What Are The Differences Between CD1 And CD2 Of The SQL Server 2005 Enterprise? And Can I Just Attach The Sql2000 MDF File Into Sql2005?
Feb 4, 2006
Hi
I have new bought the SQL server 2005 enterprise, but it have 2 CDs, so what are the differences between CD1 and CD2? and so which one should i install first? or is it necessary to install both two or just need to install one of them?
And about my original sql 2000 database, can i just attach it's MDF file into the sql 2005 engine, or which import wizard can load the sql 2000 MDF into sql 2005? or do i need to keep the sql 2000 engine before do this?
I came across a problem when migrating from SQL2000 to SQL2005.
Table1 - large table with multiple columns including columns (X21 varchar(50), Start datetime, Complete datetime)
View1 - Only returns integer values into the dwpId column
SELECT X21 AS dwpId, Start AS startDate, Complete AS endDate FROM Table1 WHERE (X21 IS NOT NULL) AND (X21 LIKE '[0-9]%') AND (ProjectID NOT LIKE '%_WI')
View2
SELECT cast(dwpId as int) as dwpId, startDate, endDate FROM View1
In SQL2005, when selecting values from View2 an error is returned indicating that the statement failed when converting a varchar value to a data type int. In SQL2000, this same statement would return the appropriate rows from the view.
Hi , We are using the a 4 CPU SQL Server 2000 Enterprise edition for our application , We want to migrate to SQL2005 with the compatibility level downgraded to SQL2000. If we go for the SQL2005 Standard edition is there any problem? We are not using the Failover clustering in our server.
Hello all,Can anyone tell me or suggest links about differences of SQL Server2000 Developer Edition & SQL Server 2005 Developer Edition?Specifically, I need to know about the licencing policy.So far I know that SQL Server 2005 Developer Edition is licenced fordevelpoment (what else), test and demo use. Each licence entitles onlyone developer to use the software on as many systems as necessary andadditional developers can use the software by parchasing additionallicences (some sentences borrowed by microsoft's presentation of theproduct).Does 2000 Edition has more functions than the latest one? In otherwords, what the advantages and disadvantages of these 2 Versions?Thanks in advance?PS: Shoul I post this here?
I have a medical records system, SoapWare v4.90, that uses MSDE (SQL2000) databases. Due to the 2gb limitation, I am trying to migrate over to SQL 2005 (Standard or Express) which I have heard works fine. The SoapWare has a datamanager that allows me to log in to the MSDE instance, detach the SoapWare databases from msde (as well as do backups, etc) which I can confirm are detached.
Then I log back into a SQL2005 database instance using the datamanager and try to attach the database. This is what their pictured instructions demonstrate. However, I get the following error:
Database 'sw_charts' cannot be upgraded because it is read-only or has read-only files. Make the database or files writeable, and rerun recovery.
Of course, some of the entries will be read only, since doctors have to sign off the charts and are not allowed to subsequently change them. But I should still be able to switch over to sql 2005?!?!?!?
Or... is there a way to attach the databases to SQLExpress manually?
I am very inexperienced with the Administration side of SQL Server 2005.
I have been given a .bak file which I need to restore onto my SQL Server. The database .bak file was created on another PC and I cannot seem to restore/recover the .bak file onto my SQL Server.
Linked server from SQL2005 to SQL2000 Hi I use the following SQL statements to create a link server. RemoteServerName is an SQL2000 and I am executing this in another machine which is SQL2005.
Though the link server is created successfully, I am not able to se the tables under it so could not query anything.
Hi, I'd like to host a small website created using VS2005 EE with a company that offers just SQL2000 DB support. My question, can i use the DB created by VS site manager as a DB to the site, if not, is there any alternatives. Thanks.
I have the follwoing scenario, where the query returns an error, when we tried to upgrade oru production SQL2000 enviroment to SQL2005.
SQL2000 Env: Microsoft SQL Server Developer Edition Microsoft Windows NT 5.2 (3790) 8.00.2175 SP4
SQL2005 Env: Microsoft SQL Server Developer Edition Microsoft Windows NT 5.2 (3790) 9.00.3054.00
Notice the removal of the two RTRIMs.
Any help welcome Gertus
Current Connection was on the SQL2005 machine: Remote Link Server SQL2000 SP4
Working: SELECT * FROM Entity -- on SQL2005 WHERE (EntityRef) + Source NOT IN (SELECT (ENTITYID) + 'EU' FROM MRIEU.MRIOB.dbo.ENTITY) --this is on sql2000 AND Source = 'EU'
Not-working:
SELECT * FROM Entity-- on SQL2005 WHERE RTRIM(EntityRef) + Source NOT IN (SELECT RTRIM(ENTITYID) + 'EU' FROM MRIEU.MRIOB.dbo.ENTITY) AND Source = 'EU'
Error :: >>
OLE DB provider "SQLNCLI" for linked server "MRIEU" returned message "Cannot create new connection because in manual or distributed transaction mode.".
