I'd like to have some feedback from the experts on SQL 2005.
The situations is the following.
I have an application .net/SQL server 2000 that send notification mails using the SQL mail feature. It works fine for years.
Sooner or later SQL 2000 will be out of service, so I decide to move my database to SQL 2005.
When I'm trying to put in production with my web hosting provider www.webhost4life.com, they said that are not supporting SQL DBMAIL on any SQL 2005 32/64 bits because the extra workload will slow down SQL 2005 performance.
My question is if somebody has experience of this situation in other installations or maybe is that provider who has some problems tuning the SQL servers.
Is it possible to embed a image datatype into a EMail message using sp_Send_DBMail?
For example, my query would select a saved print screen image held in a SQL table as datatype image. I would prefer not to attach this image but rather have it print in the message section.
Hi, I am using SQL Server 2005 and need to mail. I used sp_send_dbmail for mailing but I am able send to one @recipeint and one @copy_recipient. How can I mail to many email addresses and/or group?
I have a stored proc that inserts records into a table, gets the identity, and uses that identity on a .net webpage. The page retrieves that identity key and processes some stuff on the page.
Everything was working fine until I tried to enable sql mail with triggers. I wanted to double-check some stuff, so I requested an sql email be sent whenever an insert occurs on the table above. Here's what I think is happening --- please correct and/or help me out with a work around?
I use the stored proc to insert a record. I select the @@identity. The trigger fires but uses select to retrieve the latest insert - thereby replacing the @@identity number returned to the page?
If this is true, could I do something like the following in the original stored proc? Is this a good idea or bad idea?
BEGIN Declare @myID as int, @myBody1 as varChar(200) Set @myID=0 INSERT INTO table (fields) VALUES (@PID, more stuff); Set @myID = SELECT @@IDENTITY As [Identity]; If @myID<>0 Begin Set @body1='<br />pid=' + more stuff..... Exec msdb.dbo.sp_send_dbmail @profile_name='profileName', @recipients='email@email.com', @subject='Temp History Insert', @body=@body1, @body_format= 'HTML' ; End END
We are having trouble configuring SQL Server 2005 to use MX records. Basically, we want to use DBmail to utilize multiple mail relays. The three mail relays are contained within internal DNS MX records.
smtphost.xxx.com. IN MX 10 mailhost1.xxx.com. smtphost.xxx.com. IN MX 10 mailhost2.xxx.com. smtphost.xxx.com. IN MX 10 mailhost3.xxx.com.
It doesn't seem to like using MX records? Any ideas? Thanks KraftR Tim.Kraft@Dowjones.com
I am using DBMail to send an email notification at the completion of service broker process and have been getting the following security error:
Msg 229, Level 14, State 5, Procedure sp_send_dbmail, Line 1
EXECUTE permission denied on object 'sp_send_dbmail', database 'msdb', schema 'dbo'.
I have given the userID used to run the Service Broker, databasemailuserrole in msdb as per instruction in the msdb. I have also given it execute permission on the sp_send_dbmail but keep getting the error. The service broker is run using a sql login and the dbmail profile is set as public profile. Any suggestions would be much appreciated.
I have a stored proc that inserts records into a table, gets the identity, and uses that identity on a .net webpage. The page retrieves that identity key and processes some stuff on the page.
Everything was working fine until I tried to enable sql mail with triggers. I wanted to double-check some stuff, so I requested an sql email be sent whenever an insert occurs on the table above. Here's what I think is happening --- please correct and/or help me out with a work around?
I use the stored proc to insert a record. I select the @@identity. The trigger fires but uses select to retrieve the latest insert - thereby replacing the @@identity number returned to the page?
If this is true, could I do something like the following in the original stored proc? Is this a good idea or bad idea?
BEGIN Declare @myID as int, @myBody1 as varChar(200) Set @myID=0 INSERT INTO table (fields) VALUES (@PID, more stuff); Set @myID = SELECT @@IDENTITY As [Identity]; If @myID<>0 Begin Set @body1='<br />pid=' + more stuff..... Exec msdb.dbo.sp_send_dbmail @profile_name='profileName', @recipients='email@email.com', @subject='Temp History Insert', @body=@body1, @body_format= 'HTML' ; End END
Hi! I try to use Service Broker and DBMail together, but have some trouble with that. I need to create the queue with activation. And the stored procedure activated on this queue must send e-mail using DBmail. It's looks simple, but it doesn't work. There is my script to create objects, but don't forget create dbmail profile before use it. PS And replace my email by yours
I'm stumped on this trigger error and I'm hoping someone can help. Here's the background:
BACKGROUND Running SQLServer2005 on WinServer 2003 RC2. We use a SQL-based business application that has it's own alert system that uses database mail sucessfully, meaning the built-in emailing functions of the application work and can communicate with the database mail profile and send mail without error.
