configuration is. With SQL
>> 7 -
>> 2005 you can use log shipping or replication. SQL 2005 has database
>> mirroring. There are also options that require specific hardware such as
>> failover clustering and SAN replication.
>> You may want to check out
>> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/technologies/highavailability/default.mspx
>> for
>> an introduction.
>> John
>> "JosephByrns" wrote:
>> > I would like to set up a new SQL server on a completely different box
>> > in a
>> > different location in the company (perhaps even offsite). I want this
>> > new
>> > server to be a mirror of the original SQL server, such that when data
>> > in the
>> > original server is updated the data in the new one is also updated
>> > etc...
>> > I would like to do this for security reasons, such that if the original
>> > server goes up in flames, I can recover all the data and quickly switch
>> > to
>> > the new server.
>> >
>> > I have only ever had to deal with one SQL server at once before, so
>> > what I
>> > want to know is:
>> >
>> > Is this the best way to ensure against catastrophic failure of the
>> > server.
>> > What do I need to read up on to achieve this.
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>> >
>> >
>> >|||I mean I have standard edition.
"AndyP" <AndyP@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:16EFB1CD-473F-4FE6-92FF-9B8D7979D1F9@.microsoft.com...
> Bear in mind that there is a Microsoft article on Mirroring that
> stipulates
> that they do not recommend database mirroring in a production environment,
> and should only be used in development and test environments.
> Please see this article.
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/dbmirror.mspx
>
> --
> AndyP,
> Sr. Database Administrator,
> MCDBA 2003
>
> "John Bell" wrote:
>> Hi
>> There are different options available depending on which version of SQL
>> Server you are running and what your system configuration is. With SQL
>> 7 -
>> 2005 you can use log shipping or replication. SQL 2005 has database
>> mirroring. There are also options that require specific hardware such as
>> failover clustering and SAN replication.
>> You may want to check out
>> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/technologies/highavailability/default.mspx
>> for
>> an introduction.
>> John
>> "JosephByrns" wrote:
>> > I would like to set up a new SQL server on a completely different box
>> > in a
>> > different location in the company (perhaps even offsite). I want this
>> > new
>> > server to be a mirror of the original SQL server, such that when data
>> > in the
>> > original server is updated the data in the new one is also updated
>> > etc...
>> > I would like to do this for security reasons, such that if the original
>> > server goes up in flames, I can recover all the data and quickly switch
>> > to
>> > the new server.
>> >
>> > I have only ever had to deal with one SQL server at once before, so
>> > what I
>> > want to know is:
>> >
>> > Is this the best way to ensure against catastrophic failure of the
>> > server.
>> > What do I need to read up on to achieve this.
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>> >
>> >
>> >|||Log shipping is only backup and restore. Can be done with any edition. But if you don't have EE, you
have to write your own jobs (or Google if someone has shared).
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"JosephByrns" <josephbyrns@.yahoo.com> wrote in message news:uCkLgGdTGHA.4952@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> OK, it looks like log shipping will do what I want, unfortunately it appears that Log Shipping is
> only available to SQL 2000 Enterprise (I have Professional), can you confirm this is true? Will I
> require enterprise for the replication approach?
> Thanks.
> "AndyP" <AndyP@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:16EFB1CD-473F-4FE6-92FF-9B8D7979D1F9@.microsoft.com...
>> Bear in mind that there is a Microsoft article on Mirroring that stipulates
>> that they do not recommend database mirroring in a production environment,
>> and should only be used in development and test environments.
>> Please see this article.
>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/dbmirror.mspx
>>
>> --
>> AndyP,
>> Sr. Database Administrator,
>> MCDBA 2003
>>
>> "John Bell" wrote:
>> Hi
>> There are different options available depending on which version of SQL
>> Server you are running and what your system configuration is. With SQL 7 -
>> 2005 you can use log shipping or replication. SQL 2005 has database
>> mirroring. There are also options that require specific hardware such as
>> failover clustering and SAN replication.
>> You may want to check out
>> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/technologies/highavailability/default.mspx for
>> an introduction.
>> John
>> "JosephByrns" wrote:
>> > I would like to set up a new SQL server on a completely different box in a
>> > different location in the company (perhaps even offsite). I want this new
>> > server to be a mirror of the original SQL server, such that when data in the
>> > original server is updated the data in the new one is also updated etc...
>> > I would like to do this for security reasons, such that if the original
>> > server goes up in flames, I can recover all the data and quickly switch to
>> > the new server.
>> >
>> > I have only ever had to deal with one SQL server at once before, so what I
>> > want to know is:
>> >
>> > Is this the best way to ensure against catastrophic failure of the server.
>> > What do I need to read up on to achieve this.
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>|||Great, thanks, I'll look into it.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:%23nDpl8lTGHA.4308@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Log shipping is only backup and restore. Can be done with any edition. But
> if you don't have EE, you have to write your own jobs (or Google if
> someone has shared).
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "JosephByrns" <josephbyrns@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:uCkLgGdTGHA.4952@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> OK, it looks like log shipping will do what I want, unfortunately it
>> appears that Log Shipping is only available to SQL 2000 Enterprise (I
>> have Professional), can you confirm this is true? Will I require
>> enterprise for the replication approach?
>> Thanks.
>> "AndyP" <AndyP@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:16EFB1CD-473F-4FE6-92FF-9B8D7979D1F9@.microsoft.com...
>> Bear in mind that there is a Microsoft article on Mirroring that
>> stipulates
>> that they do not recommend database mirroring in a production
>> environment,
>> and should only be used in development and test environments.
>> Please see this article.
>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/dbmirror.mspx
>>
>> --
>> AndyP,
>> Sr. Database Administrator,
>> MCDBA 2003
>>
>> "John Bell" wrote:
>> Hi
>> There are different options available depending on which version of SQL
>> Server you are running and what your system configuration is. With SQL
>> 7 -
>> 2005 you can use log shipping or replication. SQL 2005 has database
>> mirroring. There are also options that require specific hardware such
>> as
>> failover clustering and SAN replication.
>> You may want to check out
>> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/technologies/highavailability/default.mspx
>> for
>> an introduction.
>> John
>> "JosephByrns" wrote:
>> > I would like to set up a new SQL server on a completely different box
>> > in a
>> > different location in the company (perhaps even offsite). I want
>> > this new
>> > server to be a mirror of the original SQL server, such that when data
>> > in the
>> > original server is updated the data in the new one is also updated
>> > etc...
>> > I would like to do this for security reasons, such that if the
>> > original
>> > server goes up in flames, I can recover all the data and quickly
>> > switch to
>> > the new server.
>> >
>> > I have only ever had to deal with one SQL server at once before, so
>> > what I
>> > want to know is:
>> >
>> > Is this the best way to ensure against catastrophic failure of the
>> > server.
>> > What do I need to read up on to achieve this.
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>|||This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--=_NextPart_000_0021_01C67CF9.86E39300
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This is an outdated article.
Since Microsoft didn't strictly test data mirror on SQL 2005 RTM, so, =Microsoft doesn't recommend you carry out mirroring in a product =environment.
But now, as you know, SQL 2005 SP1 has been release on 18th, April. We =can complete implement
it in your product server.
"AndyP" <AndyP@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message =news:16EFB1CD-473F-4FE6-92FF-9B8D7979D1F9@.microsoft.com...
Bear in mind that there is a Microsoft article on Mirroring that =stipulates that they do not recommend database mirroring in a production =environment, and should only be used in development and test environments.
Please see this article.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/dbmirror.mspx
-- AndyP,
Sr. Database Administrator,
MCDBA 2003
"John Bell" wrote:
> Hi
> > There are different options available depending on which version of =SQL > Server you are running and what your system configuration is. With =SQL 7 - > 2005 you can use log shipping or replication. SQL 2005 has database > mirroring. There are also options that require specific hardware =such as > failover clustering and SAN replication.
> > You may want to check out > =http://www.microsoft.com/sql/technologies/highavailability/default.mspx =for > an introduction.
> > John
> > "JosephByrns" wrote:
> > > I would like to set up a new SQL server on a completely different =box in a > > different location in the company (perhaps even offsite). I want =this new > > server to be a mirror of the original SQL server, such that when =data in the > > original server is updated the data in the new one is also updated =etc... > > I would like to do this for security reasons, such that if the =original > > server goes up in flames, I can recover all the data and quickly =switch to > > the new server.
> > > > I have only ever had to deal with one SQL server at once before, =so what I > > want to know is:
> > > > Is this the best way to ensure against catastrophic failure of the =server.
> > What do I need to read up on to achieve this.
> > > > Thanks. > > > > > >
--=_NextPart_000_0021_01C67CF9.86E39300
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=EF=BB=BF<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
&

