Reinstall of RS on a 64 bit box

We have had the same issue on three 64 bit boxes when we tried to
reinstall RS. After removing RS and reinstalling when running the RS
configuration tool, when we hit the 'find' button it just blinks and
nothing happens. When running a profile in the back ground we see it
is trying to run the 'getverison' stored procedure in the master
database. This sp exists in the RS database. Since we have just done
a reinstall and not yet configured the system should realize the RS db
does not exsist and not even run this sp. I have tried restoring the
RS dbs from backup. Creating all of the RS objects in the master db
(I know not a good idea) nothing helps. I opened a PS case with
Microsoft. They suggested removing RS as well as the client tools.
This worked on 32 bit boxes, but not 64. I spent a month on this PS
case and they could only suggest rekicking the box.
Any ideas?On Aug 23, 5:14 pm, jim.stei...@.rackspace.com wrote:
> We have had the same issue on three 64 bit boxes when we tried to
> reinstall RS. After removing RS and reinstalling when running the RS
> configuration tool, when we hit the 'find' button it just blinks and
> nothing happens. When running a profile in the back ground we see it
> is trying to run the 'getverison' stored procedure in the master
> database. This sp exists in the RS database. Since we have just done
> a reinstall and not yet configured the system should realize the RS db
> does not exsist and not even run this sp. I have tried restoring the
> RS dbs from backup. Creating all of the RS objects in the master db
> (I know not a good idea) nothing helps. I opened a PS case with
> Microsoft. They suggested removing RS as well as the client tools.
> This worked on 32 bit boxes, but not 64. I spent a month on this PS
> case and they could only suggest rekicking the box.
> Any ideas?
You might want to make sure that you removed all of the Reporting
Services components in the registry and possibly even the Assembly
references in the GAC. Hope this helps.
Regards,
Enrique Martinez
Sr. Software Consultant

reindexing job taking too long

I have an optimization job on a 4 way SQL 2000 box that takes 7-12 hours.
The db is 150 gigs. I can't figure out why sometimes it finishes 5 hours
earlier than other times. Backups are not contending with this optimization
job, but users may be. How can I find this out?
TIA
jjAre there active processes locking this table during the index
creation/defragmentation/reindexing?
--
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
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
"jj" <jeff_detoro@.urmc.rochester.edu> wrote in message
news:esxLN5m1GHA.4116@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>I have an optimization job on a 4 way SQL 2000 box that takes 7-12 hours.
>The db is 150 gigs. I can't figure out why sometimes it finishes 5 hours
>earlier than other times. Backups are not contending with this optimization
>job, but users may be. How can I find this out?
> TIA
> jj
>|||jj wrote:
> I have an optimization job on a 4 way SQL 2000 box that takes 7-12 hours.
> The db is 150 gigs. I can't figure out why sometimes it finishes 5 hours
> earlier than other times. Backups are not contending with this optimization
> job, but users may be. How can I find this out?
> TIA
> jj
>
You'll have to monitor blocking during the times that this process is
running, either with Profiler or with your own script that watches
sysprocesses.
Something to consider would be to not rebuild all indexes, but to only
rebuild those that are badly fragmented. I have a script that will
automate this for you:
http://realsqlguy.com/serendipity/archives/12-Humpty-Dumpty-Sat-On-A-Wall...html
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com

reindexing job taking too long

I have an optimization job on a 4 way SQL 2000 box that takes 7-12 hours.
The db is 150 gigs. I can't figure out why sometimes it finishes 5 hours
earlier than other times. Backups are not contending with this optimization
job, but users may be. How can I find this out?
TIA
jjAre there active processes locking this table during the index
creation/defragmentation/reindexing?
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
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
"jj" <jeff_detoro@.urmc.rochester.edu> wrote in message
news:esxLN5m1GHA.4116@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>I have an optimization job on a 4 way SQL 2000 box that takes 7-12 hours.
>The db is 150 gigs. I can't figure out why sometimes it finishes 5 hours
>earlier than other times. Backups are not contending with this optimization
>job, but users may be. How can I find this out?
> TIA
> jj
>|||jj wrote:
> I have an optimization job on a 4 way SQL 2000 box that takes 7-12 hours.
> The db is 150 gigs. I can't figure out why sometimes it finishes 5 hours
> earlier than other times. Backups are not contending with this optimizatio
n
> job, but users may be. How can I find this out?
> TIA
> jj
>
You'll have to monitor blocking during the times that this process is
running, either with Profiler or with your own script that watches
sysprocesses.
Something to consider would be to not rebuild all indexes, but to only
rebuild those that are badly fragmented. I have a script that will
automate this for you:
http://realsqlguy.com/serendipity/a...realsqlguy.com

