I am trying to install failover support for my sql server 7.0 database on the in clustere server enviorment
Now We have operating system on two clusterd servers but just one common database disk
Now what will happen if i lose server A ( Active ) the server B will take over and use the same database . But what will
happen if database disk crashes IS it possible for me to replicate the data or use disk mirroring , or have one clustered
database server seperate
How does the database server cluster work ?
What kind of replication do i use for my backup support ?
what should be my recovery process ?
how can i use standby option on the database during recovery ?
Please try to reply as soon as possible
if you can also point to some documetation on the net that will also help
Also look at my current structure ( but this should not affect your answer )
Tables
group 1 --- 20 tables ( being replicated to server c )
group 2 ----60 tables
on cluster 1
Server A-- Holds Group 1 ( Transictional replication to server c )
on cluster 2
server B---(Production server ) Group 2 + Group 1
Just want to know if we can replicate data (Transactional Replication) from a clustered servers (server A and Server B are active-passive clustered running SqlServer 7) to another server C running SqlServer 7.
If yes, how to go about doing this. Any white papers, KB articles or books out there which will walk through the steps to do it.
According to Microsoft, if you need to change the subnet for the clustered servers, you will need to either edit the registry or reinstall virtual SQL Server.
Does any one know which registry key(s) store the subnet information? I was reviewing the clustered key but was able to find the key for the IP address only.
I've been asked to write a script to monitor whether a clustered server is up and alive and if so which node it's actually running on. Apparently there's been some problems of failover to the passive server without anyone knowing that it happened and they want to know. Any suggestions?
Hello,Being a bit of a SQL Server novice, need some advice with the followingsituation.Server A and Server B have SQLServer 2000 based databases. The vendorof the application/system has implemented their own replication processto ensure the 2 databases are in sync. However, there is no clusteringwith virtual IP addresses implemented. So to an external client/db, itis 2 identical databases with the same name on 2 distinct servers.We need to develop an application that will reside on a networkedserver C and with SQLServer 2000 as well. While most of the tables inthis database are self contained, around 10 tables will have to bemirror copies of the same tables from either Server A or Server B.Question, how do we implement subscription based replication on top ofa redundant database, when no clustering is implemented? So, inessence, when Server A is alive, the database on Server C willperiodically (or on change) replicate the 10 tables from Server A. WhenServer A is not alive, it needs to do same from server B. (When bothserver A and B are alive, it is acceptable to get data from either,since they are synchronized internally).Any alternate suggestions on achieving this functionality are welcometoo. If SQL Server 2005 has some capabilities that may address thisproblem, that is a consideration as well.Thanks
I've run into a problem attempting to change my service account on the clustered servers from an administrative account to a non-privileged account under SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition. When I change the login properties in Configuration Manager I get the following error:
"The user already belongs to this group"
I'm then prevented from making any changes to the service account. I don't know what I'm supposed to do at this point to resolve the problem, so any assistance will be greatly appreciated.
I have 4 servers, 2 each for application (Dev & Prod)
DEV 1 & DEV 2 are standalone servers
Prod 1 & Prod 2 are Windows Clustered Servers.
From one application to other we do Distributed transactions. Dev 1 - Dev 2 or Dev 2 - Dev 1 can start DTC and working fine,but issue comes when Prod 1 - Prod 2 or Prod 2 - Prod 1. I get error message OLE DB provider "SQLNCLI" for linked server "xyz" returned message "No transaction is active.".
Msg 7391, Level 16, State 2, Line 3
The operation could not be performed because OLE DB provider "SQLNCLI" for linked server "xyz" was unable to begin a distributed transaction.
I have tested Dev 1 - Prod 1, Dev 1 - Prod 2, Dev 2 - Prod 1, Dev 2 - Prod 2 everything is working fine only Production servers are causing issue.
I enabled all settings needed for DTC on Cluster MSDTC service but no luck.
