Model database recovery planning

I cannot think of any reason, in our environment, why I would recover the model database. Change framework has all databases coming from DEV & QA before landing on PROD. We have never used the model database as framework of new databases either.

So, if I discontinued backup of the database, what is my recovery method if it become corrupt? Since mine is not used, can I simply copy it from another server?

Just keep either a BACKUP or a copy of the mdf/ldf files in safe storage.|||Just use the create script in your \install folder to recreate your model db.|||

Just be aware that it is an ESSENTIAL database in your system. There is one circumstance under which you do use it automatically for creating a database, and that is the initialisation of your tempdb every time you start the SQL Server service.

My understanding is that if model is not available then tempdb cannot be initialised and SQL Server will not start.

mixed SQL2k/VS 2003 and SQL05 environment?

I'm looking for information on how the various pieces/parts of RS could work
in our environment. Currently that:
+ several SQL Server 2000 boxes (individual instances on individual and
distinct servers) on Windows Server 2003.
+ multiple load balanced web servers running on Windows 2000 with IIS5,
mixture of "classic" ASP and .NET web applications authored in Visual
Studio, Visual Studio .NET 2003.
We have a need to implement Reporting Services, but are confused about the
path to take. My instinct tells me to start a brand new implementation of
RS by using SQL 2005. For us, that should not be a problem. We could
easily take one of our SQL 2k boxes and upgrade to SQL 2005.
But now the questions are related to the implications on our .NET
development and production/runtime environments.
1) do we need to install .NET 2.0 on our web servers? (I'm assuming yes)
2) will this impact our existing .NET 1.1 applications in anyway?
3) what about our developers, all set up already w/ Visual Studio .NET 2003
and ASP.NET 1.1? Will they need install Visual Studio .NET 2005 and ASP.NET
2.0? Will this affect their existing visual studio projects?
Or, to minimize the impact, will only report *authors* need to have VS 2005?
4) To make reports available on our existing ASP.NET 1.1 based intranet, do
we need to have ASP.NET 2.0 web pages developed or can existing ASP.NET 1.1
web pages work?
Hopefully this gives you the gist of the kind of technical nitty-gritty I'm
after. Any links, direct info, etc. would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
-- MargoFirst. RS 2005 can be installed on a 2000 database. You do need to have a
2005 license though.
RS 2005 is more fully featured and I do think if you are starting out I
would go that route.
RS 2005 is a framework 2.0 app. It comes with a version of VS 2005 so you do
not have to purchase VS 2005 unless you want the new controls.
VS 2005 and VS 2003 can coexist side by side (I am doing that).
Only report authors need VS 2005 environment.
From asp.net 1.1 web pages you can integrate either using url integration or
web services. BUT, the new controls from VS 2005 allow much easier and
tighter integration. The new controls require asp.net 2.0 (2.0 framework).
You can definitely have both 1.1 and 2.0 framework on the same IIS server.
If you want the new controls then buy VB.Net professional (cheapest way to
get the new controls).
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"Margo Noreen" <margo_no_spam@.on2morning.com> wrote in message
news:eAHcFxLBGHA.2788@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> I'm looking for information on how the various pieces/parts of RS could
> work in our environment. Currently that:
> + several SQL Server 2000 boxes (individual instances on individual and
> distinct servers) on Windows Server 2003.
> + multiple load balanced web servers running on Windows 2000 with IIS5,
> mixture of "classic" ASP and .NET web applications authored in Visual
> Studio, Visual Studio .NET 2003.
> We have a need to implement Reporting Services, but are confused about the
> path to take. My instinct tells me to start a brand new implementation of
> RS by using SQL 2005. For us, that should not be a problem. We could
> easily take one of our SQL 2k boxes and upgrade to SQL 2005.
> But now the questions are related to the implications on our .NET
> development and production/runtime environments.
> 1) do we need to install .NET 2.0 on our web servers? (I'm assuming yes)
> 2) will this impact our existing .NET 1.1 applications in anyway?
> 3) what about our developers, all set up already w/ Visual Studio .NET
> 2003 and ASP.NET 1.1? Will they need install Visual Studio .NET 2005 and
> ASP.NET 2.0? Will this affect their existing visual studio projects?
> Or, to minimize the impact, will only report *authors* need to have VS
> 2005?
> 4) To make reports available on our existing ASP.NET 1.1 based intranet,
> do we need to have ASP.NET 2.0 web pages developed or can existing ASP.NET
> 1.1 web pages work?
> Hopefully this gives you the gist of the kind of technical nitty-gritty
> I'm after. Any links, direct info, etc. would be greatly appreciated.
> Thanks.
> -- Margo
>
>|||Thank you for the quick reply Bruce... this actually confirms what I was
reading and otherwise stitching together; it was nice to get another nod in
that direction... Seems like it shouldn't be so hard... <g>.
-- Margo