re-indexing job takes more time

We have a re-indexing all DBs schedule job in our SQL 2000 box,
normally it took 7 hours to complete but all of the sudden now it
takes more than 20 hours.
What do you think it cause this problem? We have no clue."Frank" <soal6570@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:42601b2.0405052143.66cdbe69@.posting.google.co m...
> We have a re-indexing all DBs schedule job in our SQL 2000 box,
> normally it took 7 hours to complete but all of the sudden now it
> takes more than 20 hours.
> What do you think it cause this problem? We have no clue.

Have you checked general CPU and I/O activity on the server, using Perfmon?
There may be another process which is taking up resources, or perhaps it
could be a symptom of Slammer infection, if the MSSQL service has a very
high CPU load. You might also want to use Profiler to check if there's any
unusual activity within MSSQL itself, which might be creating problems.

Simon|||It could also be caused by other activity blocking the rebuilds, or badly
fragmented freespace if the indexes have grown.

On a seperate note, here's a link to a whitepaper you may want to read to
determine if reindexing everything is the right thing to do for your
particular situation.

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...n/ss2kidbp.mspx

Regards

--
Paul Randal
Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

"Simon Hayes" <sql@.hayes.ch> wrote in message
news:409a67f2$1_1@.news.bluewin.ch...
> "Frank" <soal6570@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:42601b2.0405052143.66cdbe69@.posting.google.co m...
> > We have a re-indexing all DBs schedule job in our SQL 2000 box,
> > normally it took 7 hours to complete but all of the sudden now it
> > takes more than 20 hours.
> > What do you think it cause this problem? We have no clue.
> Have you checked general CPU and I/O activity on the server, using
Perfmon?
> There may be another process which is taking up resources, or perhaps it
> could be a symptom of Slammer infection, if the MSSQL service has a very
> high CPU load. You might also want to use Profiler to check if there's any
> unusual activity within MSSQL itself, which might be creating problems.
> Simon

re-index takes twoce as long on 2005..

Hi
I run a reindex of a 130GB dabase on SQL 2000 and it takes almost exactly 4
hours. IF I run exactly the same command on a 2005 box against a restore of
exactly the same database, it takes almost exactly 8 hours.
am I missing someting here? does a re-ind on 2005 work differently than on
2000? is it doing something twice that I havent asked it to, and that it must
be doing by default?
Any help would be appreciated.
ta
Hi,
Can you see if you have enough room in LDF file while doing the reindex in
SQL 2005. Otherwise the autogrow will happen
and slow down the reindex command...
Thanks
Hari
"Methodology" <Methodology@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:285AE110-BFF1-4CAF-88A6-616C2D8491C9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi
> I run a reindex of a 130GB dabase on SQL 2000 and it takes almost exactly
> 4
> hours. IF I run exactly the same command on a 2005 box against a restore
> of
> exactly the same database, it takes almost exactly 8 hours.
> am I missing someting here? does a re-ind on 2005 work differently than on
> 2000? is it doing something twice that I havent asked it to, and that it
> must
> be doing by default?
> Any help would be appreciated.
> ta
|||Ive tried 'alter index x rebuild' instead of 'dbcc dbreindex' and its
slightly more thsan an hour quicker on my largest table...I think therefore
problem solved.
ta
"Hari Prasad" wrote:

> Hi,
> Can you see if you have enough room in LDF file while doing the reindex in
> SQL 2005. Otherwise the autogrow will happen
> and slow down the reindex command...
> Thanks
> Hari
> "Methodology" <Methodology@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:285AE110-BFF1-4CAF-88A6-616C2D8491C9@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||They use exactly the same code. Is the hardware the same between 2000 and
2005, specifically number of CPUs and IO bandwidth?
Paul Randal
Lead Program Manager, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlserverstorageengine/default.aspx
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Methodology" <Methodology@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F3B117CE-C3AF-4FCB-A328-A7FC66B7344B@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Ive tried 'alter index x rebuild' instead of 'dbcc dbreindex' and its
> slightly more thsan an hour quicker on my largest table...I think
> therefore
> problem solved.
> ta
> "Hari Prasad" wrote:

Registration card returned by post office.

