Any solution for that?

I've got a .dts which load data to several Sql2k servers by Copy SQL Server Objects Task. I'd like to add another task for a Sql25k but I can't because of it's requesting SMO.

It seems that such task need DMO. I know that there are other ways for do such stuff in that DTS but I wonder if there is any trick or shortcut for to avoid this barrier.

How odd, if you use Dts Import/Export Wizard from EM sql25k is accepted.

any pros/ cons to having multiple Publications

sql2k sp3
Im going to start Replicating 40 or so tables. Is there
any good/ bad to each table going into its own Publication?
TIA, ChrisR
ideally you will want to group your publications into logical units for
administrative, functional, and performance reasons.
To make life simpler for yourself you should have a single publication. This
eases the administrative burden. However sometimes you will want to
replicate different tables on different schedules, ie some transactions are
required to be replicated real time, others must only be replicated once per
day.
You will get better performance if you group your articles that have dri
relationships into the same publications, and then create multiple
publications and use the independent_agent option on each publication. This
will create multiple distribution agents replicating to the same subscriber
db.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"ChrisR" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:01ef01c496a0$ed8c86c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> sql2k sp3
> Im going to start Replicating 40 or so tables. Is there
> any good/ bad to each table going into its own Publication?
> TIA, ChrisR
|||> You will get better performance if you group your articles that have dri
> relationships into the same publications, and then create multiple
> publications and use the independent_agent option on each publication.
This
> will create multiple distribution agents replicating to the same
subscriber
> db.
Im going to be replicating to a denormalized db for reporting purposes only.
(Thanks to you ;-) ) Therefore, Im not going to include the dri as it will
be enforced on the Publisher. That being the case, theres really no logical
grouping I can use. What about just putting the really big tables into
they're own Publications and using the independent_agent option you
mentioned?
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OvJMuQtlEHA.896@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> ideally you will want to group your publications into logical units for
> administrative, functional, and performance reasons.
> To make life simpler for yourself you should have a single publication.
This
> eases the administrative burden. However sometimes you will want to
> replicate different tables on different schedules, ie some transactions
are
> required to be replicated real time, others must only be replicated once
per
> day.
> You will get better performance if you group your articles that have dri
> relationships into the same publications, and then create multiple
> publications and use the independent_agent option on each publication.
This
> will create multiple distribution agents replicating to the same
subscriber
> db.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
>
> "ChrisR" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:01ef01c496a0$ed8c86c0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
>
|||separate them according to activity. I.e. if you have 10 really volatile
tables you are publisher 20 ones that are modified a couple of time an hour,
and 50 tables which are fairly static you could do 5 or 10 separate
publications, each with one or two of the volatile tables, 4 to 2 of the
less volatile tables, and 1 to 2 of the static tables.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"ChrisR" <chris@.noemail.com> wrote in message
news:uj$UMhulEHA.2020@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> This
> subscriber
> Im going to be replicating to a denormalized db for reporting purposes
only.
> (Thanks to you ;-) ) Therefore, Im not going to include the dri as it
will
> be enforced on the Publisher. That being the case, theres really no
logical
> grouping I can use. What about just putting the really big tables into
> they're own Publications and using the independent_agent option you
> mentioned?
>
> "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OvJMuQtlEHA.896@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> This
> are
> per
> This
> subscriber
>

Any one who knows this error about SQL 65 upgrade? its urgent, thanks.

Hi All,

I am doing the upgrade from SQL6.5 to SQL2K, the server version is:
SQL 6.5 English SP5 on WinNT Enterprise 4.0 English SP6,
new server is SQL 2K standard English SP1 on WinNT Enterprise 4.0 English SP6.

When I use SQL upgrade wizard to perform a two server upgrade, all steps seems ok, when move to the step of "Export & Import Via Name Pipe" I got a error. Pls see the below error. Pls let me know the reason and how to resolve it.

log file: Export and Import via Named Pipe - 007test.err

############# Log file content ############
Export.exe on the remote machine was hung...