Mixed environment x64 and x86 (compatibility)

I have all sql servers running 32bit. We need another SQL cluster and I would
like to install SQL2005 x64. My concerns are the compatibility between
SQL2000 32bit, SQL2005 32bit and the new one:
questions:
can I restore a x64 database to a 32bit SQL Server?
Anyone has had compatibility issues using a mixed environment?
If there is no difference, why there are different AdventureWorks versions
(x64 and x86) to download?
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=E719ECF7-9F46-4312-AF89-6AD8702E4E6E&displaylang=en
Microsoft says there is no problem, but I would like to hear some real
experience ..
thanks
Julio M
Hi
"Julio Mattos" wrote:

> I have all sql servers running 32bit. We need another SQL cluster and I would
> like to install SQL2005 x64. My concerns are the compatibility between
> SQL2000 32bit, SQL2005 32bit and the new one:
> questions:
> can I restore a x64 database to a 32bit SQL Server?
The backup file format is the same on both machines. The database file
format has not changed either, therefore you can move these from one platform
to the next without issues.

> Anyone has had compatibility issues using a mixed environment?

> If there is no difference, why there are different AdventureWorks versions
> (x64 and x86) to download?
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=E719ECF7-9F46-4312-AF89-6AD8702E4E6E&displaylang=en
This is probably because of the samples being deployed on different platforms.

> Microsoft says there is no problem, but I would like to hear some real
> experience ..
You should deploy this because you need a platform that is better suited for
the 64 bit environment i.e. better memory usage, better processors etc.

> thanks
> Julio M
>
John

Mixed environment x64 and x86 (compatibility)

I have all sql servers running 32bit. We need another SQL cluster and I would
like to install SQL2005 x64. My concerns are the compatibility between
SQL2000 32bit, SQL2005 32bit and the new one:
questions:
can I restore a x64 database to a 32bit SQL Server?
Anyone has had compatibility issues using a mixed environment?
If there is no difference, why there are different AdventureWorks versions
(x64 and x86) to download?
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=E719ECF7-9F46-4312-AF89-6AD8702E4E6E&displaylang=en
Microsoft says there is no problem, but I would like to hear some real
experience ..
thanks
Julio MHi
"Julio Mattos" wrote:
> I have all sql servers running 32bit. We need another SQL cluster and I would
> like to install SQL2005 x64. My concerns are the compatibility between
> SQL2000 32bit, SQL2005 32bit and the new one:
> questions:
> can I restore a x64 database to a 32bit SQL Server?
The backup file format is the same on both machines. The database file
format has not changed either, therefore you can move these from one platform
to the next without issues.
> Anyone has had compatibility issues using a mixed environment?
> If there is no difference, why there are different AdventureWorks versions
> (x64 and x86) to download?
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=E719ECF7-9F46-4312-AF89-6AD8702E4E6E&displaylang=en
This is probably because of the samples being deployed on different platforms.
> Microsoft says there is no problem, but I would like to hear some real
> experience ..
You should deploy this because you need a platform that is better suited for
the 64 bit environment i.e. better memory usage, better processors etc.
> thanks
> Julio M
>
John

Mixed environment x64 and x86 (compatibility)

I have all sql servers running 32bit. We need another SQL cluster and I woul
d
like to install SQL2005 x64. My concerns are the compatibility between
SQL2000 32bit, SQL2005 32bit and the new one:
questions:
can I restore a x64 database to a 32bit SQL Server?
Anyone has had compatibility issues using a mixed environment?
If there is no difference, why there are different AdventureWorks versions
(x64 and x86) to download?
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...&displaylang=en
Microsoft says there is no problem, but I would like to hear some real
experience ..
thanks
Julio MHi
"Julio Mattos" wrote:

> I have all sql servers running 32bit. We need another SQL cluster and I wo
uld
> like to install SQL2005 x64. My concerns are the compatibility between
> SQL2000 32bit, SQL2005 32bit and the new one:
> questions:
> can I restore a x64 database to a 32bit SQL Server?
The backup file format is the same on both machines. The database file
format has not changed either, therefore you can move these from one platfor
m
to the next without issues.

> Anyone has had compatibility issues using a mixed environment?

> If there is no difference, why there are different AdventureWorks versions
> (x64 and x86) to download?
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...&displaylang=en
This is probably because of the samples being deployed on different platform
s.

> Microsoft says there is no problem, but I would like to hear some real
> experience ..
You should deploy this because you need a platform that is better suited for
the 64 bit environment i.e. better memory usage, better processors etc.