I recently purchased SQL Server 2000 Developer Edition
here in Canada. I mailed the registration card to the
P.O. Box in San Francisco as indicated on the
accompanying documentation.
The post office has returned the card with a stamp that
says "Box Closed: Forwarding Order Expired".
As I did not get asked to register on-line when I
installed the product, how do I register that I have
acquired this product ?Chris,
The best is to call the local MS subsidiary. Check the numbers at
www.microsoft.com/canada.
--
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Please reply only to the newsgroups.
"Chris Smith" <chris.smith@.shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:088701c39fe5$f1774ac0$a001280a@.phx.gbl...
> I recently purchased SQL Server 2000 Developer Edition
> here in Canada. I mailed the registration card to the
> P.O. Box in San Francisco as indicated on the
> accompanying documentation.
> The post office has returned the card with a stamp that
> says "Box Closed: Forwarding Order Expired".
> As I did not get asked to register on-line when I
> installed the product, how do I register that I have
> acquired this product ?

registering new sql server

Hello,
I have SQL server developer version running on my local workstation.
I recently got a new Win 2003 Box.
Couple of things.
1) IT dept gave me 35 gigs are raid 5. Is this enough for a large DB?
It seems awfully small to me.
2) The SQL server is running all well. In my local Enterprise Manger.
I tried to register a sql server. But I can't get a connect() back.
What could be causing this? I can ping the SQL box because it's on the
same subnet.
Won Lee> 1) IT dept gave me 35 gigs are raid 5. Is this enough for a large DB?
> It seems awfully small to me.
Depends on what you consider a large db. We've got a sql database just over
1 million records spread across 100 tables with that many views and stored
procedures besides, and that's 2gb.
> 2) The SQL server is running all well. In my local Enterprise Manger.
> I tried to register a sql server. But I can't get a connect() back.
> What could be causing this? I can ping the SQL box because it's on the
> same subnet.
Did you set up an alias in the Client Network Utility?|||> 1) IT dept gave me 35 gigs are raid 5. Is this enough for a large DB?
> It seems awfully small to me.
Only you can tell us how large your database is going to be. You need to
research your business requirements and determine size and growth from that.
There's no such thing as a "typical" size for a database.
> I tried to register a sql server. But I can't get a connect() back.
Can you give some more detail. Do you get an error message? Can you verify
in Service Manager that the server is running? Did you supply a valid user
name and password?
This might also help:
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=328306
David Portas
--
Please reply only to the newsgroup
--|||William Morris wrote:
>>1) IT dept gave me 35 gigs are raid 5. Is this enough for a large DB?
>>It seems awfully small to me.
>
> Depends on what you consider a large db. We've got a sql database just over
> 1 million records spread across 100 tables with that many views and stored
> procedures besides, and that's 2gb.
>
Thanks. I looked at the old DB and realized that we only grew at a 3
meg per month rate. I guess the DB is good for awhile.
>>2) The SQL server is running all well. In my local Enterprise Manger.
>>I tried to register a sql server. But I can't get a connect() back.
>>What could be causing this? I can ping the SQL box because it's on the
>>same subnet.
>
> Did you set up an alias in the Client Network Utility?
I didn't do anything. My IT guys set up the box. The error message I'm
getting is, WINBOX-SQL server does not exist or access denied.
I created a user as a DBO owner. I also tried with the SA login
credentials. I can remote desktop into the server and login to the SQL
server through Enterprise Manager and Query Analyzer.
I have no idea what Client Network Utility is so I looked it up in Books
Online. I will give that a try.
BTW How do I find out if they installed the Developer version or the
client/server version of SQL Server 2000?|||> Can you give some more detail. Do you get an error message? Can you verify
> in Service Manager that the server is running? Did you supply a valid user
> name and password?
> This might also help:
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=328306
>
David,
Yes the service is started. I did created a user and also used the SA
password to login locally.
Thanks for the KB article I will look through it.|||> This might also help:
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=328306
>
Just in case anyone is insterested.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;306199
A link from the KB article David posted fixed the problem. Funny thing
is that the server is not on DHCP. It was when we first popped it in to
the rack but promptly changed it to a fixed IP address. Kinda funny.
But at least it works now.|||Thanks to William and David for helping me out.
Won Lee