Monday, March 19, 2012
Mixed environment x64 and x86 (compatibility)
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)
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)
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
Friday, March 9, 2012
Missing SQL Server 2000 Performance Counters
did not have access to the SQL performance counters and it is the same on
other servers with the same combination. Has anyone run into this issue?
What's the solution to it? thanks.Hi Jason,
Thank you for your post.
I understand that you can not view the Performance Counters of SQL Server
on a 64bit OS. If I misunderstood your concern, please feel free to let me
know.
A 64-bit perfmon client app can view OS counters plus counters for any
application that has installed a 64-bit perfmon DLL (a 64-bit app can't
load a 32-bit DLL). This means that a 64-bit perfmon client app can see a
local 64-bit SQL instance's counters, but not counters for a local 32-bit
instance running in WOW64.
A possible workaround to this problem could be:
Please run "mmc /32 perfmon.msc" from Start-Run. Please let me know whether
you can see the perfmon counters for 32-bit sql server or not.
Sincerely,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Community Support
==================================================
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
==================================================This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Missing SQL Server 2000 Performance Counters
did not have access to the SQL performance counters and it is the same on
other servers with the same combination. Has anyone run into this issue?
What's the solution to it? thanks.Hi Jason,
Thank you for your post.
I understand that you can not view the Performance Counters of SQL Server
on a 64bit OS. If I misunderstood your concern, please feel free to let me
know.
A 64-bit perfmon client app can view OS counters plus counters for any
application that has installed a 64-bit perfmon DLL (a 64-bit app can't
load a 32-bit DLL). This means that a 64-bit perfmon client app can see a
local 64-bit SQL instance's counters, but not counters for a local 32-bit
instance running in WOW64.
A possible workaround to this problem could be:
Please run "mmc /32 perfmon.msc" from Start-Run. Please let me know whether
you can see the perfmon counters for 32-bit sql server or not.
Sincerely,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Community Support
========================================
==========
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
========================================
==========
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.|||Since this thread is already closed, here is a link to it:
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/mi...5989f5fc6817daa
"I installed SQL Server 2000 w/SP4 on a x64 Windows 2003 OS. I found
that I
did not have access to the SQL performance counters and it is the same
on
other servers with the same combination. Has anyone run into this
issue?
What's the solution to it? thanks. "
We are having the same problem, and the posted work around does work:
"A possible workaround to this problem could be:
Please run "mmc /32 perfmon.msc" from Start-Run. Please let me know
whether
you can see the perfmon counters for 32-bit sql server or not. "
...But, that prevents us from being able to see the counters from our
own computers which makes troubleshooting emergencies much quicker than
having to log in to the server itself to perform this.
Does anyone know any way of being able to see these counters from a
remote computer?
Thanks.
Monday, February 20, 2012
Missing Features In Standard Edition X64?
Hi all
In BOL in the features per version section it states that certain features available in the 32-bit version of Std Edition is not available in the 64-bit version. Eg. Database Mail, Query Editor, Query Designer etc.
I have downloaded the latest BOL (May 2007) and installed it and it still says certain features are not available in X64.
However I configured Database Mail on Std Edition X64 and it works 100%. Had some issues with SQLAgent using it but Service Pack 2 solved the problem.
Query Editor and Designer works even though Microsoft says it isn't available.
Is there any difference in the tools or features available in Std Edition 32-bit or 64-bit?
My other concern is what has Microsoft said is available and isn't?
From my tests I can't see anything missing. We are about to go purchase software and licenses and don't want to make the wrong choice.
Thanks
John
Currently, there are not 64 bit client tools pubically available to use with 64 bit SQL Server.
The 32 bit tools work just fine.
You most likely have installed and are using the 32 bit client tools.
|||The following page in Books on Line is in error.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143761.aspx
I have submitted two requests for changes:
1. Remove the standard edition 64 bit column from the management tools section, and update the header of the SE 32 column to include SE 64. This says that tools features are the same in 32 and 64 bit.
2. SQL Mail is available only in 32 bit installations. DB Mail is available in 32 and 64 bit installs, whether they are standard or enterprise.
Thanks for pointing this out. I hope we can spare you further confusion.
jkh
|||Thanks for getting back to me and clearing up the confusion.
Regards
John