I have just upgraded a test server from sql server 2008 sp3 to sql server 2014 inplace upgrade. The compatability level of master database has not upgraded. It was showing 90 and the rest of system databases got updated to 120. Is it fine to update the compatibility level of master database ? Any precautions need to taken??
View 1 RepliesI have system database and user database file are present in G,H and W drive.The process is going to be - copy data from G to S, H to T, W to U. Rename G to X, H to Y and W to Z. Rename S to G, T to H and U to W. Reboot the servers. The original G, H and W will then be X, Y and Z. The old S will be the new G, old T will be H and old U will be W. My question is that after doing this whether my SQL server will start or not
View 8 Replies View RelatedHow can you install the System Databases to a drive other than the default?
I want the Data Files to be installed on D:MSSQLData and the log files to be stored on D:MSSQLLog.
For better, quicker answers on T-SQL questions, click on the following...
[URL]
For better answers on performance questions, click on the following...
[URL]
I have a problem where I have a software application that
needed to be updated to a newer version. In order for the
new version to work I needed to upgrade my SQL Server 7
database to SQL Server 2000. The upgrade went fine for
SQL Server 2000 and also with the application. The only
problem now is that the compatibility level for the
databases stays at 70. Even when I change the
compatibility level to 80 it will automatically go back to
80. What is wrong? Please help.
Dear All,
what are the advantages of changing compatibility level from 80 to 90? are there any disadvantages doing this on production machine? will it take any downtime?
i've searched the google but i didnt get the correct info.
Arnav
Even you learn 1%, Learn it with 100% confidence.
I noticed that a database I am working with has a compatibility level set to SQL Server 2000. The instance is actually SQL Server 2005. I'm guessing that it was created like this because the database originally existed on 2000 and was created via backup/restore.
I'm trying to figure out if this needs to be changed and if so how to go about making the change in a non-disruptive manner. What features of 2005 are turned off as a reult of having a 2000 compatibility level?
I need to encrypt some column level data in multiple tables in SQL server 2014. I've never tried encryption in SQL server 2014. How can I achieve it?
View 4 Replies View RelatedHow you are handling the replication of the many instance-level objects/items (logins, linked servers, server roles, database mail, operators, on and on) to the replicas in an AlwaysOn topology.
I'm especially curious about DBAs managing larger SQL Server environments. In my current environment, we have approximately 80 production SQL instances containing about 650 databases that require high availability and disaster recovery.
We use mirroring today and have a solid, home-grown solution for replicating the instance-level items from production to disaster recovery. AlwaysOn changes things a bit since we'll have multiple replicas and of course the database could be active on any one of those at any time. So my concern is about instance-level items being created in one instance but never deployed to the other instances participating in the AG group.
I've got an old version of SQL Server 2008 R2 Developer Edition on an old PC which is failing. I've got a new PC and have put SQL Server 2014 Developer Edition onto it. Now before the old machine completely dies, I've gotten into SSMS on the old machine and did a backup of the databases I want to save. I've moved the .BAK files to where I could get to them from SSMS on the new machine. I've gotten into SSMS and tried to do a restore the database to my new machine. However I'm getting an error that does not make any sense to me.
The database I'm I've backed up is named JobSearch. When I backed it up, that was the only database I had selected. Like I said I copied the .BAK to the new machine. Got into SSMS, told it that I wanted to restore the JobSearch database, telling it where I wanted to put it, and it then immediately fails with a:
"Restore of database 'JobSearch' failed. System.Data.SqlClient.SqlError: Logical file 'VideoLibrary_Data' is not part of the database 'JobSearch'. Use RESTORE FILEISTONLY to list the logical file names."
Well of course VideoLibrary isn't "the logical file". But neither did I select VideoLibrary (which is a database I also want to move, but I'm doing one at a time). So what in heck is going on here? Why is it complaining about a database I haven't even selected to back up? Why, when I check everything on the old machine, it's backing up JobSearch, but on the new machine it sees VideoLibrary?