> thanks
> Julio M
>
John

Missing system stored procedures

I developed a Pocket PC app that uses merge replication in an isolated
development environment. It worked fine. The I moved to the operational
environment. Synchronization fails with error 2812, "Could not find stored
procedure 'sp_MSgetmakegenerationapplock'". A little investigation shows that
in the development environment, that stored procedure exists, but it does not
exist on the operational SQL Server. (The total sp count on the development
server is 969, on the operational server 930, so other sp's are also
missing). I disabled replication on the operational server and then
reconfigured it, but that didn't help.
The operational SQL Server is SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition running sp3a.
Any ideas why those sp's didn't get created, and how to fix this problem?
There's a message thread out there that suggests that xp_cmdshell is needed
to properly create some replication-related sp's. Is it possible that
xp_cmdshell is missing or disabled? However, when I configure the server for
replication, I don't get any error messages.
You need to reapply the sp. This problem has been observed before.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"PGallez" <PGallez@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8A112E32-D0BB-4FB5-9A51-B62BBAFBAB01@.microsoft.com...
> I developed a Pocket PC app that uses merge replication in an isolated
> development environment. It worked fine. The I moved to the operational
> environment. Synchronization fails with error 2812, "Could not find stored
> procedure 'sp_MSgetmakegenerationapplock'". A little investigation shows
that
> in the development environment, that stored procedure exists, but it does
not
> exist on the operational SQL Server. (The total sp count on the
development
> server is 969, on the operational server 930, so other sp's are also
> missing). I disabled replication on the operational server and then
> reconfigured it, but that didn't help.
> The operational SQL Server is SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition running
sp3a.
> Any ideas why those sp's didn't get created, and how to fix this problem?
> There's a message thread out there that suggests that xp_cmdshell is
needed
> to properly create some replication-related sp's. Is it possible that
> xp_cmdshell is missing or disabled? However, when I configure the server
for
> replication, I don't get any error messages.
|||Thanks much, I'll give that a try.
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> You need to reapply the sp. This problem has been observed before.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
> "PGallez" <PGallez@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:8A112E32-D0BB-4FB5-9A51-B62BBAFBAB01@.microsoft.com...
> that
> not
> development
> sp3a.
> needed
> for
>
>

Missing replicated records

Hi gurus there,
I have a puzzling scenario here.
Environment: SQL Server 2K5 (sp2) EE + windows 2K3
I have a publisher server PubSrv_1and two subscriber severs SubSrv_1 and
SubSrv_2, there are two publications on the Publication_1, and
Publication_2, but they all contain the same table as article tbl_A
Publication_1 is a transational replication with Subscription on SubSrv_1
and Publication_2 is a transactional replication with updateable
subscription on SubSrv_2.
Issue: sometimes I find there are missing records which appear in tbl_A on
PubSrv_1 but not in tbl_A on SubSrv_2 while still in tbl_A on SubSrv_1. In
another word, some records in the publication table are NOT replicated to
one subscriber but still replicated to another subscriber.
I am confused how this happens. Could someone please shed some lights here?
TIA
Jeff
Can you check the conflicts log on the subscriber to see if the
missing rows are logged there?
On Jan 9, 3:03 am, "jeff_y" <jeffrey...@.abc.com> wrote:
> Hi gurus there,
> I have a puzzling scenario here.
> Environment: SQL Server 2K5 (sp2) EE + windows 2K3
> I have a publisher server PubSrv_1and two subscriber severs SubSrv_1 and
> SubSrv_2, there are two publications on the Publication_1, and
> Publication_2, but they all contain the same table as article tbl_A
> Publication_1 is a transational replication with Subscription on SubSrv_1
> and Publication_2 is a transactional replication with updateable
> subscription on SubSrv_2.
> Issue: sometimes I find there are missing records which appear in tbl_A on
> PubSrv_1 but not in tbl_A on SubSrv_2 while still in tbl_A on SubSrv_1. In
> another word, some records in the publication table are NOT replicated to
> one subscriber but still replicated to another subscriber.
> I am confused how this happens. Could someone please shed some lights here?
> TIA
> Jeff
|||Hi Hillary,
Thanks for your quick response.
I am not sure where the conflicts log are for the transactional replication.
More information:
I have even put a delete trigger on the problematic table at the subsriber
side to try to log any deletion on the table, but find the trigger has never
been fired off. So in another word, the missing records have never been
deleted as they were in fact never replicated over from the publisher side.
I find the two subscribers have different editions, the SubSrv_2, which has
seen the issues, has edition 3042, while SubSrv_1 has 3161. Do you think
this can cause the issue (I am not convinced though)?
Thanks,
Jeff
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:86aa0601-0caa-49ad-b9a1-d5d3cc732456@.f10g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Can you check the conflicts log on the subscriber to see if the
> missing rows are logged there?
> On Jan 9, 3:03 am, "jeff_y" <jeffrey...@.abc.com> wrote:
>