Msg 7320, Level 16, State 2, Line 1
Cannot execute the query "SELECT TOP 1 1 FROM "MRIOB"."dbo"."ENTITY" "Tbl1005"" against OLE DB provider "SQLNCLI" for linked server "MRIEU".
I just upgraded my SQL 2000 server to SQL2005. I forked out all that money, and now it takes 4~5 seconds for a webpage to load. You can see for yourself. It's pathetic. When I ran SQL2000, i was getting instant results on any webpage. I can't find any tool to optimize the tables or databases. And when I used caused SQL Server to use 100% cpu and 500+MB of ram. I can't have this.Can anyone give me some tips as to why SQL 2005 is so slow?
Are there any tips/techniques/issues when doing a begin tran and commit between a sql 2000 server/db and a sql 2005 server/db. Should you still use "set xact_abort on"? This will be a recordset of about 1-2000
If I restore a SQL 2000 DB into 2005 it upgrades it for me. When restoring a DB to a new server/instance of SQL, in SQL 2000 I had to carry out the sp_changedbowner procedure after the restore was complete. Is the equivalent procedure when restoring a SQL 2000 DB to 2005 to go to the schema for the restored database, find the schema with the name of the SQL 2000 db owner and change the schema owner? OR alternatively run the following query where mark is the db owner in 2000 and lladmin in the new user in 2005 ;
I am runing Windows 2003 which has both SQL2000 and SQL2005.
The following works in 2000 but not 20005
Code Snippet DECLARE @sql nvarchar(4000) set @sql = 'sp_addlinkedserver @server = N''dbAccessPO'', @provider = N''Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0'', @srvproduct = N''OLE DB Provider for Jet'', @datasrc = N''C:Temppopts.mdb''' exec sp_executesql @sql set @sql = 'sp_addlinkedsrvlogin ''dbAccessPO'', FALSE, ''sa'', ''Admin'', NULL' exec sp_executesql @sql
Running this:
Code Snippetselect * from dbAccessPO...MyTable
Produces this error:
Code Snippet OLE DB provider "Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0" for linked server "dbAccessPO" returned message "Unspecified error". Msg 7303, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 Cannot initialize the data source object of OLE DB provider "Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0" for linked server "dbAccessPO".
OK, I'm stumped and could do with some help. I have a laptop running Vista (64bit) with the SQL 2005 client tools. At home, I have SQL Server 2000 running on Windows Server 2003. I cannot get the SQL 2005 to talk to the SQL Server 2000. At work, we have SQL 2000 running on NT 5.0 and it connects fine. I also have a second laptop with SQL 2000 client tools running on XP SP2 which conects fine to the SQL 2000 instance on the 2003 box.
The vista laptop talks to the 2003 server, so it's not simpy that there is no connection. Any ideas why I keep getting an error stating that the Server might not be accepting remote connections every time I try to connect the Vista machine to the SQL 2000 server? I can't connect either from the SQL management tool, nor via ODBC.
i have sql2000 & sql2005 on the same machine. I am unable to register my localhost in sql2000, get an access denied error. How can I make my localhost use sql2000 database?
I have been given the "Performance and Scalability Guide" for Forefront Client Security by one of our representatives from Microsoft. The document is listed as published in July 2007, so I apparently can not supply a link. The document makes a couple of hard to swallow claims, though. One of these is this:
The sizing differences between SQL Server Standard Edition and SQL Server Enterprise edition are due to the differences in the index sizes between the two editions. I have to say I do not buy this. Can anyone disillusion me, or give me a link to anything that even implies this? I have not found anything to prove or disprove this, as yet.
Another oddity in this document is that FCS will not support 64 bit SQL Server, but encourages the use of AWE and /3GB. I can not believe there are functionality differences between the two, unless their database performance is negatively impacted by the 64 bit architecture (naturally the document is silent on why they do not support 64 bit).
Anyway, the questions are does the quote above actually hold any water? And would 64 bit SQL server cause functionality problems, other than performance problems?
hello all.I have a database file in sqlserver 2005 mode, i set it's compatiblity to sqlserver 2000 (80) but i cant attach it in sqlserver 2000.My host only support sqlserver 2000!I need any help to convert or attach it!Thank all!
I'm trying to find what are the main differences between SQL Server 2005 64-bits and 32-bits. So far, I've found some articles about TPC-C performance but I would like to know some response time or execution time of a batch or SSIS packages.
Any information about this 2 versions is appreciated.
When adding an SSIS step to a SQL Server Agent job, when selecting the location of a config file, the dialog lets you select from the database server you're working with. If selecting the location of the package itself (when the source is File System), the dialog lets you select from the machine where Management Studio is sitting instead of from the database server. Is that intentional? And if so, why? Should I just use a fully qualified file name for the package location rather than one using a drive letter?
