I have created Queue with the following syntax. But it is not getting activated itself. What I have to do to get it activated itself, and what could be the frequency by default.
CREATE QUEUE NewCustomerQueue
WITH ACTIVATION
(PROCEDURE_NAME = prProcessNewCustomers,
STATUS = ON,
MAX_QUEUE_READERS = 1,
EXECUTE AS SELF)
GO
If I execute the prProcessNewCustomers procedure manually it is showing that the Queue has been activated. What change I have to make in the syntax to get it activated itself.
Actually I have two scenarios in my requirement,
1. One Queue processing immediately when it receives data (Order Processing)
2. Another Queue, Process when the server is idle i.e., off-peak time (for mailing)
Hello, This is info that I am still not certain about and I just need to make sure, my gut feeling is correct:
A. When a procedure is triggered upon reception of a message in a queue, what happens when the procedure fails and rolls back? 1. Message is left on the Queue. 2. is the worker procedure triggered again for the same message by the queue? 3. I am hoping the Queue keeps on triggering workers until it is empty.
My scenario is that my queue reader procedure only reads one message at a time, thus I do not loop to receive many messages.
B. For my scenario messages are independent and ordering does not matter. Thus I want to ensure my Queue reader procedures execute simultaneously. Is reading the Top message in one reader somehow blocking the queue for any other reader procedures? I.e. if I have BEGIN TRANSACTION when reading messages of the Queue, is that effectively going prevent many reader procedures working simultaneously. Again, I want to ensure that Service broker is effectively spawning procedures that work simultaneously.
3 tables with about 100 000 rows each one, frequently updated. 1 clustered index on primary key, and 2 non clustered index on columns used by JOIN and by queries.
Fillfactor for index : 90. PAD_INDEX : not activated.
I have some deadlocks problems, probably due to index pages and key locking (as precised in error log). Is it possible that the cause of that is splitting index pages while UPDATE ?
May I activate PAD_INDEX to solve part of this problem ?
i am using sqlserver2005,in that i am not getting database mail even after enabling in surface area configuration of configaration tool. what is the problem with my sqlserver. Can any one help me ...
I am new to SQL / SQL Server and have downloaded SQL Server 2005 Express.
I also appear to have an existing SQL Server program on my PC which includes Query Analyzer. I wish to use Query Analyzer. Is this compatible with SQL Express?
When I try to open Query Analyzer using Windows Authentication I get the error msg:
'Unable to connect to server HOME-DHGV3DIC8N:
Server: msg 17, level 16, state 1
[Microsoft] [ODBC SQL Server Driver] [Shared memory] SQL Server does not exist or access denied.'
I am guessing that I need to create some sort of server which I can use to run SQL server.
Could anyone let me know how I do this? And also if I will be able to run Query analyzer on SQL Express edition.
Running VB 2005 Express Edition and Sql Server 2005 Express Edition (SQLX).
Developing a desktop application which calls a local instance of ".sqlexpress".
This app needs to set data base options and add/del various table columns.
When activating the application role, I get the following message:
HariCari SQL Error/s 15422 - Application roles can only be activated at the ad hoc level.
Anyone know what this message means?
I have searched SQL Server Books On-Line and been unable to find a list of Sql err numbers. Either I have missed the obvious or Books On-Line has missed the obvious.
I have a requirement where once we create a new record in a table, we submit a query to fetch some data and save it in one of the columns of the newly created record. The main requirement is that the server where we fetch the data from can be down for sometime for regular maintenance and we do not want to loose the fetch query in that process. Is there a way we can implement this? Thanks.
I was testing my error handling and purposefully failed some messages. Automatic posion message detection kicked in and disabled my queue. I tried the following, one at a time to enable it again but it doesn't work:
ALTER QUEUE MigrationQueue WITH STATUS = ON;
ALTER QUEUE MigrationQueue WITH STATUS = ON, ACTIVATION (STATUS = ON);
I would have thought the first line would've worked but I get the following when trying to receive...
The service queue "MigrationQueue" is currently disabled.
I am running a basic SSB queue setup (more or less the Hello World example)and running into the following error message:
Transaction (Process ID 120) was deadlocked on lock resources with another process and has been chosen as the deadlock victim. Rerun the transaction.