Export Exit Code: 259 - export.exe -CodePage 1252 -DeviceType Pipe -AllTables yes -MasterPath D:\MSSQL\DATA\MASTER.DAT -DatabaseName test -DevicePath \\.\pipe\~cnvpipe0

Import Exit Code: -1 - ~cnvpipe0

Msg 4854, Level 21, State 1, Server NTAPPLIX02, Procedure , Line 1

[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]****

Time:12-03-2003 17:05:04.433

Error return from function CreateFile

in file CnvPipe.cpp

Line=142

rc=1326

Msg=Logon failure: unknown user name or bad password.

****
######################################Create/use a domain account for both sql server's service startup account. Make sure to add this domain account to the local admin group. Lastly, login using this domain account to run the upgrade.|||Originally posted by rnealejr
Create/use a domain account for both sql server's service startup account. Make sure to add this domain account to the local admin group. Lastly, login using this domain account to run the upgrade.

Hi,

Thanks, because the SQL65 server does not join any domain just a stand alone server, and i can not join this SQL server to any existing domain, but the SQL2K server is in a NT domain. Any solution for this situation ? One more problem, is the name pipe only connection method when perform a two server SQL upgrade?

Many thanks,

Zhanlan

any issues with sql2k on win2k3?

we're about to upgrade from
win2000, sql2000 sp3a standard edition, dual p3 900mhz, 2gb ram
to
win2003, sql2000 sp3a standard edition, dual xeon 3ghz hyperthreaded,
2gb ram
the only issue i could find at microsoft was the sql install issue
where win2003 wants sql sp3. any other issues to watch for?
do some people claim better performance by limiting sql server to use
only the two physical processors instead of the two physical processors
and the two logical processors?
"ch" <ch@.dontemailme.com> wrote in message
news:41A36D56.E36EF4A7@.dontemailme.com...
> we're about to upgrade from
> win2000, sql2000 sp3a standard edition, dual p3 900mhz, 2gb ram
> to
> win2003, sql2000 sp3a standard edition, dual xeon 3ghz hyperthreaded,
> 2gb ram
> the only issue i could find at microsoft was the sql install issue
> where win2003 wants sql sp3. any other issues to watch for?
I think you're covered, operating systems are comparable? In otherwords,
Windows 2000 Standard and Windows 2003 Standard?

> do some people claim better performance by limiting sql server to use
> only the two physical processors instead of the two physical processors
> and the two logical processors?
I prefer not to tinker with processor settings, rather allow the operating
system to manage the processors. in addition, Windows Server 2003 and SQL
Server 2000 does a fairly good job of dynamic memory and interfacing with
the processors. You could always run some benchmarks as there are always
certain situations, applications, etc where manual intervention may be
warranted.
Steve

any issues with sql2k on win2k3?

we're about to upgrade from
win2000, sql2000 sp3a standard edition, dual p3 900mhz, 2gb ram
to
win2003, sql2000 sp3a standard edition, dual xeon 3ghz hyperthreaded,
2gb ram
the only issue i could find at microsoft was the sql install issue
where win2003 wants sql sp3. any other issues to watch for?
do some people claim better performance by limiting sql server to use
only the two physical processors instead of the two physical processors
and the two logical processors?"ch" <ch@.dontemailme.com> wrote in message
news:41A36D56.E36EF4A7@.dontemailme.com...
> we're about to upgrade from
> win2000, sql2000 sp3a standard edition, dual p3 900mhz, 2gb ram
> to
> win2003, sql2000 sp3a standard edition, dual xeon 3ghz hyperthreaded,
> 2gb ram
> the only issue i could find at microsoft was the sql install issue
> where win2003 wants sql sp3. any other issues to watch for?
I think you're covered, operating systems are comparable? In otherwords,
Windows 2000 Standard and Windows 2003 Standard?