This is an outdated article.
Since Microsoft =didn't strictly test data mirror on SQL 2005 RTM, so, Microsoft doesn't recommend you =carry out mirroring in a product environment.
But now, as you know, =SQL 2005 SP1 has been release on 18th, April. We can complete implement
it in your product server.
"AndyP" wrote in message news:16E=FB1CD-473F-4FE6-92FF-9B8D7979D1F9@.microsoft.com...Bear in mind that there is a Microsoft article on Mirroring that stipulates = that they do not recommend database mirroring in a production =environment, and should only be used in development and test environments.Please see this article.-- AndyP,Sr. Database Administrator,MCDBA =2003"John Bell" wrote:> Hi> > There are different options =available depending on which version of SQL > Server you are running and =what your system configuration is. With SQL 7 - > 2005 you can use =log shipping or replication. SQL 2005 has database > =mirroring. There are also options that require specific hardware such as > =failover clustering and SAN replication.> > You may want to check =out >http://www.microsoft.com/sql/technologies/highavailability/defaul=t.mspx for > an introduction.> > John> > "JosephByrns" wrote:> > > I would like to set up a =new SQL server on a completely different box in a > > different =location in the company (perhaps even offsite). I want this new > => server to be a mirror of the original SQL server, such that when data in the => > original server is updated the data in the new one is also =updated etc... > > I would like to do this for security reasons, =such that if the original > > server goes up in flames, I can recover =all the data and quickly switch to > > the new server.> > => > I have only ever had to deal with one SQL server at once before, =so what I > > want to know is:> > > > Is this =the best way to ensure against catastrophic failure of the server.> > =What do I need to read up on to achieve this.> > > > =Thanks. > > > > > >