PROBLEM I'm trying to write a trigger that will automatically send out an email alert after certain actions are performed in the business application. When I enable the trigger and it tries to run it fails with the following error:
SQLDBCode: 229Alerts error: SQLSTATE = 4200Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL ServerEXECUTE permission denied on object 'sp_send_dbmail', database 'msdb', schema 'dbo'...
TROUBLESHOOTING I've seen several articles about DatabaseMailUserRole permissions and have made sure that all users, admin and even guest (for testing) are members of this role. Other than that our setup is pretty vanilla so I'm not sure what else to do.
We only have one large dbase for the app and the fact that the internal emailing fuction works makes me think that the permissions for the msdb are already correct (although I could be wrong)
This problem is driving me crazy so I thank you in advance for any suggestions!
I would like to replace mymail@mail.com by mypdl@mail.com , where mypdl is basically a people distribution list with 2 emails: my own email and my coworker and fellow DBA.
IF EXISTS ( SELECT TOP 1 [PercentUsed] FROM [BackupSize] WHERE PercentUsed>=70 AND [drivename]='D:' -- D is the internal drive ORDER BY [MetricDate] DESC
[Code] ...
But I think this won't work by design. Maybe I need to create an operator?
I am attempting to use dbmail from an application that logs in to my database using an application role. Since the application role does not exist outside the database, I created an spSendEmail in the database with "execute as login='mailagent'" in it: I set the database to trustworthy, created a 'mailagent' account and added it to the msdb database with the databasemailuser role rights.
Email works just fine on the server when I use the execute as login='mailagent' to fire off the msdb..sp_send_dbmail. But from the .NET application, I get the error: "Cannot execute as the server principal because the principal 'mailagent' does not exist, this type of principal cannot be impersonated, or you do not have permission." When I run my spSendEmail stored procedure from the calling database, I get the same error.
Can the same result be achieved sending as attachment with dbmail?
EXEC msdb..sp_send_dbmail @attach_query_result_as_file = 1I don't want to have to add column names as part of the query
Change the query to return column headers in resultset SELECT 'CustID' as f1, 'name' as f2 UNION ALL SELECT CAST(CustID as Varchar(10)), name FROM tblCustand set
Under IIS SMTP I can set bounced email redirect etc. how to do that with dbmail, the idea is I can get the list of bounced emails somewhere so I can create a report.
Hello Everyone,I have a very complex performance issue with our production database.Here's the scenario. We have a production webserver server and adevelopment web server. Both are running SQL Server 2000.I encounted various performance issues with the production server with aparticular query. It would take approximately 22 seconds to return 100rows, thats about 0.22 seconds per row. Note: I ran the query in singleuser mode. So I tested the query on the Development server by taking abackup (.dmp) of the database and moving it onto the dev server. I ranthe same query and found that it ran in less than a second.I took a look at the query execution plan and I found that they we'rethe exact same in both cases.Then I took a look at the various index's, and again I found nodifferences in the table indices.If both databases are identical, I'm assumeing that the issue is relatedto some external hardware issue like: disk space, memory etc. Or couldit be OS software related issues, like service packs, SQL Serverconfiguations etc.Here's what I've done to rule out some obvious hardware issues on theprod server:1. Moved all extraneous files to a secondary harddrive to free up spaceon the primary harddrive. There is 55gb's of free space on the disk.2. Applied SQL Server SP4 service packs3. Defragmented the primary harddrive4. Applied all Windows Server 2003 updatesHere is the prod servers system specs:2x Intel Xeon 2.67GHZTotal Physical Memory 2GB, Available Physical Memory 815MBWindows Server 2003 SE /w SP1Here is the dev serers system specs:2x Intel Xeon 2.80GHz2GB DDR2-SDRAMWindows Server 2003 SE /w SP1I'm not sure what else to do, the query performance is an order ofmagnitude difference and I can't explain it. To me its is a hardware oroperating system related issue.Any Ideas would help me greatly!Thanks,Brian T*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
Hello Everyone,I have a very complex performance issue with our production database.Here's the scenario. We have a production webserver server and adevelopment web server. Both are running SQL Server 2000.I encounted various performance issues with the production server witha particular query. It would take approximately 22 seconds to return100 rows, thats about 0.22 seconds per row. Note: I ran the query insingle user mode. So I tested the query on the Development server bytaking a backup (.dmp) of the database and moving it onto the devserver. I ran the same query and found that it ran in less than asecond.I took a look at the query execution plan and I found that they we'rethe exact same in both cases.Then I took a look at the various index's, and again I found nodifferences in the table indices.If both databases are identical, I'm assumeing that the issue isrelated to some external hardware issue like: disk space, memory etc.Or could it be OS software related issues, like service packs, SQLServer configuations etc.Here's what I've done to rule out some obvious hardware issues on theprod server:1. Moved all extraneous files to a secondary harddrive to free up spaceon the primary harddrive. There is 55gb's of free space on the disk.2. Applied SQL Server SP4 service packs3. Defragmented the primary harddrive4. Applied all Windows Server 2003 updatesHere is the prod servers system specs:2x Intel Xeon 2.67GHZTotal Physical Memory 2GB, Available Physical Memory 815MBWindows Server 2003 SE /w SP1Here is the dev serers system specs:2x Intel Xeon 2.80GHz2GB DDR2-SDRAMWindows Server 2003 SE /w SP1I'm not sure what else to do, the query performance is an order ofmagnitude difference and I can't explain it. To me its is a hardware oroperating systemrelated issue.Any Ideas would help me greatly!Thanks,Brian T
We have the same application installed on a few different environments with similar servers and similar hardward. The only difference is the versions of SQL and the colations. Is SQL 2005 a lot faster that SQL 2000? Could colation type make a big effect on performance? ScAndal
HiI want to insert 1000s of records into SQL Server 2005 Database with some manipulation. So that i put into the For Loop and inserting record.Inside the loop i am opening the connection and closing after use. The sample code is belowfor(int i=0;i<1000;i++){ sqlCmd.CommandText = "ProcName"; sqlCmd.Connection = sqlCon; sqlCmd.Connection.Open(): sqlCmd.ExecuteNonQuery(); sqlCmd.Connection.Close(); } What my Question is.. How is the Performance of this Code..?? Will is take time to get the Connection and Close the Connection in every itration?Or Shall I Open the Connection in Begining of the outside loop and close the connection at end of the Loop? will it increase the Performace?Please clarify me these question.. Thanks in advance.