We've had this issue for awhile, but I have not been able to find a resolution for this. We have 2 identical servers (hardware & software) set-up: IBM x3850-(88633RU) running Windows Server 2003 Enterprise x64 (5.2.3790 SP1 Build 3790 R2). Server A was running SP1 (Build 9.0.2047) on a 3-node active-passive-passive failover cluster. Server B was running SP2 + Hotfix KB933097 (Build 9.0.3152) on a 2-node active-passive failover cluster. Both these servers are heavily utilized, and when originally installed with these versions of SQL Server Enterprise 2005 experienced no issues during or post-install. The original install of SQL 2005 Enterprise on both these servers had the Cluster Group Selection "Data files" setting changed to "M:MICROSOFT SQL SERVER" so that all system dbs and binaries would be installed to that location. On Server B where SP2 had already been applied, the update was downloaded on May 1, 2007, well after the GDR issues which had been plaguing SP2 releases was supposed to have been resolved.
Our problems began the night when we tried to apply hotfix KB933097 on Server A, and cumulative update packages 1,2,3 on Servers A & B, as well as catch-up the same SP2 and hotfix packages on other non-clustered servers where default system db locations remained the same. On all servers other than Servers A and B, the installs proceeded smoothly and without issue.
On Server B, which was already running SP2 + Hotfix KB933097, we tried installing Cumulative Update Package 1 (Build 9.0.3161) on the primary node. The install proceeded until the following errors were encountered:
"[Microsoft][SQL Native Client][SQL Server]Cannot find the object 'dm_exec_query_resource_semaphores', because it does not exist or you do not have permission."
"[Microsoft][SQL Native Client][SQL Server]Cannot find the object 'dm_exec_query_memory_grants', because it does not exist or you do not have permission."
After this, the setup finished with the message "Product: Microsoft SQL Server 2005 (64-bit) - Update 'Hotfix 3161 for SQL Server Database Services 2005 (64-bit) ENU (KB935356)' could not be installed. Error code 1603. Additional information is available in the log file C:Program FilesMicrosoft SQL Server90Setup BootstrapLOGHotfixSQL9_Hotfix_KB935356_sqlrun_sql.msp.log."
We rebooted the server and tried several times to reinstall the hotfix as sa and as the database service account with full windows and sa credentials, each time with no success, and rebooting between retries. All other components were installed successfully. We were hesitant to try uninstalling the hotfix, since it was unable to be removed successfully in previous attempts. However, when I connected to Database Engine using Management Studio, I found that the version of SQL being reported was in fact Build 9.0.3161! Everything also appeared to be running properly.
I tried to to Google the answer, but could only find information as applied to SP1 when system dbs master and mssqlsystemresource were located on different locations (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;918695 ). I had already verified that all system dbs, including the ones mentioned, were originally and currently located together on M:Microsoft SQL ServerMSSQL.1MSSQLData.
Finally I contacted a fellow DBA who advised me to continue installing all the other hotfixes, and then compare all SQL files against other servers where the install succeeded to ensure all system files were updated correctly (matching file sizes and datetime stamps). Since we were depending on a fix in Cumulative Update Package 3 to fix a critical log-shipping security issue, I went ahead with the rest of the installs, getting the same error with each package, rebooting between each install.
We found after the final install that the mssqlsystemresource files in the M:Microsoft SQL ServerMSSQL.1MSSQLData
directory were in fact updated after each install with a new timestamp, and that all files in C:Program FilesMicrosoft SQL ServerMSSQL.1MSSQLBinn matched on both file size and timestamp. The log-shipping security issue we were looking to fix also appeared to be resolved by the last update.
On Server A, which was running SP1 (Build 9.0.2047), we installed the same SP2 package as we had on Server B with no issue. We rebooted and then tried to apply the same Hotfix KB933097 (Build 9.0.3152) that had been applied successfully on Server B and found to our surprise that the same errors were being generated here as well. We continued to apply the rest of the hotfixes so that both servers matched software updates. Comparing the above directories showed that files seemed to have been updated, even though database services appeared to be not installed.
