SQL Server 2008 :: Maximum Number Of Sessions Has Been Reached
Jun 29, 2015
We have a big software that run a warehouse distribution center, written in .NET Backhand is a SQL Server 2008 R2 STD database.
Now, it seems there is a problem with the sessions not being properly closed after each call to the DB. Here is the message got form SQL:
DESCRIPTION:A new connection was rejected because the maximum number of connections on session ID 57 has been reached. Close an existing connection on this session and retry.
In the .NET code, connection is made with the following code:
If oConn Is Nothing Then oConn = New SqlConnection
If oConn.State = ConnectionState.Open Then oConn.Close()
With oConn
.ConnectionString = "Server=" & Server & ";Database=" & DB & ";User ID=" & User & ";Password=" & Pass & ";Connection Timeout=" & 5 & ";MultipleActiveResultSets=" & True
.Open()
End With
This code is called once, at the opening of the software
StoredProc are call with the code:
Try
oCmd = New SqlCommand
With oCmd
.Connection = oConn
.CommandType = CommandType.StoredProcedure
[Code] .....
So every Command is closed after execution, yet, they stay active in the SQL Server. Is there something I'm missing here?
I am trying to setup transactional replication between Server A and Server B. There are 265 databases on each server.
I am running SQL Server 2005 on Windows Server 2003. The problem comes in at the 201st database. The message in the SQL Server Agent Error Log is :
Warning,[398] The job (WSSWPG09-EmpirePaint-WSSWPG06-104) has been queued because the maximum number of working threads (400) are already running. This job will be executed as soon as one of the working thread finishes execution.
SQL Server's max worker threads is set to 0. The Distribution, LogReader and T-SQL subsystems have been increased to 200 max_worker_threads.
Is there some other setting (maybe a Windows Registry setting) that can be configured to fix this? Or have I just hit a physical maximum of the processor?
I'll try and keep this brief so in a nutshell:I have large distributed java system running on a Windows 2003 server(4cpu 8Gb memory).Periodically the following exceptions occurs in the servers:java.net.SocketException: No buffer space available (maximumconnections reached?): recv failedI know for a fact we are not using too many TCPIP sockets or runningtoo many socket servers.I have googled this error and found very little to help me.What buffer space is this?What does recv failed mean?(Is it at all relevant that sql server is running on the same box?)Any advice appreciated.Thanks in advance.Dan
We have been running SQL Server 7 for the past 6 months, with no problems at all. All of a sudden, we have received the error message 17050, that the maximum limit for connections has been reached. We cannot now start Enterprise Manager or do anything. We have tried fiddling with licencing in control panel but to no avail. Does anyone have any idea why this has suddenly happened? Any tips would be great!
We are running three web sites in a clustered environmentWLBS. The web servers are connected to a Database Serverrunning MS SQL server enterprise edition licensed as perCPU license. The Windows 2000 Advanced Server Licensingmode on all the servers is per SEAT license.Our customers are accessing our web servers and after sometime getting error 500, Maximum concurrent users havereached.We have been told by our software provider that theconnection problem lies with the ADO components whichcommunicating with the SQL server.We have been turning round and round, without any luck.Your help will be highly appreciated.Thanks and best regardsDaveLearning is a Never Ending process*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
One of our production databases was setup mirroring, log shipping and replication on it, the log file was setup unrestricted growth. This morning one index rebuilding process generated lots of logs, and the log file disk ran out of space, the database was in recovery mode. so we had to disable log shipping, pause mirroring and replication, expand log file disk, restarted SQL instance to fix the issue. Now we want to setup the log file to maximum size 80G, the whole log file disk is 120G.
So if the log file reached 80G next time, we can change the max size to 90G or 100G and it's easier to fix the space issue. My question is, if the database log file reached max size,
1. is the database still available? 2. Will the active session causing the issue be rollback to release space back?
Is there a way to find the max number of sessions that were on a sql server since its last restart? I know how to get how many total connections there were since last restart, and the current number of sessions, but not the max number of sessions that were running since last restart. Also, opinion on the optinum number of allowable sessions, or a good way to figure out the balance?
I created am inventory table with few columns say, Servername, version, patching details, etc
I want a tracking of the table.
Let's say people are asked to modify the base table and I want a complete capture of the details modified and the session of the user ( ) who (system_user) is actually modifying the details.
SQL Server 2000 8.00.760 (SP3)I've been working on a test system and the following UDF worked fine.It runs in the "current" database, and references another database onthe same server called 127-SuperQuote.CREATE FUNCTION fnGetFormattedAddress(@WorkID int)RETURNS varchar(130)ASBEGINDECLARE@Address1 As varchar(50)@ReturnAddress As varchar(130)SELECT@Address1 = [127-SuperQuote].dbo.tblCompany.Address1FROM[Work] INNER JOIN[127-SuperQuote].dbo.tblCompany ON [Work].ClientID =[127-SuperQuote].dbo.tblCompany.CompanyIDWHERE[Work].WorkID = @WorkIDIF @Address1 IS NOT NULLSET @ReturnAddress = @ReturnAddress + @Address1 + CHAR(13)+ CHAR(10)RETURN @ReturnAddressENDSo now the system has gone live and it turns out that the live"SuperQuote" database is on a different server.I've linked the server and changed the function as below, but I get anerror both in QA and when checking Syntax in the UDF builder:The number name 'Zen.SuperQuote.dbo.tblCompany' contains more than themaximum number of prefixes. The maximum is 3.CREATE FUNCTION fnGetFormattedAddress(@WorkID int)RETURNS varchar(130)ASBEGINDECLARE@Address1 As varchar(50)@ReturnAddress As varchar(130)SELECT@Address1 = Zen.SuperQuote.dbo.tblCompany.Address1FROM[Work] INNER JOINZen.SuperQuote.dbo.tblCompany ON [Work].ClientID =Zen.SuperQuote.dbo.tblCompany.CompanyIDWHERE[Work].WorkID = @WorkIDIF @Address1 IS NOT NULLSET @ReturnAddress = @ReturnAddress + @Address1 + CHAR(13)+ CHAR(10)RETURN @ReturnAddressENDHow can I get round this? By the way, I've rather simplified thefunction to ease readability. Also, I haven't posted any DDL because Idon't think that's the problem!ThanksEdward
I have created a local user on Report Server Computer and the user has the administrative rights. When i try to connect Report Server (http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/reportserver) with this user's credantials. (ReportServer directory security is set -only- to Basic Authentication. ). I get the following error.