--=_NextPart_000_0021_01C67CF9.86E39300--|||Hi
That was prior to SP1.
John
"AndyP" wrote:
> Bear in mind that there is a Microsoft article on Mirroring that stipulates
> that they do not recommend database mirroring in a production environment,
> and should only be used in development and test environments.
> Please see this article.
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/dbmirror.mspx
>
> --
> AndyP,
> Sr. Database Administrator,
> MCDBA 2003
>
> "John Bell" wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > There are different options available depending on which version of SQL
> > Server you are running and what your system configuration is. With SQL 7 -
> > 2005 you can use log shipping or replication. SQL 2005 has database
> > mirroring. There are also options that require specific hardware such as
> > failover clustering and SAN replication.
> >
> > You may want to check out
> > http://www.microsoft.com/sql/technologies/highavailability/default.mspx for
> > an introduction.
> >
> > John
> >
> > "JosephByrns" wrote:
> >
> > > I would like to set up a new SQL server on a completely different box in a
> > > different location in the company (perhaps even offsite). I want this new
> > > server to be a mirror of the original SQL server, such that when data in the
> > > original server is updated the data in the new one is also updated etc...
> > > I would like to do this for security reasons, such that if the original
> > > server goes up in flames, I can recover all the data and quickly switch to
> > > the new server.
> > >
> > > I have only ever had to deal with one SQL server at once before, so what I
> > > want to know is:
> > >
> > > Is this the best way to ensure against catastrophic failure of the server.
> > > What do I need to read up on to achieve this.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > >
> > >|||Hi
I believe there is a method of log shipping in the resource kit and there
has also been several articles on rolling your own log shipping in SQL Server
Magazine e.g.
http://www.sqlmag.com/Article/ArticleID/15805/Log_Shipping_with_SQL_Server_2000.html
John
"JosephByrns" wrote:
> Great, thanks, I'll look into it.
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
> message news:%23nDpl8lTGHA.4308@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > Log shipping is only backup and restore. Can be done with any edition. But
> > if you don't have EE, you have to write your own jobs (or Google if
> > someone has shared).
> >
> > --
> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >
> >
> > "JosephByrns" <josephbyrns@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:uCkLgGdTGHA.4952@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> >> OK, it looks like log shipping will do what I want, unfortunately it
> >> appears that Log Shipping is only available to SQL 2000 Enterprise (I
> >> have Professional), can you confirm this is true? Will I require
> >> enterprise for the replication approach?
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >> "AndyP" <AndyP@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:16EFB1CD-473F-4FE6-92FF-9B8D7979D1F9@.microsoft.com...
> >> Bear in mind that there is a Microsoft article on Mirroring that
> >> stipulates
> >> that they do not recommend database mirroring in a production
> >> environment,
> >> and should only be used in development and test environments.
> >>
> >> Please see this article.
> >>
> >> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/dbmirror.mspx
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> AndyP,
> >> Sr. Database Administrator,
> >> MCDBA 2003
> >>
> >>
> >> "John Bell" wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> There are different options available depending on which version of SQL
> >> Server you are running and what your system configuration is. With SQL
> >> 7 -
> >> 2005 you can use log shipping or replication. SQL 2005 has database
> >> mirroring. There are also options that require specific hardware such
> >> as
> >> failover clustering and SAN replication.
> >>
> >> You may want to check out
> >> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/technologies/highavailability/default.mspx
> >> for
> >> an introduction.
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >> "JosephByrns" wrote:
> >>
> >> > I would like to set up a new SQL server on a completely different box
> >> > in a
> >> > different location in the company (perhaps even offsite). I want
> >> > this new
> >> > server to be a mirror of the original SQL server, such that when data
> >> > in the
> >> > original server is updated the data in the new one is also updated
> >> > etc...
> >> > I would like to do this for security reasons, such that if the
> >> > original
> >> > server goes up in flames, I can recover all the data and quickly
> >> > switch to
> >> > the new server.
> >> >
> >> > I have only ever had to deal with one SQL server at once before, so
> >> > what I
> >> > want to know is:
> >> >
> >> > Is this the best way to ensure against catastrophic failure of the
> >> > server.
> >> > What do I need to read up on to achieve this.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Minimum level of rights for a SQL Server DBA.

Previously, DBAs in our company used to have local machine administrator
access on the SQL Server boxes. As part of tightening server security, those
rights have been taken away from DBAs (in some cases they have been added to
'Power Users' group).
In order to install SQL Server, the account need to be a local machine
administrator (that's given otherwise installation gives error).
But, what type of minimal rights should be given to DBAs on the server
resources to let that person function properly?
When I am talking about resources, I mean rights to write to specific
directories like
* SQL Server programs/tools
* Common DLLs (in C:\Program files\common files...)
* Local backup directories
* Directory for snapshot/transactional replication transfer data.
And right to execute programs/utilities on the server like
* Perfmon (for system tuning/performance monitoring)
* Services (starting/stopping MSSQLSERVER/SQL Agent esp. if there are
dependencies).
Is there anything that is not needed here or, alternatively, is there
anything that I missed?
Another dimension of this issue is the OS login access that is needed to run
the SQL Server services (needed for remote backups and replication).
Any help will be greatly appreciated!
Regards,
MZeeshan
At my last company, I didnt have admin rights... just SA. 90% of the time
it was fine. The other 10% it sucked. Common things I needed someone to hold
my hand on were:
1. Service restarts.
2. Hotfix/ service packs.
3. Set up stuff like Log Shipping where directory access is needed.
4. Wanting to just see how much disk space I had left on my backup drive.
5. Replication Snapshot.
I know you already mentioned alot of these. The problem is that when the DBA
needs these things, alot of time he needs them NOW. Not once he can have
someone come to his desk and log in as Admin. But like I said, 90% of the
time it was fine and I actually would prefer it. SA is usually good enough.
Any less than SA and a DBA cant get his work done.
"MZeeshan" <mzeeshan@.community.nospam> wrote in message
news:CD58C09D-1874-46A3-AA05-344727CA35F3@.microsoft.com...
> Previously, DBAs in our company used to have local machine administrator
> access on the SQL Server boxes. As part of tightening server security,
> those
> rights have been taken away from DBAs (in some cases they have been added
> to
> 'Power Users' group).
> In order to install SQL Server, the account need to be a local machine
> administrator (that's given otherwise installation gives error).
> But, what type of minimal rights should be given to DBAs on the server
> resources to let that person function properly?
> When I am talking about resources, I mean rights to write to specific
> directories like
> * SQL Server programs/tools
> * Common DLLs (in C:\Program files\common files...)
> * Local backup directories
> * Directory for snapshot/transactional replication transfer data.
> And right to execute programs/utilities on the server like
> * Perfmon (for system tuning/performance monitoring)
> * Services (starting/stopping MSSQLSERVER/SQL Agent esp. if there are
> dependencies).
> Is there anything that is not needed here or, alternatively, is there
> anything that I missed?
> Another dimension of this issue is the OS login access that is needed to
> run
> the SQL Server services (needed for remote backups and replication).
> Any help will be greatly appreciated!
> --
> Regards,
> MZeeshan
>
|||Thanks!
Anyone? any other ideas?
Regards,
MZeeshan
"ChrisR" wrote:

> At my last company, I didnt have admin rights... just SA. 90% of the time
> it was fine. The other 10% it sucked. Common things I needed someone to hold
> my hand on were:
> 1. Service restarts.
> 2. Hotfix/ service packs.
> 3. Set up stuff like Log Shipping where directory access is needed.
> 4. Wanting to just see how much disk space I had left on my backup drive.
> 5. Replication Snapshot.
> I know you already mentioned alot of these. The problem is that when the DBA
> needs these things, alot of time he needs them NOW. Not once he can have
> someone come to his desk and log in as Admin. But like I said, 90% of the
> time it was fine and I actually would prefer it. SA is usually good enough.
> Any less than SA and a DBA cant get his work done.
>
> "MZeeshan" <mzeeshan@.community.nospam> wrote in message
> news:CD58C09D-1874-46A3-AA05-344727CA35F3@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Hi MZeeshan,
If you need OS login access that is needed to run the SQL Server services
(needed for remote backups and replication). I think give DBA local
administrator privilege is necessary.
BTW, you are recommanded using the tools below to ensure the security of
your product server.
Best Practices Analyzer Tool for Microsoft SQL Server 2000 1.0
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...=en&familyid=B
352EB1F-D3CA-44EE-893E-9E07339C1F22&displaylang=en
Since this is a consultation type issue, you can contact Advisory Services
(AS) . Microsoft Advisory Services provides short-term advice and guidance
for problems not covered by Problem Resolution Service as well as requests
for consultative assistance for design, development and deployment issues.
You may call this number to get Advisory Services: (800) 936-5200.
Sincerely yours,
Michael Cheng
Microsoft Online Partner Support
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
================================================== ===
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Minimum level of rights for a SQL Server DBA.