It looks like we now need Cumulative Update 5 hotfix package in order to deal with WMI alerting issues, but I'm afraid to apply it until we have a known resolution for the past errors.
Since this issue was supposed to be resolved by SP2, I'm not sure why these post-SP2 hotfixes should fail. It seems to me to be an issue of the directory location of the system files which is in question.
I can post the hotfix log files as well, if anyone is interested in seeing them.
Any help would be greatly appreciated. As well, does anyone have any idea when SP3 is scheduled to come out? I really don't like applying hotfixes which are usually untested for general purposes, and it seems Microsoft is delaying this in favour of releasing SQL 2008.
We are attempting to restore one of our databases from a backup that went to a local drive on the server. We see the backupset in the list but receive an error that it is not available when we try to use it. When we try to restore from device and select the files the drive letter is not available. When we attempt to enter the path to the file it can't locate it. We don't have space on our SAN to copy the backup there and we can't add the local drive to the cluster resources.
I am trying to set up log shipping in a clustered server environment. I am pretty confused about the location of the shared folder to be created to put backup created by log shipping job. Which drive should I use either local or clustered shared drive to store the backups in primary server and to copy the same in secondary Server?
Hello! We are planning to build Primary SQL Server 6.5 and Backup SQL Server 6.5. In case of media failure on primary server what kind of options should we set if we want all users automatically switch to backup server until recovery process on primary server take place?
I am wanting to use backup compression on a few sql servers (2008R2 and 2012). I have never touched compression before and always just gone with the default.I use Ola Hallengren's scripts to do the backups which, if not specifically specified, will use the server default.Backups (FULL and LOG) have been happening successfully on these servers for years.SQL won't care that the previous backup in the set was uncompressed or that the hourly transaction log backups previously taken were uncompressed?Restore statements (T-SQL) will be identical?From everything I am reading it is simply a case of setting the configuration and acting like nothing changed but I just wanted to be 100% certain.1 of the servers is a SharePoint backend.All of the backup files from all servers are picked up by Commvault backup system.
I ran the following code on one of our servers and I got some surprising results. Those results included backups for that machine but also showed entries for other servers. I don't understand it! I can understand the results being wrong because I coded something incorrectly, but why would another server be listed in bs.server_Name? It appears that the entries are "correct" in that backups were taken on the other server at the time given, but why is it there??? (I put the code together to list the most recent backup for each database on the instance. I hope it is correct.)
select @@ServerName, bs.server_Name, bs.Database_Name, bmf.physical_Device_Name, bs.backup_start_date, bs.backup_finish_date, Case When bs.backup_start_date < Getdate() - 1 Then 'Stale' Else 'Recent' End as Status, Case When bs.backup_finish_date is NULL Then 'Failed' Else 'Successful' End as Success from msdb.dbo.backupset bs Join msdb.dbo.backupmediafamily bmf on bmf.media_set_id = bs.media_set_id where type = 'd' and bs.backup_set_id = (select max (bso.backup_set_id) from msdb.dbo.backupset bso where bso.server_name = bs.server_Name and bso.Database_Name = bs.Database_Name and bso.Type = 'D') order by database_name
I am currently testing the transmission rates of sql server 70 backups over an ATM circuit (T3) from tampa, fl to detroit. We are evaluating what we need to do to relocate our warm backup database servers to our Disaster Recovery site in detroit. I have tried several types of transmissions and are not receiving any transfer rates that will reasonably work with a recovery plan. I have tried copying a file from source to target, I have tried backing up from source to target, I have tried FTP'ing files, and never can achieve higher transmission rate then 1 gig per hour.
I am looking to talk to anyone out there that may have implemented a long distance sql servber DR site or anyone who is thinking about it. Or anyone who has any input on how I might be able to achieve a higher transmission rate over a T3. Or anyone who is using SAN's in both their local and DR site and might be using special synchronizing software. I am currently piloting a Metastore SAN and a Compaq SAN to solve some local disk management problems and eventually transmit data from SAN to SAN for DR.