The number of requests for "XXXServerXXXUser" has exceeded the maximum number allowed for a single user. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SQL Server Reporting Services
Then i try to login using a different user with administrative rights on the machine, i can logon successfully. The system is up for a month but this problem occured today?!? What could be the problem?!?
is there any more efficient way for example to implement the next query?
SELECT s1.article, dealer, s1.price FROM shop s1 JOIN ( SELECT article, MAX(price) AS price FROM shop GROUP BY article) AS s2 ON s1.article = s2.article AND s1.price = s2.price; WHERE dealer = 'dealer sample'
Hello people,I might sound a little bit crazy, but is there any possibility that youcan incorporate 4^15 (1,073,741,824) tables into a SQL Database?I mean, is it possible at all? There might be a question of whereanyone would want so many tables, but i'm a bioinformatics guy and I'mtrying to deal with genomic sequences and was coming up with a newalgorithm, where the only limit is the number of tables I can put intoa Database.So, can you please advise if its possible to put in so many tables intoa SQL database? Or is the Bekerley DB better?
if SQL SERVER 2000 only allow 8060 bytes per row, then how can it store images or CLOB data? Is there a way that would let us change the maximum number of bytes per row? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Hello people, I might sound a little bit crazy, but is there any possibility that you can incorporate 1,073,741,824 tables into a SQL Database?
I mean, is it possible at all? There might be a question of where anyone would want so many tables, but i'm a bioinformatics guy and I'm trying to deal with genomic sequences and was coming up with a new algorithm, where the only limit is the number of tables I can put into a Database.
So, can you please advise if its possible to put in so many tables into a SQL database? Or is the Bekerley DB better?
I am reading SQL Server 2000 Black book (Coriolis publisher) and Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Optimization guide (Jenney Lynne Fields PH publisher).
In the Black book page 56, it says :"..up to a total of 16 instances. In the optimization guide page 144, it says :"There is no theoretical limit to the number of instances of SQL server you can run simultaneously..."
I take error 610 "Maximum number of databases that may be accessed by a transaction is 8. This number has been exceeded by this query" when I execute a SELECT query.
My db contains two table Employee_detail and Student_Detail.Employee_detail has Emp_id and Student_Detail has stud_id.Now my problem is that i want to get one maximum no from these two table.
I need a small SQL server for up to 10 users. If I understand the EULAs and FAQs correctly, there is no limit on the number of users imposed by the SQL Server 2005 Express license. If so, then the number of users is only limited by the OS's license so all I need is SQL Server 2005 Express (free), Windows XP Pro (10 users limit) and no CALs for either Windows or SQL Server.
I am upgrading from Access, where you can only have 10 fields in a primary key or unique index. Is this also the limit in SQL Server? If not, what is the limit?
I am adding a table within my vb.net program using New datatable(tblname) function, then adding 22 columns (col01 to col22) to this table using .columns.add (colname) function without any error.The program however throws an exception when trying to assign a value to column number 14 (col14) saying this column does not belong to table tblname. Assigning a value from col01 to col13 is working fine.Is there a limitation on number of columns can be added to a table using code?
I have a problem with a piece of code, which updates some tables using transaction. This process brings the program to a halt when updating large files.
With smaller files, the process finishes without problems.
I have noticed that, if a comment out the "begin transaction" and respective "commit", the same code executes without problems, even when updating large files.
I suspect that there is a limit on the number of records a transaction can hold before a commit is issued. I am surprised however, that SQL Server halts, without messages or warnings.
Is this a configuration issue? If there is a limit on the number of records a transaction can hold, what is this limit:? Anything I can do to have a warning form SQL Server when a situation like this is reached (or indeed to avoid this situation) ?
My team at work has spent the past week troubleshooting performance issues experienced by users of our asp.net 2.x web application. We've got a probe running on one of the web servers that has identified a frequently occuring error that no one has seen before and I can't find anywhere online. MSSQL error "system.data.oledb.oledbcommand.executenonquery(Maximum number of unique SQL exceeded) Has anyone here ever seen this error before?The web server, application, SQL servers and databases all seem to be configured properly, but users are experiencing latency and this frequently occurring error is a mystery to us.
I have a Sqlserver 6.5 production server used for web based applications Compaq 5500 4 GIG RAM, 4 processor
Sql Memory config on that server is 1048576 (which is 2048 MB) and the run value is 640000 (which is 1250 MB). runvalue for user connections was 500
We have only 90 user connections may increase upto 100 depends on the connections. We don't have any overload on that server.
Error: I was seeing "unable to connect maximum no. of 500 configured user connections are already connected" in the error log.
Action Taken:
I increased the user connections to 600 and rebooted the server. Immediately the same error I can see in the error log. But we have only 20 user connections at that time. I can able to connect.
In MS Sql Server 2000, if you run a stored procedure that query's morethan 8 databases, you get this error gets raised:Maximum number of databases used for each query has been exceeded. Themaximum allowed is 8.In 2005, does this maximum number still exist? if so, is it still 8, orhas the number been increased?Thanks,Mike