Previously, DBAs in our company used to have local machine administrator
access on the SQL Server boxes. As part of tightening server security, those
rights have been taken away from DBAs (in some cases they have been added to
'Power Users' group).
In order to install SQL Server, the account need to be a local machine
administrator (that's given otherwise installation gives error).
But, what type of minimal rights should be given to DBAs on the server
resources to let that person function properly?
When I am talking about resources, I mean rights to write to specific
directories like
* SQL Server programs/tools
* Common DLLs (in C:\Program files\common files...)
* Local backup directories
* Directory for snapshot/transactional replication transfer data.
And right to execute programs/utilities on the server like
* Perfmon (for system tuning/performance monitoring)
* Services (starting/stopping MSSQLSERVER/SQL Agent esp. if there are
dependencies).
Is there anything that is not needed here or, alternatively, is there
anything that I missed?
Another dimension of this issue is the OS login access that is needed to run
the SQL Server services (needed for remote backups and replication).
Any help will be greatly appreciated!
--
Regards,
MZeeshanAt my last company, I didnt have admin rights... just SA. 90% of the time
it was fine. The other 10% it sucked. Common things I needed someone to hold
my hand on were:
1. Service restarts.
2. Hotfix/ service packs.
3. Set up stuff like Log Shipping where directory access is needed.
4. Wanting to just see how much disk space I had left on my backup drive.
5. Replication Snapshot.
I know you already mentioned alot of these. The problem is that when the DBA
needs these things, alot of time he needs them NOW. Not once he can have
someone come to his desk and log in as Admin. But like I said, 90% of the
time it was fine and I actually would prefer it. SA is usually good enough.
Any less than SA and a DBA cant get his work done.
"MZeeshan" <mzeeshan@.community.nospam> wrote in message
news:CD58C09D-1874-46A3-AA05-344727CA35F3@.microsoft.com...
> Previously, DBAs in our company used to have local machine administrator
> access on the SQL Server boxes. As part of tightening server security,
> those
> rights have been taken away from DBAs (in some cases they have been added
> to
> 'Power Users' group).
> In order to install SQL Server, the account need to be a local machine
> administrator (that's given otherwise installation gives error).
> But, what type of minimal rights should be given to DBAs on the server
> resources to let that person function properly?
> When I am talking about resources, I mean rights to write to specific
> directories like
> * SQL Server programs/tools
> * Common DLLs (in C:\Program files\common files...)
> * Local backup directories
> * Directory for snapshot/transactional replication transfer data.
> And right to execute programs/utilities on the server like
> * Perfmon (for system tuning/performance monitoring)
> * Services (starting/stopping MSSQLSERVER/SQL Agent esp. if there are
> dependencies).
> Is there anything that is not needed here or, alternatively, is there
> anything that I missed?
> Another dimension of this issue is the OS login access that is needed to
> run
> the SQL Server services (needed for remote backups and replication).
> Any help will be greatly appreciated!
> --
> Regards,
> MZeeshan
>|||Thanks!
Anyone? any other ideas?
--
Regards,
MZeeshan
"ChrisR" wrote:
> At my last company, I didnt have admin rights... just SA. 90% of the time
> it was fine. The other 10% it sucked. Common things I needed someone to hold
> my hand on were:
> 1. Service restarts.
> 2. Hotfix/ service packs.
> 3. Set up stuff like Log Shipping where directory access is needed.
> 4. Wanting to just see how much disk space I had left on my backup drive.
> 5. Replication Snapshot.
> I know you already mentioned alot of these. The problem is that when the DBA
> needs these things, alot of time he needs them NOW. Not once he can have
> someone come to his desk and log in as Admin. But like I said, 90% of the
> time it was fine and I actually would prefer it. SA is usually good enough.
> Any less than SA and a DBA cant get his work done.
>
> "MZeeshan" <mzeeshan@.community.nospam> wrote in message
> news:CD58C09D-1874-46A3-AA05-344727CA35F3@.microsoft.com...
> > Previously, DBAs in our company used to have local machine administrator
> > access on the SQL Server boxes. As part of tightening server security,
> > those
> > rights have been taken away from DBAs (in some cases they have been added
> > to
> > 'Power Users' group).
> >
> > In order to install SQL Server, the account need to be a local machine
> > administrator (that's given otherwise installation gives error).
> >
> > But, what type of minimal rights should be given to DBAs on the server
> > resources to let that person function properly?
> >
> > When I am talking about resources, I mean rights to write to specific
> > directories like
> > * SQL Server programs/tools
> > * Common DLLs (in C:\Program files\common files...)
> > * Local backup directories
> > * Directory for snapshot/transactional replication transfer data.
> >
> > And right to execute programs/utilities on the server like
> >
> > * Perfmon (for system tuning/performance monitoring)
> > * Services (starting/stopping MSSQLSERVER/SQL Agent esp. if there are
> > dependencies).
> >
> > Is there anything that is not needed here or, alternatively, is there
> > anything that I missed?
> >
> > Another dimension of this issue is the OS login access that is needed to
> > run
> > the SQL Server services (needed for remote backups and replication).
> >
> > Any help will be greatly appreciated!
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > MZeeshan
> >
>
>|||Hi MZeeshan,
If you need OS login access that is needed to run the SQL Server services
(needed for remote backups and replication). I think give DBA local
administrator privilege is necessary.
BTW, you are recommanded using the tools below to ensure the security of
your product server.
Best Practices Analyzer Tool for Microsoft SQL Server 2000 1.0
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displayla%20ng=en&familyid=B
352EB1F-D3CA-44EE-893E-9E07339C1F22&displaylang=en
Since this is a consultation type issue, you can contact Advisory Services
(AS) . Microsoft Advisory Services provides short-term advice and guidance
for problems not covered by Problem Resolution Service as well as requests
for consultative assistance for design, development and deployment issues.
You may call this number to get Advisory Services: (800) 936-5200.
Sincerely yours,
Michael Cheng
Microsoft Online Partner Support
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
=====================================================
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Minimum level of rights for a SQL Server DBA.

