I have an Access front end to a MS SQL database. I use ODBC to connect the two and have linked the tables into access correctly.
I am having a problem with Write Conflicts. Access is showing an error box every time I try to change records that have links to them from other tables. I am not trying to change keys or any index fields. If I go to the SQL Enterprise manager I can change the records every time with no problems.
Anyone out there got any idea as to what is happening? I have been trying to solve this for over a month now and am completely stuck.
I have a database thats got sql as the engine and access 2000 for the client side. and every time I edit a record this "Write Conflict" comes up. I dont know why its doing that but Idont want that happening whent the database goes live and my users start editing records. what do I, apparently its a Replication Conflict
I have a database that has been working in MS Access 97 for a couple of years. I just moved the tables up to our SQL Server (7.0) and now I get "Write Conflict" errors when I try to update certain records. The table has a unique primary key and I have upgraded my MDAC to 2.50. Nothing seems to help. The records that get the Write Conflict tend to be ones that are the newer ones in the database. Not all records have this problem. I can update the records by going to Enterprise Manager and typing data directly in the tables. The detail on the error message says "This record has been changed by another user since you started editing it." I am the only one using the database. Any ideas?
in merge replication using sql server 2005 and sql server compact, what happens when rows or columns cannot be inserted/updated/deleted because of some error other than a conflict? Are they handled differently tan change conflicts?
executing the first script listed below resulted in the error message (translation):
Message 7890, Level 16, Status 1, Line 1 Error when registrating Endpoint. Potential port conflict ...
use AdventureWorks; go CREATE ENDPOINT SQLEP_AWPersons STATE = STARTED AS HTTP ( PATH = '/AWpersons', AUTHENTICATION = (INTEGRATED), PORTS = (CLEAR), SITE = '*' ) FOR SOAP ( WEBMETHOD 'PersonInfo' (NAME='AdventureWorks.dbo.uspGetPersonInfo'), BATCHES = DISABLED, WSDL = DEFAULT, DATABASE = 'AdventureWorks', NAMESPACE = 'http://Adventure-Works/Persons' )
I changed the port in the script to 8084:
PORTS = (8084),
Error Message 102: Wrong Syntac near ')'.
I changed the port in the script to '8084':
Error Message 7888: The stated IPv6-Address is not supported. The server is potentially not configured for the IPv6 Connectivity or the address is not formated in an known IPv6-Format.
I recently updated the datatype of a sproc parameter from bit to tinyint. When I executed the sproc with the updated parameters the sproc appeared to succeed and returned "1 row(s) affected" in the console. However, the update triggered by the sproc did not actually work.
The table column was a bit which only allows 0 or 1 and the sproc was passing a value of 2 so the table was rejecting this value. However, the sproc did not return an error and appeared to return success. So is there a way to configure the database or sproc to return an error message when this type of error occurs?
I have a parent package that calls child packages inside a For Each container. When I debug/run the parent package (from VS), I get the following error message: Warning: The Execution method succeeded, but the number of errors raised (3) reached the maximum allowed (1); resulting in failure. This occurs when the number of errors reaches the number specified in MaximumErrorCount. Change the MaximumErrorCount or fix the errors.
It appears to be failing while executing the child package. However, the logs (via the "progress" tab) for both the parent package and the child package show no errors other than the one listed above (and that shows in the parent package log). The child package appears to validate completely without error (all components are green and no error messages in the log). I turned on SSIS logging to a text file and see nothing in there either.
If I bump up the MaximumErrorCount in the parent package and in the Execute Package Task that calls the child package to 4 (to go one above the error count indicated in the message above), the whole thing executes sucessfully. I don't want to leave the Max Error Count set like this. Is there something I am missing? For example are there errors that do not get logged by default? I get some warnings, do a certain number of warnings equal an error?
Starwin writes "when i execute DBCC CHECKDB, DBCC CHECKCATALOG I reveived the following error. how to solve it?
Server: Msg 8909, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 Table error: Object ID -2093955965, index ID 711, page ID (3:2530). The PageId in the page header = (34443:343146507). . . . . . . . .
CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 1 consistency errors in table '(Object ID -1635188736)' (object ID -1635188736). CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 1 consistency errors in table '(Object ID -1600811521)' (object ID -1600811521).
. . . . . . . .
Server: Msg 8909, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 Table error: Object ID -8748568, index ID 50307, page ID (3:2497). The PageId in the page header = (26707:762626875). Server: Msg 8909, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 Table error: Object ID -7615284, index ID 35836, page ID (3:2534). The PageId in the page heade"
Does anybody know if there are any conflicts using an XP computer as server and running SQL 7.0 on it?