I use following trigger to stop user "smith" if he try to connect through SSMS to My Server:
create TRIGGER [trg_connection_MyServer]
ON ALL SERVER WITH EXECUTE AS 'Smith'
FOR LOGON
AS
BEGIN
IF ORIGINAL_LOGIN()= 'Smith'
begin
if exists (SELECT 1 FROM sys.dm_exec_sessions
WHERE (program_name like 'Microsoft SQL Server%' and original_login_name = 'Smith') )
ROLLBACK;
end
I want to log this information or send emal incase, this user try to connect through SSMS, so that I can catch it. How can I do this, if I use insert command it rollsback everything and I can't do any activity.
I have been tasked with auditing all DDL and selected DML events on a production server and logging them to a table. My solution is to use CDC for the DML and a Server-Level trigger for the DDL. Because there should never but much DDL activity on the server (except when performing update tasks) I don't need to worry about the trigger consuming too many resources.
My question is this: Is there any single specification such as DDL_LEVEL_EVENTS that can capture all DDL activity or do I need to specify each and every DDL action in the trigger?
I need backup script to take all the database backups and we have the maintenance plan but our database character size is 98 and when we are taking the backups through maintenance plan while storing the backup history information it is adding the date and timezone information and exceeding the length to 128 so it is not writing the information on MSDB.
So we want to take the backup using the script and it has to create sub folder for each database. Also if any of the database fails it should continue with others.
If you were to do a fresh install it would set permissions on the disk so everything just works.
Now when changing the service account (e.g. to a domain user) use the configuration manager, does it do the same magic (possibly sans if the database data/log files are on another disk)? Or do you need to trawl through the dozens of folders and assign rights manually?
We installed SP1 for SQL Server 2014 this past weekend and got this error message in the logs. I found that if you set the db to read-write, it updates the system objects, even after SP1 has completed. Then you can set it back to read-only. I'm just posting this so other people can find it on the internet, as I wasn't able to find it specifically.
Error Log Entry:System objects could not be updated in database 'x' because it is read-only.
Problem: After installing SP1 for SQL Server 2014 you will find this message in the error logs saying read-only databases could not be updated.
Solution: Simply set the db to read-write and the system objects will get updated, long after SP1 was installed.
ALTER DATABASE [x] SET READ_WRITE WITH NO_WAIT
Then set it back to read-only:
ALTER DATABASE [x] SET READ_ONLY WITH NO_WAIT
You should then see these log entries:
System objects could not be updated in database 'x' because it is read-only.
Setting database option READ_WRITE to ON for database 'x'.
Starting up database 'x'.
CHECKDB for database 'x' finished without errors on 2015-07-25 01:02:28.143 (local time). This is an informational message only; no user action is required.
Synchronize Database 'x' (129) with Resource Database.
Setting database option READ_ONLY to ON for database 'x'.
Starting up database 'x'.
CHECKDB for database 'x' finished without errors on 2015-07-25 01:02:29.888 (local time). This is an informational message only; no user action is required.
Looking for query that lists all databases, in an instance, that are not accessed before a given date (e.g., not accessed before December 31, 2014)?
View 6 Replies View RelatedWe have multiple databases on a single instance in an OLTP environment. I have my data files on a separate SAN LUN from my transaction log files (and a few NDFs split out onto additional LUNs). I was wondering if there is a performance benefit to putting each LDF file on its own LUN? Or at least my few busiest LDFs?
We are currently on 2012, but I'm having to put together specs for a 2014 installation and need to answer this question without having an environment in which I can benchmark different setups. I just want to hear whether or not others have done this (why or why not?).
I have a requirement to delete all the orphans users for the databases. The issue I am having is with when database principal owns a schema in the DB, User cannt be dropped.
How do I transfer it to DBO in case I am looping multiple databases. This is what I got so far .
declare @is_read_only nvarchar (200)
Select @is_read_only = is_read_only from master.sys.databases where name='test' /* This should be a parameter value */
IF @IS_READ_ONLY= 0
BEGIN
Declare @SQL as varchar (200)
[Code] .....