> do some people claim better performance by limiting sql server to use
> only the two physical processors instead of the two physical processors
> and the two logical processors?
I prefer not to tinker with processor settings, rather allow the operating
system to manage the processors. in addition, Windows Server 2003 and SQL
Server 2000 does a fairly good job of dynamic memory and interfacing with
the processors. You could always run some benchmarks as there are always
certain situations, applications, etc where manual intervention may be
warranted.
Steve

any issues with sql2k on win2k3?

we're about to upgrade from
win2000, sql2000 sp3a standard edition, dual p3 900mhz, 2gb ram
to
win2003, sql2000 sp3a standard edition, dual xeon 3ghz hyperthreaded,
2gb ram
the only issue i could find at microsoft was the sql install issue
where win2003 wants sql sp3. any other issues to watch for?
do some people claim better performance by limiting sql server to use
only the two physical processors instead of the two physical processors
and the two logical processors?"ch" <ch@.dontemailme.com> wrote in message
news:41A36D56.E36EF4A7@.dontemailme.com...
> we're about to upgrade from
> win2000, sql2000 sp3a standard edition, dual p3 900mhz, 2gb ram
> to
> win2003, sql2000 sp3a standard edition, dual xeon 3ghz hyperthreaded,
> 2gb ram
> the only issue i could find at microsoft was the sql install issue
> where win2003 wants sql sp3. any other issues to watch for?
I think you're covered, operating systems are comparable? In otherwords,
Windows 2000 Standard and Windows 2003 Standard?
> do some people claim better performance by limiting sql server to use
> only the two physical processors instead of the two physical processors
> and the two logical processors?
I prefer not to tinker with processor settings, rather allow the operating
system to manage the processors. in addition, Windows Server 2003 and SQL
Server 2000 does a fairly good job of dynamic memory and interfacing with
the processors. You could always run some benchmarks as there are always
certain situations, applications, etc where manual intervention may be
warranted.
Steve

any article regarding differences between SQL2K and Yukon

any article regarding differences between SQL2K and YukonThere is almost none public info on Yukon yet, as those who has access to it are under
non-disclosure agreements. Your best bet it probably to search the net and try to find out what has
"leaked" until now.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:upjwehGgDHA.944@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>|||Of the information that has been made public, the biggest change appears to
be the ability to write stored procs, UDF's and triggers using any .NET
language. This could potentially alter, drastically, how coding is done at
the database level. T-SQL is also being beefed up significantly.
J.R.
Largo SQL Tools
The Finest Collection of SQL Tools Available
http://www.largosqltools.com
"Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:upjwehGgDHA.944@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>|||> language. This could potentially alter, drastically, how coding is done
at
> the database level.
I guess the key is 'could potentially'. Some other DBMSs have introduced
similar features. As far as I can tell from working with DBAs of those
products, the database level coding doesn't seem to have been altered that
drastically. Perhaps, it's just the DBA crowd I hang out with :-)
--
Linchi Shea
linchi_shea@.NOSPAMml.com
"Largo SQL Tools" <nospam@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:u0jRvfHgDHA.3616@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Of the information that has been made public, the biggest change appears
to
> be the ability to write stored procs, UDF's and triggers using any .NET
> language. This could potentially alter, drastically, how coding is done
at
> the database level. T-SQL is also being beefed up significantly.
> J.R.
> Largo SQL Tools
> The Finest Collection of SQL Tools Available
> http://www.largosqltools.com
> "Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:upjwehGgDHA.944@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> >
> >
>

any alternative to getchecksum in SQL7?

Is there an equivalent of CHECKSUM from SQL2k in SQL7? I discovered
getchecksum in SQL7 but I can’t use it since the tables in the subscriber are
denormalized.
Thanks.
-A
Adam,
if you just want to check that the data is fully synchronized, I'd use
DataCompare from Redgate.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)