At first, I thought it was because I had the Initiator and Target Services on the same Queue, but I get this error even when I separate the two Services onto two Queues. This happens when I run more than one Target application receiving messages from the Target Queue.
Does anybody have any idea what could be happening here? Am I not allowed to set up more than one receiver?
I have a queue that, after running fine for several days will mysteriously turn off. It doesn't seem to be related to a poison message because I can restart the queue and processing resumes just fine. What are all the scenarios that would cause a queue to turn itself off, so I can 1) take preemptive action to prevent it from happening in the first place and 2) respond appropriately when it occurs.
Also, how to properly setup and verify that the BROKER_QUEUE_DISABLED is working properly. This is the SQL that I have so far, but is there a more direct way to raise the event other than writing an activated stored procedure that rolls back 5 times?
I have sent messages and they are all sitting in the transmission queue with a blank status, why is service broker not trying to send them ? They are no errors in the sql log. BOL says this is blank when it has not tried to send the message ? Service broker is definately activated in the database.
How do i force sql server to send anything in the transmission que ?
Running transactional replication, dedicated server for distributor. While performance in terms of latency is excellent (usually 1 sec, almost never higher than 4) the disk queue length on the distributor is extremely high (over 6 usually). Is this typical? On any other server I would be very concerned, but cpu and memory usage are excellent and as said, latency is good. what is recommended config for distributor? others see high queue length?
(1) When I was monitoring the SystemProcessor Queue locally ( Via a term server login onto the box ) I would see a queue of 3-4. If I monitor the same parameter from a remote PC, I see a Processor Queue of 1 - why? The box had 1 GB RAM ( SQL used 500 MB and had 250 MB free according to Task manager ).
(2) I have another almost identical box that has same CPU but twice ammount of RAM ( 2 GB ) but has SystemProcessor Queue of almost 0 - why?
Again one client with SAN EMC and again performace is several times worse then you can have with a cheap and primitive IDE drive... :(
Anyway, my question. I am monitoring many parameters, including Avg Read Queue and Avg Write Queue. So if I ReadQueue=3 and WriteQueue=7, what does it mean?
Scenario 1, there are 2 different Queues (R- read request, W - write request): Windows --> Device Read. Queue: R:R:R Write Queue: W:W:W:W:W:W:W
Scenario 2: Windows --> Device Common Queue: W.R.W.W.R.W.W.R.W.W
In other words, if SQL server flushes writes (TRAN COMMIT or CHECKPOINT), generating hundreds or even thousands of write requests in few milliseconds, so Queue grows to 100-300 for a second or so, are read requests locked during that time?
I am trying to implement a very fast queue using SQL Server.The queue table will contain tens of millions of records.The problem I have is the more records completed, the the slower itgets. I don't want to remove data from the queue because I use thesame table to store results. The queue handles concurrent requests.The status field will contain the following values:0 = Waiting1 = Started2 = FinishedAny help would be greatly appreciated.Here is a simplified script to demonstrate what has been done.CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Queue] ([ID] [int] IDENTITY (1, 1) NOT NULL ,[JobID] [int] NOT NULL ,[Status] [tinyint] NOT NULL) ON [PRIMARY]GOCREATE INDEX [Status] ON [dbo].[Queue]([Status]) ON [PRIMARY]GOCREATE PROCEDURE dbo.NextItem@JobID integer,@ID integer outputASSELECT TOP 1 @ID = [ID]FROM Queue WITH (READPAST, XLOCK)WHERE (Status = 0) AND (JobID = @JobID)RETURNGO
I am doing backup job using windows 2003 backup. I hv several scheduled backup job. And sometimes, when the first backup job not yet finish backing up, the second backup job will automatic starts at the set time resulting 2 backup jobs at 1 time. I need to know whether in SQL2000/2005, we can set the tsql command to do the job queue for the windows 2003 backup job, meaning if the 1st backup job is still ongoing, the 2nd backup job will hv to wait even though the set time for the job was already expired. When the 1st job done, then only the 2nd job started.
hi everybody, i am working on a SSIS package that creates Multiple file from a table depending on a particular field. now the requirement from the target system is i have send the files directly to the particular serverrs. for that i have to post my files in msmq and then use some other technology to achieve this. if anybody has some ideas on this it will be very helpful for me. thanks in advance srikanth
My normal scenario is tills sending live slaes to head office via service Broker queue. Sales are sent as soon as sale is made(normally tills on adsl lines), a loss of a Link to head office will still allow a sale to be made with the sale sitting in the transmission queue on the till but has not been commited at HO to adjust stock etc, until the link is back up. My worry is link goes down with several sales siting in the queue and then hardware failure. Is their a mechanism to backup the Transmission queue in the case of no link?