Previously, DBAs in our company used to have local machine administrator
access on the SQL Server boxes. As part of tightening server security, those
rights have been taken away from DBAs (in some cases they have been added to
'Power Users' group).
In order to install SQL Server, the account need to be a local machine
administrator (that's given otherwise installation gives error).
But, what type of minimal rights should be given to DBAs on the server
resources to let that person function properly?
When I am talking about resources, I mean rights to write to specific
directories like
* SQL Server programs/tools
* Common DLLs (in C:\Program files\common files...)
* Local backup directories
* Directory for snapshot/transactional replication transfer data.
And right to execute programs/utilities on the server like
* Perfmon (for system tuning/performance monitoring)
* Services (starting/stopping MSSQLSERVER/SQL Agent esp. if there are
dependencies).
Is there anything that is not needed here or, alternatively, is there
anything that I missed?
Another dimension of this issue is the OS login access that is needed to run
the SQL Server services (needed for remote backups and replication).
Any help will be greatly appreciated!
Regards,
MZeeshanAt my last company, I didnt have admin rights... just SA. 90% of the time
it was fine. The other 10% it sucked. Common things I needed someone to hold
my hand on were:
1. Service restarts.
2. Hotfix/ service packs.
3. Set up stuff like Log Shipping where directory access is needed.
4. Wanting to just see how much disk space I had left on my backup drive.
5. Replication Snapshot.
I know you already mentioned alot of these. The problem is that when the DBA
needs these things, alot of time he needs them NOW. Not once he can have
someone come to his desk and log in as Admin. But like I said, 90% of the
time it was fine and I actually would prefer it. SA is usually good enough.
Any less than SA and a DBA cant get his work done.
"MZeeshan" <mzeeshan@.community.nospam> wrote in message
news:CD58C09D-1874-46A3-AA05-344727CA35F3@.microsoft.com...
> Previously, DBAs in our company used to have local machine administrator
> access on the SQL Server boxes. As part of tightening server security,
> those
> rights have been taken away from DBAs (in some cases they have been added
> to
> 'Power Users' group).
> In order to install SQL Server, the account need to be a local machine
> administrator (that's given otherwise installation gives error).
> But, what type of minimal rights should be given to DBAs on the server
> resources to let that person function properly?
> When I am talking about resources, I mean rights to write to specific
> directories like
> * SQL Server programs/tools
> * Common DLLs (in C:\Program files\common files...)
> * Local backup directories
> * Directory for snapshot/transactional replication transfer data.
> And right to execute programs/utilities on the server like
> * Perfmon (for system tuning/performance monitoring)
> * Services (starting/stopping MSSQLSERVER/SQL Agent esp. if there are
> dependencies).
> Is there anything that is not needed here or, alternatively, is there
> anything that I missed?
> Another dimension of this issue is the OS login access that is needed to
> run
> the SQL Server services (needed for remote backups and replication).
> Any help will be greatly appreciated!
> --
> Regards,
> MZeeshan
>|||Thanks!
Anyone? any other ideas?
--
Regards,
MZeeshan
"ChrisR" wrote:

> At my last company, I didnt have admin rights... just SA. 90% of the time
> it was fine. The other 10% it sucked. Common things I needed someone to ho
ld
> my hand on were:
> 1. Service restarts.
> 2. Hotfix/ service packs.
> 3. Set up stuff like Log Shipping where directory access is needed.
> 4. Wanting to just see how much disk space I had left on my backup drive.
> 5. Replication Snapshot.
> I know you already mentioned alot of these. The problem is that when the D
BA
> needs these things, alot of time he needs them NOW. Not once he can have
> someone come to his desk and log in as Admin. But like I said, 90% of the
> time it was fine and I actually would prefer it. SA is usually good enough
.
> Any less than SA and a DBA cant get his work done.
>
> "MZeeshan" <mzeeshan@.community.nospam> wrote in message
> news:CD58C09D-1874-46A3-AA05-344727CA35F3@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||Hi MZeeshan,
If you need OS login access that is needed to run the SQL Server services
(needed for remote backups and replication). I think give DBA local
administrator privilege is necessary.
BTW, you are recommanded using the tools below to ensure the security of
your product server.
Best Practices Analyzer Tool for Microsoft SQL Server 2000 1.0
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...g=en&familyid=B
352EB1F-D3CA-44EE-893E-9E07339C1F22&displaylang=en
Since this is a consultation type issue, you can contact Advisory Services
(AS) . Microsoft Advisory Services provides short-term advice and guidance
for problems not covered by Problem Resolution Service as well as requests
for consultative assistance for design, development and deployment issues.
You may call this number to get Advisory Services: (800) 936-5200.
Sincerely yours,
Michael Cheng
Microsoft Online Partner Support
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
========================================
=============
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Friday, March 9, 2012

Migration Of MSSQL instance along with security permissions

Hi All,

This is the scenario. Basically i work for a web hosting company now we have taken over control of a competitor and would like to migrate there existing data to our own MSSQL server's in order to integrate them into our automatic system etc etc ...

The current system is running MSSQL7.

The system been copied to is MSSQL2K.

