Dear all,
to restore one perticular backup set, i've made the database to single user mode, now it is not accepting me to connect to that again...
how can i bring the database to multiuser mode?
thanks in advance
Vinod
Even you learn 1%, Learn it with 100% confidence.
I am using SharePoint Services 3.0 (SP1) with default configuration options, which installs the Microsoft##SSEE instance of SQL to my local C: drive.
While attempting to relocate the files to another drive, I set one of the databases (as recommended) to Single User by using the SQL Server Management Express tool.
I cannot now reset that database to Multi User, even by executing the query
exec sp_dboption 'database_name', 'single user', ''FALSE'
again by using the Management Express Tool.
Can someone please help, in plain english???? Thanks
I have written a VB/SQL Server based application. The application uses stored procs and the SQL Server security model to handle logins and permissions. My partner and I want to sell the applicaiton to specific businesses and offer a rental program for smaller companies that would like to use the application to connect to an internet based database. The application uses TCP/IP with a specific port number to connect to the database so it can be used in or out of LAN.
If we rent the application, maintenance is simple. I just create a user in the database with the login/password the user would like and viola they have access to the data.
When a company wants to purchase the program to use in-house, we would like to offer two alternatives: #1 a single user or #2 a multiple user SQL Server database.
My question is if a company purchases the single-user version, how can we keep them from adding users to their database. In other words, since we have no control over the database at the client's location, how can we ensure that it remains a single-user database?
Thanks for any help!
Randall Medcalf
I have tried everything I found on Google, but nothing seems to be working. Already Ran alter command set multi_user, but getting an error.
"Msg 5064, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Changes to the state or options of database cannot be made at this time. The database is in single-user mode, and a user is currently connected to it.
Msg 5069, Level 16, State 1, Line 1..ALTER DATABASE statement failed."
This is my first time to deploy an asp.net2 web site. Everything is working fine on my local computer but when i published the web site on a remote computer i get the error "Failed to generate a user instance of SQL Server due to failure in retrieving the user's local application data path. Please make sure the user has a local user profile on the computer. The connection will be closed" (only in pages that try to access the database)
Help pleaseee
Hi,
Please give the T-SQL script for this ? Thanks
Shanth
Can multiple users connect to SQL Server 2005 concurrently?
View 4 Replies View RelatedDoes anyone have links to various strategies for handling multi-user concurrency issues when updating data in SQL Server (2000 or 2005), either in the database (stored procedures) or via code.
I've seen a couple such as:
Check individual user updated columns to see if the database columns have changed and if not apply the updated columns (either individual updates or constructing a dynamic SQL statement).
Check all the fields for any change and if no change, update all the fields.
Check a version field for change and if no change, update all the fields.
What I haven't seen is complete solutions such as for the first one, ensuring the record is locked and can't be changed while checking for concurrency and ultimately updating the data. For the second one, how to raise an error if there was a problem, or for the third one how to ensure the record is locked between the version check and the update.
Even pieces of solutions are welcome (locking records, testing for change, etc). Just want to compare and contrast various methods as I create an infrastructure for 2005.
Thanks,
LarryC
Dear All,
i've altered my database to single user mode. and now trying to change to multi user mode with the query
alter database mydb set multi_user
but it is saying that it is in single user mode. query analyser closed.
how can i change that to multi user mode? idont know who opend that
to run sp_who it is not showing the database in dropdown list in enterprise manager.
thanks in advance
Vinod
Even you learn 1%, Learn it with 100% confidence.
I've taken over development of a Vs2003(vB)/MsSql2000 application which usually runs in on a Windows 2000 server with multiple workstations running the application simultaneously in Remote Desktop Sessions.
The central user interface element of the application is an un-databound grid (actually a farpoint spreadsheet) which displays sql table rows that are accessable from every workstation. The grid refreshes its content whenever a specific subroutine is called. That subroutine performs a query which loads its results into a collection which is then loaded into the grid. The subroutine is called during startup and at other times using the rather elaborate mechanism described below. Each workstation also has the ability to modify any row in the grid via a dialog-based editor. The grid itself is not setup to allow inplace editing.
The grid usually contains about 200 records and 20-50% of these records get modified (some repeatedly) every hour.
My question involves the classic multi-user issues of keeping all of the seperate workstation's grids current as individual workstations make modifications to the data.
What is Microsoft's recommended method for handling multi-user data-refresh requirements in custom applications written in VB.NET2003 with MsSQL2000?
Now that you know what I'm looking for, let me add a little more detail. The existing code handles this multi-user refresh issue in the following way...