I have a laptop using Windows XP, that I also have installed SQL 7.0 on (desktop version). I use it both as a client and as a server. As a client I am connecting to the NT server and it is working perfectly. When I try to run my SQL developed software against the local server though, I get a message saying "-2147217900 - Duplicate record or Record is in use. The request for procedure "TABLE NAME" failed because "TABLE NAME" is a table object"
why do i get collation conflict when i used temp table ??Cannot resolve the collation conflict between "Latin1_General_CI_AI" and "SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS" in the equal to operation.i solved it by using COLLATE Latin1_General_CI_AS (the column name)will i have collation conflicts again when i put my web app on a web hosting company??
I have 2 tables Users and DVDTestResults these tables have a relation over UserID Users.UserID DVDTestResults.UserName
both char
But when I try to insert in DVDTestResults I am having an error:
INSERT statement conflicted with COLUMN FOREIGN KEY constraint 'FK_DVDTestResults_Users'. The conflict occurred in database 'Test', table 'Users', column 'UserID'. The statement has been terminated.
INSERT statement conflicted with TABLE FOREIGN KEY constraint 'FK_ChecklistCases_ChecklistFGroups'. The conflict occurred in database 'Test', table 'ChecklistFGroups'. The statement has been terminated.
but it seems to be no error can you help me please I can send you the related part of database
I am doing this in SQL Query analyzer:select dbo.GetTimedifference(CAST('5:30 PM' AS DATETIME),CAST('12:00 PM' AS DATETIME))it will give me (- 05:30) which is correct if i am talking about 12:00 PM midnight, what if I ment 12:00 PM in the noon, I mean, 11:00 AM, then 12:00 PM, it should give me, (5:30)since 5:30 Pm is 5:30 hours pass 12:00 PM noon, how can I solve that ?thanks a lot.
I'm using merge replication between 10 SQL server 7.0 SP2 machines. One central server is the publisher and 9 subscribers. I’ve setup an alert to get a message in case of conflicts. I defined it to trigger everytime the performance counter conflicts/sec rises above 0.
After some experimenting this seems now to work reliable, but there is still one point which bothers me. All conflicts are kept in the conflict history and everytime I get a message through the alert the number of copnflicts stated in the message increases by one. Also if I open view replication conflicts in EM all conflicts can still be viewed even those I manually resolved. I can't even find a way to seen which conflicts are new ones and which have been resolved already. Does anybody know a way how to reset this numbers without going through all the conflict tables.
I have a db server which was installed with Collation 'SQL_Latin_General_CP1_CS_AS' and now I have to replace this server with a new server and I want to install this server with Collation 'SQL_Latin_General_CP1_CI_AS'.
I am using Linked Servers to collect some data from my Sybase database which has "Code Page 850 (Multilingual) character set,us_english,Binary ordering, for use with Code Page 850 (cp850)."
But with new SQL server(case-insensitive settings), I am unable to run a select query (joining a local server and sybase server) and I get an error message "cannot resolve collation conflict for equal to operation"
I have tried changing property of linked server by specifying Remote server collation to true and Collation Name as 'SQL_Latin_General_CP1_CS_AS' as well as 'SQL_Latin_General_CP850_Bin' but I do get the same error message.
Could any of you please help me in this regard ?
Thanks in advance.
Wilson
Edit: Sorted out. Somehow it is working now after specifying Remote server collation to true and Collation Name as 'SQL_Latin_General_CP1_CS_AS'
Moving code from Sybase to SQL Server 2005. I have two tables. One table (vINID) is reset and populated right before this code runs. The other table (vINPA) is a table in the database used by the Front End App. This is the error I get when I try and run on our SQL Server 2005.
Msg 468, Level 16, State 9, Line 1 Cannot resolve the collation conflict between "SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS" and "Latin1_General_BIN" in the equal to operation.
Here is the SQL code:
SELECT DISTINCT vINID.BLEI_CK, vINID.BLIV_ID, ISNULL(vINPA.RCPT_AMT,0) AS RCPT_AMT
FROM Reporting_DEV.dbo.RPT_04597_INID AS vINID -- table re-populated
LEFT JOIN fauafpr0_pids.dbo.CDS_INPA_PMT_ACT AS vINPA ON vINPA.BLIV_ID = vINID.BLIV_ID
How do I solve a primary key conflict for a mutiple select statement. When SQL finds a duplicate entry I doesn't ignore it like access but it doesn't insert anything. It should be something like where not in.....
Thanks in advance
CREATE PROCEDURE [dbo].[z_qry_history_1_is] AS INSERT INTO r_tbl_history_is_rg ( ean_code, contractnr, switch_id, bakje, week, jaar )
SELECT distinct r_tbl_is_open.ean_code, r_tbl_is_open.transaction_id, r_tbl_is_open.switch_id, r_tbl_is_open.bakje, datepart(ww,getdate()) AS Expr1, datepart(yyyy,getdate()) AS Expr2
FROM r_tbl_is_open; GO
Violation of PRIMARY KEY constraint 'aaaaar_tbl_history_is_rg_PK'. Cannot insert duplicate key in object 'r_tbl_history_is_rg'. The statement has been terminated.