Please, if you are involved with any of these strategies and would like someone to share your knowledge with or if I can be of help to you by sharing our testing knowledge, please write asap.
Thanks. Gail Wade Database Administration Raymond James Financial gwade@it.rjf.com
But I am running this command with sa user..... Wich kind of permission is missing to execute this copy? When I execute the same command to copy the backup from the server to itself, it works fine!!!! Does someone have an idea to solve this problem?????
I have been experiencing a problem with a job I am trying to automate. My team requires two instances of a db on development. Every week, db1 is detached and reattached as db1_copy, and a new copy of db1 from production is copied over. I have used cursors for the dropusers, addlogins, grantdbaccess, addroles, and addrolemembers aspects of the restore process. Also, we use sql authentication and not windows authentication. The issue is that when the agent encounters a minor issue, ie. a login that already exists in that db, or adding a rolemember to a role that is already there, I get an error. I have ensure that at that step, the job simply proceeds because it is a minor step in the process (it happens during the script execution when done manually but I can override this because I am present and just let it run in one step instead of many). Is there any way to do this without adding a multitude of steps?
We are told that we cannot get remote access on our DB servers , can access them only via SQL management studio. But we are the one's who will be restoring all our DB's from current setup to new servers.
My Question:
1. Can we restore the DB's directly via SQL Management studio(from other server where management studio is installed) without logging into the DB server.
2. How do we set the mdf/ldf file paths, assuming we have elevated access on the DB. Is this possible?.
We are going to use SQL Sever change tracking. The problem is that some of our tables, which are to be tracked, have no primary keys. There are only unique clustered indexes. The question is what is the best way to turn on change tracking for these tables in our circumstances.
I desire to have a clustered index on a column other than the Primary Key. I have a few junction tables that I may want to alter, create table, or ...
I have practiced with an example table that is not really a junction table. It is just a table I decided to use for practice. When I execute the script, it seems to do everything I expect. For instance, there are not any constraints but there are indexes. The PK is the correct column.
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[tblNotificationMgr]( [NotificationMgrKey] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [ContactKey] [int] NOT NULL, [EventTypeEnum] [tinyint] NOT NULL,
I have created two tables. table one has the following fields,
Id -> unique clustered index. table two has the following fields, Tid -> unique clustered index Id -> foreign key of table one(id).
Now I have created primary key for the table one column 'id'. It's created as "nonclustered, unique, primary key located on PRIMARY". Primary key create clustered index default. since unique clustered index existed in table one, it has created "Nonclustered primary key".
My Question is, What is the difference between "clustered, unique, primary key" and "nonclustered, unique, primary key"? Is there any performance impact between these?
Hi there, I have a table that has an IDENTITY column and it is the PK of this table. By default SQL Server creates a unique clustered index on the PK, but this isn't what I wanted. I want to make a regular unique index on the column so I can make a clustered index on a different column.
If I try to uncheck the Clustered index option in EM I get a dialog that says "Cannot convert a clustered index to a nonclustered index using the DROP_EXISTING option.". If I simply try to delete the index I get the following "An explicit DROP INDEX is not allowed on index 'index name'. It is being used for PRIMARY KEY constraint enforcement.
So do I have to drop the PK constraint now? How does that affect all the tables that have FK relationships to this table?
I have a really super slow stored proc that does something simple. it updates a table if certain values are received.
In looking at this the matching is done on the Primary Key, which is set as a Clustered index, looking further I have another constraint, that sets the same column to a Unique, Non-Clustered.
I am not sure why this was done, but it seems to be counter productive. I have read only references to Which one is better on a primary key, but not can their be both and if it is "Smart".
I've a table with primary key defined as non-clusterd, now without dropping it can I modify the existing index to clustered through tsql as I had to write some migration script and in that script I wanna do this.
I would like to find information on Clustered and Non-clustered indexes and how B-trees are used. I know a clustered index is placed into a b-tree which makes sense for fast ordered searching. What data structure does a non-clustered index use and how? I tried to find info. on the web but couldn't get much detail...