A SQL Trigger is attached to the SQL Table's Insert/Modify and Delete events. That Trigger calls the xp_logevent built-in stored procedure to make an entry in the NT Event Log.
The application contains a subroutine to handle EventLog("Application").EntryWritten messages. That subroutine calls the subroutine (mentioned earlier) which refreshes the grid contents through a new SQL query.
In this way, whenever any workstation changes the table data, a trigger fires which makes a log entry and broadcasts an EntryWritten message into the global windows environment. The individual applications (each running in their own RDP session) hear the message and respond by refreshing their grid.
This all seems a little "rube goldberg" to me, but it has worked for many years.
That is, until we moved the SQL2000 server to a seperate machine to improve program responsiveness.
Now when the trigger is fired and the log entry is made, the EntryWritten message is broadcast into the windows environment of the dedicated SQL server where there are no applications listening for it. Meanwhile, the applications continue to run with unrefreshed data on the (now) dedicated RDP server from where the EntryWritten messages cannot be "heard".
So my question really comes down to this...
In an environment where the SQL server and the RDP server are two seperate machines, what is the best method for coordinating multi-user screen refreshes across seperate applications running in distinct RDP Client sessions?
Thanks in advance for any assistance.
Peace,
Colt Taylor
Computer Golf Sofware
I have developed two programs that operates against the same database. One of the program is just a display program that displayes the data put into the other administation program where you put in the data to be displayed (an administration program).
Every time I access the db from the administration program, the display program stops and throws connection pool errors and other database errors. For me, it looks like it doesīt do multi-access to a database.
I have tried putting user instance to off in both programs, but this didnīt help.
Connection string also points to same file database.
Please help....
I have designed an application that uses sql server 2005 express database. This application was intended to be installed and used on a local desktop machine. However, now this application needs to be also installed on several computers and still needs to use only 1 database. Part of the database saves local user settings, so what I have done thus far is use two connection strings: one for local database (because the application may be used as origionally intended) and one for remote database that everyone should be able to connect to.
When I remotely connect to the database, it works fine. However, it seems to be locked so when I chose the same database for another user I get the error message "This File Is In Use." I need to know how to unlock it and make it usable for several users at the same time.
Thank you for your help! Please let me know if you need more information or if something is unclear in my description.
Hi,
I am developing reporting application (access project) which will be used in multi user environment.
Here is what I have:
1 SQLServer database for many users
Each report will be based on:
stored procedure which creates a table filtered for specific dates predefined views will use the newly generated table to show results to the client. However, if more than 1 person runs reports results will not be accurate if each person specified different dates because they will look at the same table and results will match only for a user who called the stored procedure last.
what can you recommend - how to report in multi user environment?
Many thanks
Hi all,
I just want to know if SSCE 3.0/3.5 can cater for Multi-user instances? I have a desktop application that I want to allow multiple Windows-user accounts to access. basically I need a datastore that can be lightweight (which SSCE is) and support "User Instances" (like in SQL Server Express)
thanx!
Hi!
In my database I have all business logic in stored procedures. For example there are procedures: ReadBike and UpdateBike. Bike is business object stored in 4 tables.
On my system work 100 employees and we have one problem with this. The stroy is;
1. User A reads data about Bike1
2. User B reads data about Bike1
3. User A updates data about Bike1 (user B have old data)
4. User B updates data about Bike1
So user B don't know about chnages made by user A. How to solve that ptroblem?
It's probably solved in ADO, but I want use business login in procedures.
Regards,
Walter
I am new to SQL Server but have been using Access to provide Multi-User acces to a central data store. We are evaluating the replacement of Access with SQL Server. With Access we don't need any special installation; I believe that the Jet Database Engine installed locally on each user's PC allows them to work with this in a disconnected manner; we use ADO.net 2.0 with VB.net 2005.
If each user has a locally installed SQL Server Express can they all attach to a database that resides on a shared network location?
In another post on the Forum I see the following regarding multi-user access:
Our application You will need to pick a central computer that everyone will be using the access the data and attach the file to the parent instance of SQL Express on that comuter, giving it a name that you can use to access it. Then you will need to modify your connection string to connect to the named database on the central server...
Can multiple locally installed SQL Server Express instances attach to a single data store that resides on a shared network location?
If not, what permissions do I need to create a parent instance of SQL Server Express?
Thank you for helping me understand how to implement our solution.
JudiR
Can a SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition database file be deployed on a file share and be accessed by multiple (5-10) concurrent users? This is a current scenario being implemented at several sites using MS Access databases.
Each client would have the SQLce engine installed on it and would only access the database via a managed C# application.
I am trying to place a database offline.
When I right in Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio on the database > Take Offline
Set offline failed for Database 'OperationsManagerAC'.