Objectives:

Retain all security accounts listed on the MSSQL7 system and use them on the MSSQL2K system. This includes all the logins that use standard MSSQL login's. (Reason : To ensure that all the customers ASP pages work after the DB's have been copied.)
Backup all the databases on the MSSQL7 and restore them to the MSSQL2K system. Unfortunately system is running on a different network with firewall's etc in between. What type of maintenance plan and how should i implement the requirement to keep all the login account's?
Any help greatly appreciated......
thxone of the option can be like take all backups on either hdd or tape then connect it to ur server copy it from previous one to new one.
to copy all login info etc u can write a script if u need the script i can send u next time (this will take the info to a cursor and one by one it wil update.)
as far as sql 7 database schema and 2k schema is concerned i dont think it will be a problem.
this is an intersting case pl update me|||Hi ranjan apologies for not replying sooner (did not know if anyone had replied). I agree when u state that u dont think either that the difference between porting to 2000 is going to cause an issue. I have restored all the databases now but am in need of a little help / inspiration on how to port over the login names. Perhaps you can help or have a script that performs this task. Regards the script u have for updating i presume its independent to the current logins that are on the SQL2K system at present. How is this done?

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Migration from v7 to 2000 Q

We use a custom application written by a software company that are no longer
trading.
The back-end of the application runs on SQL7. We are currently implementing
a small business server 2003 system with SQL 2000. I would therefore like to
move the backend onto SQL 2000 (small biz).
I have tried to migrate to the database using the backup option on sql7 and
then restore on sql2000.
The problem I have come across is although it copies the data, it doesn't
copy the stored procs and views over. For this reason (I assume) the front
end stops working. When you run the application it stops asking for the
location of a view.
Is it possible to migrate the stored procs and views? What are my chances of
success. Sorry for the vagueness of the question, but SQL server admin
really isn't my thing. If you need more info please let me know.
TIA,
H
H,
Backup/Restore detach/attach both copy everything in the database including
views and stored procedures. Do you not see the views and stored procedures
in Enterprise Manager when you move from 7 --> 2000? Who owns these views
and stored procedures i.e., dbo?
HTH
Jerry
"H" <walesforthegr@.ndslam.com> wrote in message
news:O$$5AHQyFHA.3812@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> We use a custom application written by a software company that are no
> longer trading.
> The back-end of the application runs on SQL7. We are currently
> implementing a small business server 2003 system with SQL 2000. I would
> therefore like to move the backend onto SQL 2000 (small biz).
> I have tried to migrate to the database using the backup option on sql7
> and then restore on sql2000.
> The problem I have come across is although it copies the data, it doesn't
> copy the stored procs and views over. For this reason (I assume) the front
> end stops working. When you run the application it stops asking for the
> location of a view.
> Is it possible to migrate the stored procs and views? What are my chances
> of success. Sorry for the vagueness of the question, but SQL server admin
> really isn't my thing. If you need more info please let me know.
> TIA,
> H
>
|||Take a look at the Copy Database Wizard which should help pick up objects,
such as Stored Procedures, stored in the Master database.
Hal Berenson, President
PredictableIT, LLC
"H" <walesforthegr@.ndslam.com> wrote in message
news:O$$5AHQyFHA.3812@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> We use a custom application written by a software company that are no
> longer trading.
> The back-end of the application runs on SQL7. We are currently
> implementing a small business server 2003 system with SQL 2000. I would
> therefore like to move the backend onto SQL 2000 (small biz).
> I have tried to migrate to the database using the backup option on sql7
> and then restore on sql2000.
> The problem I have come across is although it copies the data, it doesn't
> copy the stored procs and views over. For this reason (I assume) the front
> end stops working. When you run the application it stops asking for the
> location of a view.
> Is it possible to migrate the stored procs and views? What are my chances
> of success. Sorry for the vagueness of the question, but SQL server admin
> really isn't my thing. If you need more info please let me know.
> TIA,
> H
>

Migration from v7 to 2000 Q

We use a custom application written by a software company that are no longer
trading.
The back-end of the application runs on SQL7. We are currently implementing
a small business server 2003 system with SQL 2000. I would therefore like to
move the backend onto SQL 2000 (small biz).
I have tried to migrate to the database using the backup option on sql7 and
then restore on sql2000.
The problem I have come across is although it copies the data, it doesn't
copy the stored procs and views over. For this reason (I assume) the front
end stops working. When you run the application it stops asking for the
location of a view.
Is it possible to migrate the stored procs and views? What are my chances of
success. Sorry for the vagueness of the question, but SQL server admin
really isn't my thing. If you need more info please let me know.
TIA,
HH,
Backup/Restore detach/attach both copy everything in the database including
views and stored procedures. Do you not see the views and stored procedures
in Enterprise Manager when you move from 7 --> 2000? Who owns these views
and stored procedures i.e., dbo?
HTH
Jerry
"H" <walesforthegr@.ndslam.com> wrote in message
news:O$$5AHQyFHA.3812@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> We use a custom application written by a software company that are no
> longer trading.
> The back-end of the application runs on SQL7. We are currently
> implementing a small business server 2003 system with SQL 2000. I would
> therefore like to move the backend onto SQL 2000 (small biz).
> I have tried to migrate to the database using the backup option on sql7
> and then restore on sql2000.
> The problem I have come across is although it copies the data, it doesn't
> copy the stored procs and views over. For this reason (I assume) the front
> end stops working. When you run the application it stops asking for the
> location of a view.
> Is it possible to migrate the stored procs and views? What are my chances
> of success. Sorry for the vagueness of the question, but SQL server admin
> really isn't my thing. If you need more info please let me know.
> TIA,
> H
>|||Take a look at the Copy Database Wizard which should help pick up objects,
such as Stored Procedures, stored in the Master database.
--
Hal Berenson, President
PredictableIT, LLC
"H" <walesforthegr@.ndslam.com> wrote in message
news:O$$5AHQyFHA.3812@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> We use a custom application written by a software company that are no
> longer trading.
> The back-end of the application runs on SQL7. We are currently
> implementing a small business server 2003 system with SQL 2000. I would
> therefore like to move the backend onto SQL 2000 (small biz).
> I have tried to migrate to the database using the backup option on sql7
> and then restore on sql2000.
> The problem I have come across is although it copies the data, it doesn't
> copy the stored procs and views over. For this reason (I assume) the front
> end stops working. When you run the application it stops asking for the
> location of a view.
> Is it possible to migrate the stored procs and views? What are my chances
> of success. Sorry for the vagueness of the question, but SQL server admin
> really isn't my thing. If you need more info please let me know.
> TIA,
> H
>