I have a 2 node cluster having 4 cores each wherein having 3 instances of SQL 2008 R2 enterprise comprising of 60 databases, 20 on each instance. I need to setup mirroring for each of the databases to a secondary server having 4 cores and 3 instances. What i understand is that in this case the mirror server will be providing max of 512 worker threads and the 60 mirror databases would consume 240 threads.what all needs to be checked for looking into the feasabilty of going ahead with a async mirror setup as mentioned above.
View 0 Replies View RelatedI have been creating databases in SQL 2008 with a primary filegroup for the system objects and a secondary, marked Default, for the data.
We are preparing a migration to SQL 2014, and the administrator is complaining he won't adopt this structure on the new servers because 'there is no benefit' and 'a backup cannot be restored (!?)'.
In Windows Server 2012. How do I do a System Restore to a previous restore point?I need to install the 64 bit and 32 bit Oracle Client Install for connections in SSIS and to create Oracle Linked Servers.
If you make a mistake it is not fun removing it. Sometimes it corrupts the machine and it is difficult to uninstall since there is not an Oracle Universal installer for Oracle 11g.If you install the 32 bit before the 64 you mess up the machine.how to create a restore point.
Ok guys, I am trying to install Sql server 2005 on Vista but I am still stuck with this warning message in the System Configuration Check during Sql server 2K5 installation :
SQL Server Edition Operating System Compatibility (Warning)
Messages
* SQL Server Edition Operating System Compatibility
* Some components of this edition of SQL Server are not supported on this operating system. For details, see 'Hardware and Software Requirements for Installing SQL Server 2005' in Microsoft SQL Server Books Online.
Now, I know I need to install SP2 but how the hell I am going to install SP2 if Sql server 2005 doesn't install any of the components including Sql server Database services, Analysus services, Reporting integration services( only the workstation component is available for installation)?
Any work around for this issue?
P.S.: I didn't install VS.NET 2005 yet, can this solve the problem?
Thanks.
Hallo Everyone,
I have an SQL database that I need to detach from an SQL2005 server and reattach to an SQL 2000 database. I tried to set the Compatibility level from SQL Server 2005 (90) to SQL Server 2000 (80). This did not work
Any ideas?
Nigel...
I'm running SQL Server 7.0. I have a DB running with 6.5 compatibility mode.
Do INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE queries use row level locking in this DB ?
(I know if I set the db compatibility mode to 7.0 row level locking will be enabled)
Thanks in advance for your help.
I want to set up a database role so that users can use sp_readerrorlog through SSMS. It does a check on membership in the securityadmin role.
I have tested it and can see you can grant execute on xp_readerrorlog but the SSMS GUI uses sp_readerrorlog.
I thought I could create a user/certificate and add the signature to sp_readerrorlog but it's not permitted (likely because it's not a normal database object).
So the other solution is to add the users to the securityadmin role but then explicitly deny alter any login (best done with a custom server role in 2012+ but otherwise just manually in 2008). I tested this out and it works, I'm not able to alter any logins or increase my own permissions, I also did a check of what's reported from fn_my_permissions(null, null) and it shows minimal permissions like I'd expect.
Hello All,
I am in the process of upgrading my current database in SQL Server 2000 to SQL Server 2005. I have finished my analysis using the upgrade advisor and have found a lot of SPs having upgrade related issues. From what I estimate I think it will take around 3-4 weeks to resolve all of those issues. I wanted a quicker way to upgrade my database since we have very little time for the final release. The main reason for upgrade to 2005 was use of new features like Database Mirroring and/or peer to peer replication alongwith the Partitioning features and the new T-SQL enhancements.
The question I wanted to ask was does the compatibility level 80 of SQL Server 2005 supports these new features.
From what I have read on the KB article at http://support.microsoft.com/kb/822400 is that mirroring is supported in any compatibility level, but there is no specific mention on the peer to peer thing.
Also when I personally tried using the New Partitioning Features of 2005 on the database having compatibility 80, it worked fine. Also other features like SQLCLR and TRY...CATCH works fine.
One thing I observed was that new T-SQL statements like PIVOT/UNPIVOT is not supported
It will be nice if someone can give out the entire list of features that will be supported in the compatibility Level 80 and also the list of the ones that are not supported.