Transaction (Process ID 56) was deadlocked on lock resources with another process and has been chosen as the deadlock victim. Rerun the transaction. ALTER DATABASE statement failed. (Microsoft SQL Server, Error: 1205)
So I am trying with some queries to pass the database from Single user to multi user but it fails
USE [master]
GO
ALTER DATABASE OperationsManagerAC SET MULTI_USER GO
Msg 1205, Level 13, State 68, Line 1</p><p>Transaction (Process ID 52) was deadlocked on lock resources with another process and has been chosen as the deadlock victim. Rerun the transaction.
Msg 5069, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
ALTER DATABASE statement failed.
I tried also
alter DATABASE OperationsManagerAC SET OFFLINE WITH ROLLBACK IMMEDIATE
IT FAILS AS WELL... with the same error... how to run the SQL Statements without using
How to proceed next?
How to remove the label "Single User" in the database?
View 2 Replies View Relatedhow can we make a stored proc single threaded so only one process can access it at a time to prevent deadock. or how to lock the tables eficiently???
View 1 Replies View RelatedI tried to run the SQL in single user mode by executing sqlservr.exe -m.
The execution starts in a DOS window but apparently stops at one point. The SQL Server will run in single user mode but when i tried to restore the master db, the restoration process stops and the SQL server stops. Is there any process I left out? I think the execution of single user mode is incomplete. Please help.
Actually, I found exactly the same problem was posted year ago, but there was no solution.
Any information would be greatly appreciated.
Where can I find out about SQL Bugs -- such as the one in subject.
Any help regarding subject would be awesome.
Thanks
I use SQL 6.5 and Service Pack 5a NT4 with a CLuster and Raid.
One DB (DB1) is in SIngle User and Read Only Modus. If I use the Enterprise Manager to máke a new Login and/or to change the rights of another DB, I get the message, that DB1 is in single user Mode:
Error 924: ... DB is in Single User MOde....
The same message was sent, if I use I-SQL and ask DB1 with a DBCC or SP ():
dbcc checkdb (db1):
Nachr.-Nr. 924, Schweregrad 14, Status 1
Database 'DBPLW02' is already open and can only have one user at a time.
DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, see your System Administrator.
or with sp_dboption dbplw02, offline, true:
Nachr.-Nr. 5160, Schweregrad 16, Status 1
Cannot take 'dbplw02' offline because usecount=1.
Nachr.-Nr. 15245, Schweregrad 16, Status 1
'DBCC DBCONTROL' error. Database not placed offline.
I canīt change the DB1 in multi user mode and I canīt find the person who has opened DB1 because I get every time this message.
Technet only tells problems with the Enterprise Manager and not with EM and I-SQL!
Who can help?
Reiner
At the moment some of the databases on my systems drop themseleves into single user mode over the weekend. Has any one expierienced this or does any one know how I could monitor it to find out how it is doing it.
View 1 Replies View RelatedHello,
I have an SMS 2.0 Site in which we ae using SQL Server 6.5. I am having major
problems setting server in Single-User Moder and running automated SQL Utilities because of multiple connections at one time. Does anyone know how to FORCE SQL into Single-User Mode. Any help would be greatly appriciated.
Thank You,
George Aviles
gaviles@na2.us.ml.com
I'm trying to restore the master database. I can't seem to start the SQL Server in single user mode.
Through the command prompt
1. net stop MSSQL$AIMS
2. C:Program FilesMS SQL ServerMSSQL$AIMSBinnsqlservr.exe -c -m
It runs saying that it's in single user mode etc etc.
When i open enterprise manager and try to restore the database, it comes up in a prompt saying i need to put it in single user mode
I have been trying with no success to start my SQL Server in single user mode and login.
Here's the scenario:
I've got a one node cluster with SQL Server 2000 installed. I changed the startup parameters of SQL Server to reflect the following:
-c
-f
-m
I have disabled SQL Server Agent so it doesn't start when I bring SQL Server online. But when I do bring SQL Server online, I'm not able to connect at all. I keep getting the "only one administrator can log on at one time".
There is no one else trying to log on and SQL Agent is disabled.
What is the scoop? Has anyone seen this? And if so, how did you address it? I'm trying to restore master and need to get this donesooner rather than later.
Thanks!
Hi I have heard abt starting the SQL Server in Single User Mode,
1) Can any one tell my why would I have to do that , Can some one please give me real time examples as to why he/she started the SQL Server in Single User Mode
2) I have currently got 20 users online,howe can I start the SQL in single user mode.
Thankyou.