this line 'select * from [viewUserLatestFee]' executes instantly (in Query Analiser) this line 'select * from [viewUserLatestFee] where orgID = 1' takes up to 30 seconds for 1000 rows (still in Query analiser)
can anyone please help - I seem to have ran out of ideas
I have a feeling people might be curious about the view so here it is:
We used a stored proc to pull totals from a database. Everything was fine until the table grew and started to time out. So we created a temp table to populate with a range of data and then pull the totals from there. Everything was fine until the table grew and started to time out. Any suggestion?
I am newly joined as SQL DBA. I want to check the Physical disk Performance. we have RAID 5 with 5+1 disks. I calculated NO Of IO's Per Disk. But how do we know what is actual limit of IO's per disk.
What's my best bet in getting better performance out of one of my database servers? Currently we have 1 set of Raid5 disks partitioned into 2 drives. This houses everything (system, database, and logs) If that server has 2 slots left for drives I was thinking of putting 2 mirrored drives and getting the logs off the main database space? (Make sense?) This is a vendored application so working with new indexes etc. isn't something I should do wo/ the vendor's interaction. Will what I describe above help?
We have SQL Server running on a dual processor Pentium 500mhz server. Our database is hit by about 300 users. 200 of those users are doing constant searches though a client table of about 250,000 records, which in turn is linked to a history table containing over 5,000,000 records. This is only the tip of the iceberg, we have many triggers, procedures, updates, etc. going in the background. The database has over 500 tables.
Keep in mind, these searches that are taking place can involve all kinds of fields: phone number, company name, fax number, first name, last name, status, wildcard searches, etc. So as you can imagine, the database is being hit with all kinds of funky requests to find records. I will be the first to admit that our developers (vendor) are not the best code writers, and we have a tough time getting them to optimize something they do not even understand themselves.
As I speak, our processor utilization is maxing out between 95 to 100 percent. I've done a lot of performance tuning and all of the problems lie in the searching. We've built, tested, rebuilt, re-tested each and every index. I even used the Profiler to filter what I could. It has improved, but our database is growing at a rate of 10 megs a day (already close to 3 gigs, not that huge). I think I've optimized my indexes as best as I can considering all the fields and possibilities available to users to search for records.
For a database that requires all of these different search criteria, what would be a more optimal server? We are looking to purchase something ASAP. I could really use help from someone in a similar situation. It seems odd, in mind, that a company of 300 people would need to rely on a quad server (four processor capability.).
HI I have 700 to 900 mb of production database , 2 gb of ram , 30 gb hard disk, My production machine is runnng very slow , i have check everything memory, page/sec, catch hit ratin , dbcc dbreindex but still it performance is not up to the mark. If i stop SQL SERVER & restart for few days machine works fine but after that again same thing it work very slow, what could be the reason if any one had any solution please suggest. Thanks Nil
Hi friends, My company has aution web site, it is written in Java and all sql statements generated dynamically. No stored procedures used. If 30 users uses this site it is OK but if around 300 users uses then the site becomes very slow(almost dead) and developers saying that database is the bottle neck. Please help me in this problem how can I check and overcome this problem.
We have recently upgraded to SQL 7.0 on NT 4.0/sp6 box which has got 4 PIII 700 processors, 1GB RAM, and 70GB HDD on RAID 1 and RAID 5. We feel that the application performance is not great as expected in SS7. (The application was running in 6.5 smoothly and performance was good)
Is there any option needs to set to improve performance? Now, SS 7 using all the 4 processors and dynamically allocated memory, etc. Any thoughts greatly appreciated.