Thanks in Advance,
Mitesh
I installed SQL Server 2005 Developer Edition. When i create a new database (using the "New Database" dialog) i cannot set the new database's compatibility level to "SQL Server 2005(90)" because this option is not in the "dropdown list". the only items shown are: "SQL Server 7.0(70)" and "SQL Server 2000(80)". I set the owner to "sa". How do i get "SQL Server 2005(90)" in my "compatibility level" drop down list? Is this an installation option that i missed? Thanks in advance for any assistance!
-chris
Hello everybody,
I have question ablout the installing SQL Server 2005 in the windows XP profesional, I always install sql server on my machine with the Windows XP professional edition as usual without any problem but now
I have a strange problem, first on the System configuration stepeverything is OK except €œSQL Server Edition Operating System Compatibility (Warning) €œ ,with this message :
- SQL Server Edition Operating System Compatibility (Warning)
Messages
·SQL Server Edition Operating System Compatibility
·Some components of this edition of SQL Server are not supported on this operating system. For details, see 'Hardware and Software Requirements for Installing SQL Server 2005' in Microsoft SQL Server Books Online.
Meanwhile the main problem is in the €œ Component to install €? window as I don€™t see these serises of component checkbox enable! Except the €œWorlstation component, books online and development tool €œ,
sql server database services -->disable
anlysis services -->disable
reporting services -->disable
notification services -->disable
integration services -->disable
Worlstation component, books online and development tool -->enable
And after that I make sure about the serious problem and then I decide to continuing installation with clicking on the enable check box and then I have an instance of SQL Server on my machine but it isn€™t compelete .
I tried to solving my problem with unistalling the SQL Server and reinstalling the this software again but this problem still exist, and then I decide to change my window and reinstalling this again , I do that but
It is not work out!!
Therfor if it possible for you please help me to solving my problem, thank you very much
Hi Gurus,
I would like to know if I put the Compatibility Level in a SQL Server 2005 installation to 70 I can make afirmation that I have a full SQL Server 7.0. If the answer is "Yes" where I can find a documentation or a FAQ that explained this topic.
Has anyone changed compatibility level from 80 to 90? Did you have any problems?
View 8 Replies View RelatedI restored the database from SQL server 2000 to 2005.The database was restored with 80 compatibility.Can i change it to 90 and what are the effects? Coz my applications are pulling data from SQL server 2000. Does 80 work for database mirroring?
View 5 Replies View RelatedHi there
We found interesting issue which is basically the app is being tested ok on SQL2005 by software vendor. Then we tested in our environment and we found it's not truly true. There are some compatibility issue on SQL syntax. Anyway ... the plan set the compatibility level back to 80 instead 90. Cause this thing for sure is working.
Now my question is do you know any other impacts that you know of if we are doing this setting (running SQLServer 2005 but the database set as 80)? I know that some inbuilt reporting only run 90 level but I can get around this. Performance or something? Is there any thing that I should to know?
Thanks
Having moved over to SQL 2k5, from SQL 7.0 we have now realised that the database's need to be set to comp level 9.0 before they are found in the maintence plan wizard, we currently still access the database using an Access 2000 front end, by changing the comp level will this cause us issues writing data, I'm sure it won't but want to make sure, I'm sure that the comp level just sets what options are available to use.
Thanks
We have recently migrated quite a databases around 20 from SQL 2000 and 2005 to SQL server 2008R2.
I am using Ola's script for index maintenance for those with compatibility level above 80 as i heard it supports that way.
Hence separated in 2 way job where for those with compatibility level 80, we are running job with below query on each database with 80 as compared
USE ABC
GO
EXEC sp_MSforeachtable @command1="print '?' DBCC DBREINDEX ('?', ' ', 80)"
GO
EXEC sp_updatestats
GO
I am not sure if this is the only way in for those databases, because we are seeing the database getting because of that somewhere using above query.( seems log file filling very rapidly).
But above is not the case with those databases , with compatibility 90 and above.