While I execute one query its showing this error: Cannot resolve the collation conflict between "SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS" and "Arabic_CI_AS" in the equal to operation.
I have merge replication set with with one publisher and three subscribers (push subscription). From time to time I get the following in the conflict table:
"The same row was updated at both 'Publisher.database' and 'Subscriber.database'. The resolver chose the update from 'Publisher.database' as the winner"
This is weird because the UPDATE only happend at the given subscriber. I checked the publisher and all other subscribers and there was never an UPDATE on this table. Also, the update at the publisher was actually the record that was already present.
I'm kinda stuck here. Any help or comments are greatly appreciated.
i have a dts package that is going to run at night and pull data from2 tables in an Oracle db and load it to 2 staging tables that mypackage creates in sql server 2000. i then execute a few sprocs toand columns, indexes, etc. after that all happens successfully i wantto delete the two production tables and rename the staging tables totake their place.the problem is that when i run the sproc to add the indexes,constraints, etc i get an error because objects with the same nameexist on the 2 production tables. i can't delete the productiontables until the very last step. i thought about generating a randomnumber in my sproc and using it as the name of the index but thatseems crude and messy. any ideas?
I am running merge replication on SQL Server 2005. Included in replication are 6 Subscribers and one Publisher/Distributor. Replication compatibility level is SQL 2005 and I am using row-level tracking. Servers are synchronized in 5 minutes each (so gap between two consecutive syncs of one server is 30 minutes)
Earlier all of this was on compatibility level SQL 2000, since all servers were upgraded from 2000 to 2005. But 10 days ago I upgraded and replication compatibility to 2005. I did not initialize subscription, since I had data in place and db's ready for merge replication.
Since that 10 days ago I have column update conflict on each row change. Not just if it is changed at same time at different subscribers. For example, if I change one row today, and somebody else changes it three days later on other subscriber it counts as a conflict. He always chooses good (updated) version of data as winner, but it is quite annoying having 15000 conflicts in one table daily. And it makes harder to track other conflicts.
Does it have anything to do with row level column tracking, or it is some known bug? Or, even better, if anyone knows how to avoid it. I was thinking about changing it to column level, but then I need to reinitialize subscriptions which means sending of 9 GB data through some pretty slow lines (256 kbp/s), or few hours work to drop existing subscriptions and create new one's. Maybe I would to this if I knew that column level will help.
l've a raw data which contains list of device name and # of wires used, i.e. DEVICE NAME # of Wires --------------------- ------------- A 10 B 11 C 17 D 5 A 0 E 0
So l would like to import these data into my table (with device name as primary key) which each device only appear once. If the device name appear twices, then l should ignore device with # of wires = 0. If device name appear twice and # of wires <> 0, then l should log it.
I developed an ppc application, where i am using web service for synchronisation, but here i am getting lot of problem while handling conflict management.
Please suggest me how to manage conflicts, using web service.
I have installed SQL Server 2005 Express (I have also kep my SQL Server 2000 installation), created a blank database (using the <default> Collation which I believe is Latin1_General_CI_AS), and restored a backup (from SQL Server 2000) into the newly created database.
All the tables and records appear to be there but I get the following error when trying to make any changes to the database (through my front end application that sits over the database).
Unable to get objects. Additional information: Cannot resolve the collation conflict between "Latin1_General_CI_AS" and "SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS" in the equal to operation..
Looking at the properties of the database, the collation is SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS. I have tried changing this to Latin1_General_CI_AS with no success.
Am I supposed to set the collation when I create the empty database before restoring the backup into it or is there something I am missing?
hi allin my local machine there was no problem. however, when i put my database on the the hosting company's database server i got this error System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: Cannot resolve the collation conflict between "SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS" and "Latin1_General_CI_AI" in the equal to operationplease help it's urgent thanks
I am getting this error while I am trying to delete a record from "MediaTypes" table Media Types table and DVBTestCOutputs table have related through MediaID (cascade on update only not delete)
MediaTypes DVBTestCOutputs ------------- --------------------- MediaID int .......................... MType char(10) .......................... MediaType int
DELETE statement conflicted with COLUMN REFERENCE constraint 'FK_DVBTestCOutputs_MediaTypes1'. The conflict occurred in database 'Test', table 'DVBTestCOutputs', column 'MediaType'.
can you help me please I do not want the related record deleted also from DVBTestCOutputs table so I didn't choose the cascade on delete checkbox is this the problem??
I ran a sql somedays ago it gave me result, I ran the same sql today it gave different result. The only difference is that the particular table in the sql is frequently used table with lots of new insert. But the sql I ran is not selecting the new rows, it only deals with already inserted records.
Any idea what will make the sql to give different result from same set of records in different time.