I have two SQL servers setup; A - SQL 2005, and B - SQL 2000.
I would like to create an account on Server A which has access to the results from one view via a linked server on Server B. I don't want the user on Server A to be able to access any databases, tables or even columns on Server B with the exception of those contained within this view.
Is this possible, and how would I go about doing it? (Permission-wise)
I have just loaded SQL2005(server only)on my production box. This box also is running SQL2000. When I install the SQL2005 SP2 it says that if services are locked they will cause a reboot. I stop all the SQL 2005 services but it also want to stop SQL2000 Server for "backward compatiblilty". I thought installing a separate instance of SQL2005 would not have any effect on my SQL2000 instance. Thanks for your help R/P
I have an odd problem with sql 2005. I'm a long time sql 2000 user trying to migrate to 2005. My company uses CSVs to import data from our clients db into our SQL db. In 2000 I just create a txt source and pick whichever CSV and transform to a temp sql table. This has always worked just fine with no problems.
So we have a new server with sql 2005 installed. I go through the "migrate dts 2000" wizard and pull in all my DTSs from sql 2000. The first thing I see that needs to be fixed is "connection 1" which is my CSV connection manager along with the flat file source.
I went through both the connection and the flat file source and tried to copy exactly what I do in sql 2000. When I preview the data or even execute this package I get bad data.
Here is what my CSV looks like: "ACCT ","ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION ","ACCT TYPE","SCH NO","SC" "9999Z","Balance By Source Offset",9 "87B","UTILITIES(NOT PHONE)U-C",7 72,"ADM-LEGAL/AUDIT/COLL EXP",7 315,"SALES TAX - VEHICLES LOCAL 1",3 "90A","INTEREST(NON FPLAN/MORT)/N-C",7 73,"MEALS & ENTERTAINMENT-ALL",7 "210A","REBATES RECEIVABLE",2,17,4 "5A@","# OF EXT WARR SALES-UC",10 "51N","N/C-VEHICLE INV MAINTENANCE",7 "87D","UTILITIES(NOT PHONE)SVC",7 "90B","INTEREST(NON FPLAN/MORT)U-C",7 317,"ACCRUED OTHER",3,75,4
This is what it looks like when I preview it inside the flat file connection manager: ACCT ACCT DESC ACCT TYPE SCH NO SCTYPE 9999z blance by source... 9– – "87B" UTILITIES(NO... 7
So it is basically putting two rows of csv data into one row of SQL data. Now I realize my CSV isn't in the correct format because it doesn't have the extra commas at the end of a row IF the columns are null. It seems that 2005 doesn't recognize the carriage return/line feed. It puts the actual ascii characters in the preview. Once I execute the package it changes the ascii characters into blank spaces. My big issue is, why did this work just fine in 2000 but I can't get clean data in 2005? I'm completely clueless now, I have no idea where to go with this. Its impossible to change the output of the CSVs I get. There is literally no other options. I kinda get what I get with them. Why is this happening?
Firslty, my aplogies if this is documented elsewhere - I am a new user to SQL Team and not yet found everything! I hope someone here can help me...
In brief, I am making the foolish mistake of embarking on my third and final year of an MS(c) degree in forensic computing. For my final year project I am intending to study and document (for forensic computing purposes) the forensic capture and investigation of data from a MS SQL Server database.
However, my experience is mostly from MySQL! In other words, I know very little about the internal structure of MS SQL Server 2000 or 2005.
Which leads me to my question....
Can anyone point me in the direction of a technical pagedocumentpdf (whatever) that details what the core fundamental differences are between 2000 and 2005. I'm not talking about an MS publicity paper - no, I need a non-bias technical guide which states the differences as fact.
If the differences in 2005 are mostly just cosemtic (the GUI etc) then I'll study 2000 because lots is already known and documented about it it seems. However, if it's much more than that and the differences are specific to what I'm studying (the forensic capture) then I'll probably have to go with 2005 because that's what we will be encountering more of in the next few years and the differences will effect the investigator.
Your time and responses much appreciated.
Regards
Ted
(BTW - Having looked at the description of 'Inside Microsoft SQL Server 2000', it seems like it might be a good book for my project (if I do 2000). Would you guys agree?)
Hi guyz, I have basic knowledge of Sql Server 2005 and now i wanna move ahead in Oracle 9i ! So, i have 2 questions here -
a)Whats the Difference between Sql Server 2005 and Oracle 9 i ?
Note: Please keep the discussion general so that student like me can understand. I have never seen Oracle but the industry requirements suggest that Oracle is way better than than SQL Server 2005. But thats what i think
b)I am Running Windows XP SP 2 and i would like to practise Oracle 9i. So, Where i can download it for free ? I know i have checked there website but they don't mention the difference between each version. Oracle does't market their products as well as Microsoft.
Please , I am Student .. so i request you to make the discussion general . Thank you for your time.