Migration from v7 to 2000 Q

We use a custom application written by a software company that are no longer
trading.
The back-end of the application runs on SQL7. We are currently implementing
a small business server 2003 system with SQL 2000. I would therefore like to
move the backend onto SQL 2000 (small biz).
I have tried to migrate to the database using the backup option on sql7 and
then restore on sql2000.
The problem I have come across is although it copies the data, it doesn't
copy the stored procs and views over. For this reason (I assume) the front
end stops working. When you run the application it stops asking for the
location of a view.
Is it possible to migrate the stored procs and views? What are my chances of
success. Sorry for the vagueness of the question, but SQL server admin
really isn't my thing. If you need more info please let me know.
TIA,
HH,
Backup/Restore detach/attach both copy everything in the database including
views and stored procedures. Do you not see the views and stored procedures
in Enterprise Manager when you move from 7 --> 2000? Who owns these views
and stored procedures i.e., dbo?
HTH
Jerry
"H" <walesforthegr@.ndslam.com> wrote in message
news:O$$5AHQyFHA.3812@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> We use a custom application written by a software company that are no
> longer trading.
> The back-end of the application runs on SQL7. We are currently
> implementing a small business server 2003 system with SQL 2000. I would
> therefore like to move the backend onto SQL 2000 (small biz).
> I have tried to migrate to the database using the backup option on sql7
> and then restore on sql2000.
> The problem I have come across is although it copies the data, it doesn't
> copy the stored procs and views over. For this reason (I assume) the front
> end stops working. When you run the application it stops asking for the
> location of a view.
> Is it possible to migrate the stored procs and views? What are my chances
> of success. Sorry for the vagueness of the question, but SQL server admin
> really isn't my thing. If you need more info please let me know.
> TIA,
> H
>|||Take a look at the Copy Database Wizard which should help pick up objects,
such as Stored Procedures, stored in the Master database.
Hal Berenson, President
PredictableIT, LLC
"H" <walesforthegr@.ndslam.com> wrote in message
news:O$$5AHQyFHA.3812@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> We use a custom application written by a software company that are no
> longer trading.
> The back-end of the application runs on SQL7. We are currently
> implementing a small business server 2003 system with SQL 2000. I would
> therefore like to move the backend onto SQL 2000 (small biz).
> I have tried to migrate to the database using the backup option on sql7
> and then restore on sql2000.
> The problem I have come across is although it copies the data, it doesn't
> copy the stored procs and views over. For this reason (I assume) the front
> end stops working. When you run the application it stops asking for the
> location of a view.
> Is it possible to migrate the stored procs and views? What are my chances
> of success. Sorry for the vagueness of the question, but SQL server admin
> really isn't my thing. If you need more info please let me know.
> TIA,
> H
>

migration from sybase to sql

Our company planning to migrate database server(Unix)
sybase 11.9.2 . This database are avaliable in tape(DAT).
I want to down load & convert to seq 7 or seq 2000
directly from tap to disk.
If I am using dump statment it is showing error msg.
Any one can solve this Issue.
Thanking U
r.varadharajanThe "SQL Server 2000 for the Sybase Customer Resource Kit" might help you -
check http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/compare/sybaseresourcekit.asp.
--
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
FAQ from Neil & others at: http://www.sqlserverfaq.com
Please reply only to the newsgroups.
PASS - the definitive, global community
for SQL Server professionals - http://www.sqlpass.org
"Varadharajan" <rvrajanmdu@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:07f901c33f9d$6e8e49e0$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> Our company planning to migrate database server(Unix)
> sybase 11.9.2 . This database are avaliable in tape(DAT).
> I want to down load & convert to seq 7 or seq 2000
> directly from tap to disk.
> If I am using dump statment it is showing error msg.
> Any one can solve this Issue.
> Thanking U
> r.varadharajan
>

Saturday, February 25, 2012

migrating with from access with VB scripts

The company i am working for has been using an Access database for purchasing and inventory. this has become to small/dangerous due to the number of records and frequent 'database needs repair' errors. I am trying to migrate the database to a sql server w/ access front end and am runing into problems with most of the VB proceedures that are built into the database. the most common at the moment is a 'Write Conflict' error saying someone else changed the record i am editing. i know this can't be the case becasue i am working on this in an isolated environment. I have traced it to a VB script that changes a field from 'Entering' to 'Pending' (text field) on the click of the 'new record' button. any ideas?

Access 2000/2003, SQL server 2000If you have more than one channel open to the database server (a second "session", basically) then that may well appear to be "another user."|||doesn't seem to be, in my tracing, the issue seems to be that VB doesn't know that I'm the person makeing the changes. It looks like the VB script starts when the form opens, checks the contents of the record to be worked on and when the button is clicked, finds the contents have changed.|||Please post the code involved.

Monday, February 20, 2012

Migrating to SQL Server 2000 Standard to 2005 Express

I am working for a small company. We have an in-house web application that
was purely used by internal employees. At the time, it was cheaper to get a
per user license. Now we have application that is open to the public and so
we need to change the licensing mode to per processor mode. Right now, we
have a tight budget, so we are thinking about getting SQL Server 2005
Express. If performance is an issue, we may upgrade to other version later.
Looking at the http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143393.aspx, 2000
standard to 2005 express upgrade is not supported. Does that mean that if
I get a copy of backup of 2000 standard database and restore it to 2005
express, it will not work? If the upgrade works, will I able to use Upgrade
Advisor?
ThanksAFAIK, you *should* be able to restore your database to SQL Express.
I'd recommend doing a test migration onto a development server or
workstation and trying it out. You're going to want to migrate, instead
of upgrading, though...
JJ wrote:
> I am working for a small company. We have an in-house web application tha
t
> was purely used by internal employees. At the time, it was cheaper to get
a
> per user license. Now we have application that is open to the public and
so
> we need to change the licensing mode to per processor mode. Right now, we
> have a tight budget, so we are thinking about getting SQL Server 2005
> Express. If performance is an issue, we may upgrade to other version late
r.
> Looking at the http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143393.aspx, 200
0
> standard to 2005 express upgrade is not supported. Does that mean that i
f
> I get a copy of backup of 2000 standard database and restore it to 2005
> express, it will not work? If the upgrade works, will I able to use Upgra
de
> Advisor?
> Thanks
>
-Dave Markle
http://www.markleconsulting.com/blog|||The only thing I can think of that would prevent this is a database bigger
than 4GB. There might also be some performance differences because Express
won't use as many system resources as standard.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"Dave Markle" <"dma[remove_ZZ]ZZrkle"@.gmail.dot.com> wrote in message
news:OX3yXomSHHA.4744@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> AFAIK, you *should* be able to restore your database to SQL Express. I'd
> recommend doing a test migration onto a development server or workstation
> and trying it out. You're going to want to migrate, instead of upgrading,
> though...
> JJ wrote:
>
> --
> -Dave Markle
> http://www.markleconsulting.com/blog