If you could back up the transmission queue at a till could i then take those messages and copy them into head offices queue for processing, this is in the case of my link to the till was down for a whole day but needed the daily sales from the shop,could i get the back up at end of the day and apply the messages at head office?
Any infomation on what would be the best way to recover from this event would be gratefully accepted.
any examples on a heartbeat to check the link status that is of very low cost between HO and tills bearing in mind HO needs to maintain status for large number of tills.
I'm currently looking for a way to decently pauze the processing of messages by activation procedures. When I pauze the processing I want to be sure that the running activation procedures terminated. I thought I could do this using ALTER QUEUE WITH ACTIVATION (STATUS = OFF) and sys.dm_broker_activated_tasks. This is what I've tested: I set up one queue with an activation procedure attached to it that receives one message, then waits for one minute, then writes that message into a table. The queues max queue readers is set to 2. Now, I put 5 messages in the queue, 2 procs pop up in sys.dm_broker_activated_tasks. I run the alter queue statement shown above and check sys.dm_broker_activated_tasks again. It is empty so allegedly there are no tasks running. I check the table in which the messages are written by the activation procs and after some time I can see the results of both activation procedures which were according to sys.dm_broker_activated_tasks not running (but of course they were). The rest of the process works as expected, the procs reactivate upon reenabling the activation status and all is well. Is there another way of checking the running activation procedures that checking sys.dm_broker_activated_tasks? Is this intended behaviour or just a bug?
I know we are not allowed to benchmark SQL Server but..... It would be nice to have material to present which demonstrates the performance gains using a queue compared to insert/delete in a SQL table.
Logically it seems faster to use a queue due to the conversation grouping locking and the service broker itself. But there seems to be some overhead involved just to manage these queues that the service broker has to perform.
I am sure we are not unique with the choice to figure out if we will get a boost in performance using SQL a queue between services rather than a table to queue data. What is available to help understand the performance gains of using a queue?
I am running SQL server 2000 SP4 on a server with 2 Dual core 4G processors with data attached via a SAN>
I have a 70G database with 10 users that is giving attrocious performance. I have just tried to run a count(*) accross a couple of tables and am still waiting for the results 15 mins later. When I look at the disk queue it is around 50/60. I thought the target for this was around 2. I am sure that the hardware that we have in place is capable of running this db. However I`m not sure how to fully analyse what is going wrong here.
Is it possible to receive from a queue by a conversation handle? In the documentation there is an example that show you how to do it. Yet, if you "read" the whole document it says that the conversation handle can not be an expression.
The WHERE clause of the RECEIVE statement may only contain search conditions that use conversation_handle or conversation_group_id. The search condition may not contain any of the other columns in the queue. The conversation_handle or conversation_group_id may not be an expression.
Here is what I'm trying to do:
;RECEIVE TOP(1) @MsgBody = CAST(message_body as XML)
FROM ProcessingLetters
WHERE conversation_handle = @Conversation_Handle
It doesn't seem to matter if I use RECEIVE or SELECT. It will return nothing.
I've even tried this:
where cast(Conversation_Handle as varchar(100)) = cast(@Conversation_Handle as varchar(100))
Why am I doing this? I've put something into the queue to let me know that something is processing. When it is done I want to pull it out and end the conversation.
So is the WHERE conversation_handle = @Conversation_Handle supposed to work?
I am guessing defining multiple services on the same queue is basically for providing different services to outside sources while using 1 queue, obviously as long as the contracts and activated sp logic applies to all services defined on that queue.
I am defining a queue per service, is this right or wrong or irrelevant ? It just works better for me in terms of manageability.
I just want to make sure there is no "best practice" reason for doing either or ? Is it just a matter of preference?
My transmission queue has lots of messages that will never, ever be delivered because the transmission_status = "The session keys for this conversation could not be created or accessed. The database master key is required for this operation."
How can I purge the transmission queue to get rid of this junk?