I have a table<table1> with 804668 records primary on table1(col1,col2,col3,col4)
Have created non-clustered index on <table1>(col2,col3,col4),to solve a performance issue.(which is a join involving another table with 1.2 million records).Seems to be working great.
I want to know whether this will slow down,insert and update on the <table1>?
SELECT a.AssetGuid, a.Name, a.LocationGuid FROM Asset a WHERE a.AssociationGuid IN ( SELECT ada.DataAssociationGuid FROM AssociationDataAssociation ada WHERE ada.AssociationGuid = '568B40AD-5133-4237-9F3C-F8EA9D472662')
takes 30-60 seconds to run on my machine, due to a clustered index scan on our an index on asset [about half a million rows]. For this particular association less than 50 rows are returned.
expanding the inner select into a list of guids the query runs instantly:
SELECT a.AssetGuid, a.Name, a.LocationGuid FROM Asset a WHERE a.AssociationGuid IN ( '0F9C1654-9FAC-45FC-9997-5EBDAD21A4B4', '52C616C0-C4C5-45F4-B691-7FA83462CA34', 'C95A6669-D6D1-460A-BC2F-C0F6756A234D')
It runs instantly because of doing a clustered index seek [on the same index as the previous query] instead of a scan. The index in question IX_Asset_AssociationGuid is a nonclustered index on Asset.AssociationGuid.
The tables involved:
Asset, represents an asset. Primary key is AssetGuid, there is an index/FK on Asset.AssociationGuid. The asset table has 28 columns or so... Association, kind of like a place, associations exist in a tree where one association can contain any number of child associations. Each association has a ParentAssociationGuid pointing to its parent. Only leaf associations contain assets. AssociationDataAssociation, a table consisting of two columns, AssociationGuid, DataAssociationGuid. This is a table used to quickly find leaf associations [DataAssociationGuid] beneath a particular association [AssociationGuid]. In the above case the inner select () returns 3 rows.
I'd include .sqlplan files or screenshots, but I don't see a way to attach them.
I understand I can specify to use the index manually [and this also runs instantly], but for such a simple query it is peculiar it is necesscary. This is the query with the index specified manually:
SELECT a.AssetGuid, a.Name, a.LocationGuid FROM Asset a WITH (INDEX (IX_Asset_AssociationGuid)) WHERE a.AssociationGuid IN ( SELECT ada.DataAssociationGuid FROM AssociationDataAssociation ada WHERE ada.AssociationGuid = '568B40AD-5133-4237-9F3C-F8EA9D472662')
To repeat/clarify my question, why might this not be doing a clustered index seek with the first query?
So I'm reading http://www.sql-server-performance.com/tips/clustered_indexes_p2.aspx and I come across this: When selecting a column to base your clustered index on, try to avoid columns that are frequently updated. Every time that a column used for a clustered index is modified, all of the non-clustered indexes must also be updated, creating additional overhead. [6.5, 7.0, 2000, 2005] Updated 3-5-2004 Does this mean if I have say a table called Item with a clustered index on a column in it called itemaddeddate, and several non-clustered indexes associated with that table, that if a record gets modified and it's itemaddeddate value changes, that ALL my indexes on that table will get rebuilt? Or is it referring to the table structure changing? If so does this "pseudocode" example also cause this to occur: sqlstring="select * from item where itemid=12345" rs.open sqlstring, etc, etc, etc rs.Fields("ItemName")="My New Item Name" rs.Fields("ItemPrice")=1.00 rs.Update Note I didn't explicitly change the value of rs.fields("ItemAddedDate")...does rs.Fields("ItemAddedDate")=rs.Fields("ItemAddedDate") occur implicitly, which would force the rebuild of all the non-clustered indexes?
We have a table, which has one clustered index and one non clustered index(primary key). I want to drop the existing clustered index and make the primary key as clustered. Is there any easy way to do that. Will Drop_Existing support on this matter?