Migrating to SQL Server 2000 Standard to 2005 Express

I am working for a small company. We have an in-house web application that
was purely used by internal employees. At the time, it was cheaper to get a
per user license. Now we have application that is open to the public and so
we need to change the licensing mode to per processor mode. Right now, we
have a tight budget, so we are thinking about getting SQL Server 2005
Express. If performance is an issue, we may upgrade to other version later.
Looking at the http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143393.aspx, 2000
standard to 2005 express upgrade is not supported. Does that mean that if
I get a copy of backup of 2000 standard database and restore it to 2005
express, it will not work? If the upgrade works, will I able to use Upgrade
Advisor?
Thanks
AFAIK, you *should* be able to restore your database to SQL Express.
I'd recommend doing a test migration onto a development server or
workstation and trying it out. You're going to want to migrate, instead
of upgrading, though...
JJ wrote:
> I am working for a small company. We have an in-house web application that
> was purely used by internal employees. At the time, it was cheaper to get a
> per user license. Now we have application that is open to the public and so
> we need to change the licensing mode to per processor mode. Right now, we
> have a tight budget, so we are thinking about getting SQL Server 2005
> Express. If performance is an issue, we may upgrade to other version later.
> Looking at the http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143393.aspx, 2000
> standard to 2005 express upgrade is not supported. Does that mean that if
> I get a copy of backup of 2000 standard database and restore it to 2005
> express, it will not work? If the upgrade works, will I able to use Upgrade
> Advisor?
> Thanks
>
-Dave Markle
http://www.markleconsulting.com/blog
|||The only thing I can think of that would prevent this is a database bigger
than 4GB. There might also be some performance differences because Express
won't use as many system resources as standard.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"Dave Markle" <"dma[remove_ZZ]ZZrkle"@.gmail.dot.com> wrote in message
news:OX3yXomSHHA.4744@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> AFAIK, you *should* be able to restore your database to SQL Express. I'd
> recommend doing a test migration onto a development server or workstation
> and trying it out. You're going to want to migrate, instead of upgrading,
> though...
> JJ wrote:
>
> --
> -Dave Markle
> http://www.markleconsulting.com/blog

Migrating to SQL Server 2000 Standard to 2005 Express

I am working for a small company. We have an in-house web application that
was purely used by internal employees. At the time, it was cheaper to get a
per user license. Now we have application that is open to the public and so
we need to change the licensing mode to per processor mode. Right now, we
have a tight budget, so we are thinking about getting SQL Server 2005
Express. If performance is an issue, we may upgrade to other version later.
Looking at the http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143393.aspx, 2000
standard to 2005 express upgrade is not supported. Does that mean that if
I get a copy of backup of 2000 standard database and restore it to 2005
express, it will not work? If the upgrade works, will I able to use Upgrade
Advisor?
ThanksAFAIK, you *should* be able to restore your database to SQL Express.
I'd recommend doing a test migration onto a development server or
workstation and trying it out. You're going to want to migrate, instead
of upgrading, though...
JJ wrote:
> I am working for a small company. We have an in-house web application that
> was purely used by internal employees. At the time, it was cheaper to get a
> per user license. Now we have application that is open to the public and so
> we need to change the licensing mode to per processor mode. Right now, we
> have a tight budget, so we are thinking about getting SQL Server 2005
> Express. If performance is an issue, we may upgrade to other version later.
> Looking at the http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143393.aspx, 2000
> standard to 2005 express upgrade is not supported. Does that mean that if
> I get a copy of backup of 2000 standard database and restore it to 2005
> express, it will not work? If the upgrade works, will I able to use Upgrade
> Advisor?
> Thanks
>
-Dave Markle
http://www.markleconsulting.com/blog|||The only thing I can think of that would prevent this is a database bigger
than 4GB. There might also be some performance differences because Express
won't use as many system resources as standard.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"Dave Markle" <"dma[remove_ZZ]ZZrkle"@.gmail.dot.com> wrote in message
news:OX3yXomSHHA.4744@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> AFAIK, you *should* be able to restore your database to SQL Express. I'd
> recommend doing a test migration onto a development server or workstation
> and trying it out. You're going to want to migrate, instead of upgrading,
> though...
> JJ wrote:
>> I am working for a small company. We have an in-house web application
>> that was purely used by internal employees. At the time, it was cheaper
>> to get a per user license. Now we have application that is open to the
>> public and so we need to change the licensing mode to per processor mode.
>> Right now, we have a tight budget, so we are thinking about getting SQL
>> Server 2005 Express. If performance is an issue, we may upgrade to other
>> version later.
>> Looking at the http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143393.aspx,
>> 2000 standard to 2005 express upgrade is not supported. Does that mean
>> that if I get a copy of backup of 2000 standard database and restore it
>> to 2005 express, it will not work? If the upgrade works, will I able to
>> use Upgrade Advisor?
>> Thanks
>
> --
> -Dave Markle
> http://www.markleconsulting.com/blog

Monday, March 26, 2012

mirror

mirror

mirror

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Minimum level of rights for a SQL Server DBA.

Minimum level of rights for a SQL Server DBA.

Minimum level of rights for a SQL Server DBA.

Friday, March 9, 2012

Migration Of MSSQL instance along with security permissions

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Migration from v7 to 2000 Q

Migration from v7 to 2000 Q

Migration from v7 to 2000 Q

migration from sybase to sql

Saturday, February 25, 2012

migrating with from access with VB scripts

Monday, February 20, 2012

Migrating to SQL Server 2000 Standard to 2005 Express

Migrating to SQL Server 2000 Standard to 2005 Express

Migrating to SQL Server 2000 Standard to 2005 Express

Migrating to SQL 2005

Blog Archive

About Me