If I start the server in single user mode does it reset the sort order?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI know it's completely not advised, but I have to do this: I need to make some updates to a system table. In short, I have some databases that were secondary databases in a log shipping scenario. I needed to recover those, so now they're not in STANDBY. All I want to do is reset those back to STANDBY so I don't have to completely start from scratch. One of the databases is 500GB and I do not feel like having to wait for another full restore of that database.
I have DAC enabled on the server in question. Whenever I try to connect, it says DAC is NOT enabled. Wrong!!! When I run this query:
Code Snippetsp_configure 'remote admin connections', 1;GORECONFIGURE;GO The first statement runs fine. It says to RUN RECONFIGURE. I run reconfigure. I then get an error saying ad-hoc updates to system catalogs are not accepted. Huh?????? So I start the SQL Server in Single User Mode. I closed every single connection. Nothing else is trying to connect. When I try to connect to the instance via SSMS using ADMIN:<instance name>, I get an error saying I can't connect because only one adminstrator is allowed to connect while in single user mode. I do not get what the H-E-double-hockey-sticks is going on! I'm set up as a sysadmin on this box... I don't get it...
I have been trying with no success to start my SQL Server in single user mode and login.
Here's the scenario:
I've got a one node cluster with SQL Server 2000 installed. I changed the startup parameters of SQL Server to reflect the following:
-c
-f
-m
I have disabled SQL Server Agent so it doesn't start when I bring SQL Server online. But when I do bring SQL Server online, I'm not able to connect at all. I keep getting the "only one administrator can log on at one time".
There is no one else trying to log on and SQL Agent is disabled.
What is the scoop? Has anyone seen this? And if so, how did you address it? I'm trying to restore master and need to get this done sooner rather than later.
Thanks!
I was wondering if you guys might give me some advice on how best to handle a particular scenario i'm struggling with.
I have a client that basically wants web-based-update access to their sql server database. Specifically, for a group of users to be able to access a page where they select a record for editing. the caveat is that no two users should be able to pull up the same record at the same time. Originally I would have thought there was some easier record-locking-mechanism I could exploit within sql server or ado.net itself, but I haven't been able to come up with anything.. so this is my current approach:
The page they use starts-out with basically a blank form. there are custom-built paging controls at the bottom of the screen. they click page-forward to begin and a stored procedure is ran to select a record and update a field on that record to indicate "in-process". when they finish editing the record - or page on to the next record without updating - another stored procedure is ran - updating/resetting the status field on the record appropriately.
The entire page is encapsulated within an ajax.net updatepanel.
The entire page has caching disabled. This works well in conjunction with the first page being blank. if they get out of the app and try to get back in by clicking the back button - all they can do is get to the first (blank) page.
A piece of javascript window.onunload clicks a button on the page that releases the record they currently have selected in the event of a re-direct, clicking back, etc.. it appears to work with everything except a window close. in that case, i have a stored procedure running periodically on the server that checks how long a record has been selected - and if it exceeds the time indicated - resets the record as to allow it to be re-selected later.
In the event of session timeout, they are redirected to another page that tells them their session has timed-out (and since the window.onunload fires - it takes care of releasing the record if they have one on the screen).
The concept seemed to be working well until I started multi-user testing. Now it seems as if two users time it perfectly - they are actually able to both select the same record. it happens pretty rarely, but it does seem to happen. I'm guessing this has to do with how my stored procedure is structured - possibly allowing a tiny-enough window between the record being selected for editing - and the update running to actually status the record as in-process (2 separate sql statements within the one stored procedure).
I believe I also have a found a second quirk in my approach where something is causing the window.onunload event to fire twice in some strange situations.. but that's more annoying/confusing from a logging standpoint than anything..
I've read where people say to ensure you dont update a record that's already been updated - that you should compare the fields before you actually perform the update and ensure they haven't changed since you selected it.. but to me that doesn't solve anything.. if two people select the same record and both spend time working on it - the person that tries to update last has just wasted their time.
I've also toyed with the idea of maintaining a separate table in the database to hold the keys to the currently selected records and use that to keep multiple people from selecting the same record - but honestly i dont know if that approach is any better than what i'm doing now.
anyway, I was just curious if you guys had any advice in regards to how you'd handle a request like this.. or if you see any obvious problems/fixes with my current approach..
I would greatly appreciate any info you could provide-
thanks-
Good Day,
I have an application that is being developed on Visual Studio 2005 (VB) and SQL Express. The application is set up to use the SQL Express on the development computer, and if an Internet or CD install is built, it installs SQL Express as expected. The question is, when it is time to deploy and put the SQL Express database on the 2003 server, how should the install on the server be done and how should we set the database path to the server?
Thanks,
Dave