Does SRS sql engine break things that used to work?

I've noticed that when I take stable SQL 2000 engines that are at SP3A where
the sqlservr executable is at build 8.00.760 and install SRS I get a new
build of the sql engine.
SQLServr.EXE build is 8.00.859 in SRS and things that used to work don't.
For example, stored procedure debug doesn't work at all on an SRS SQL Server.
I know I have seen a few other things that are now broke.
Does anyone know of any hotfixes that repair features that SRS breaks?RS doesn't do anything to the SQL Engine. If you are talkin about the 859
hotfix that we require in certain situations, there is a newer hotfix that
resolves the problem. You need to request it from product support. See
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;831997.
Brian Welcker
Group Program Manager
Microsoft SQL Server
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Dan" <Dan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:22305D8C-975B-4283-BC11-8264CDDEEB1E@.microsoft.com...
> I've noticed that when I take stable SQL 2000 engines that are at SP3A
> where
> the sqlservr executable is at build 8.00.760 and install SRS I get a new
> build of the sql engine.
> SQLServr.EXE build is 8.00.859 in SRS and things that used to work don't.
> For example, stored procedure debug doesn't work at all on an SRS SQL
> Server.
> I know I have seen a few other things that are now broke.
> Does anyone know of any hotfixes that repair features that SRS breaks?|||Thank-you for the quick reponse Brian.
I think maybe I wasn't too clear on my question.
If I install SQL Server 2000 Standard and then take it up to SP3A the build
level of my SQL engine is 760.
However, if I then apply SQL Reporting Services on top of this installation
my SQL engine gets taken up to build 859. Maybe this is not directly related
to SRS, but it certainly takes place upon installation of SRS.
At that point I no longer have the capability to debug stored procs (I
believe thru the sp_dbidbg xp).
So the downside is that I have to make a choice between having SRS and then
losing the capability of stored proc debug or not having SRS.
If there is a hotfix that addresses that I would love to have it.
thanks,
dan
"Brian Welcker [MS]" wrote:
> RS doesn't do anything to the SQL Engine. If you are talkin about the 859
> hotfix that we require in certain situations, there is a newer hotfix that
> resolves the problem. You need to request it from product support. See
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;831997.
>
> --
> Brian Welcker
> Group Program Manager
> Microsoft SQL Server
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> "Dan" <Dan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:22305D8C-975B-4283-BC11-8264CDDEEB1E@.microsoft.com...
> > I've noticed that when I take stable SQL 2000 engines that are at SP3A
> > where
> > the sqlservr executable is at build 8.00.760 and install SRS I get a new
> > build of the sql engine.
> >
> > SQLServr.EXE build is 8.00.859 in SRS and things that used to work don't.
> >
> > For example, stored procedure debug doesn't work at all on an SRS SQL
> > Server.
> >
> > I know I have seen a few other things that are now broke.
> >
> > Does anyone know of any hotfixes that repair features that SRS breaks?
>
>|||The RS setup proces does not touch the version of the SQL engine. We really
don't. We recommend a specific SQL engine hotfix during the installation
process that does do this. You would need to call product support for the
hotfix. I don't think it is generally downloadable.
--
Brian Welcker
Group Program Manager
Microsoft SQL Server
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Dan" <Dan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DA304849-A7E9-4A92-A39D-5E338227EF52@.microsoft.com...
> Thank-you for the quick reponse Brian.
> I think maybe I wasn't too clear on my question.
> If I install SQL Server 2000 Standard and then take it up to SP3A the
> build
> level of my SQL engine is 760.
> However, if I then apply SQL Reporting Services on top of this
> installation
> my SQL engine gets taken up to build 859. Maybe this is not directly
> related
> to SRS, but it certainly takes place upon installation of SRS.
> At that point I no longer have the capability to debug stored procs (I
> believe thru the sp_dbidbg xp).
> So the downside is that I have to make a choice between having SRS and
> then
> losing the capability of stored proc debug or not having SRS.
> If there is a hotfix that addresses that I would love to have it.
> thanks,
> dan
>
> "Brian Welcker [MS]" wrote:
>> RS doesn't do anything to the SQL Engine. If you are talkin about the 859
>> hotfix that we require in certain situations, there is a newer hotfix
>> that
>> resolves the problem. You need to request it from product support. See
>> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;831997.
>>
>> --
>> Brian Welcker
>> Group Program Manager
>> Microsoft SQL Server
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights.
>> "Dan" <Dan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:22305D8C-975B-4283-BC11-8264CDDEEB1E@.microsoft.com...
>> > I've noticed that when I take stable SQL 2000 engines that are at SP3A
>> > where
>> > the sqlservr executable is at build 8.00.760 and install SRS I get a
>> > new
>> > build of the sql engine.
>> >
>> > SQLServr.EXE build is 8.00.859 in SRS and things that used to work
>> > don't.
>> >
>> > For example, stored procedure debug doesn't work at all on an SRS SQL
>> > Server.
>> >
>> > I know I have seen a few other things that are now broke.
>> >
>> > Does anyone know of any hotfixes that repair features that SRS breaks?
>>sql

Does SP4 client work OK with SP3a server?

Can a SQL2000 SP4 client connect without problems to a SQL2000 SP3a server?
We are planning on updating all the client pcs to SP4 before we upgrade the
servers.
Thanks
Rondid you hear examnotes <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> say in
news:0D2D4D7E-7BAF-4600-A545-0B2FB6E82291@.microsoft.com:

> Can a SQL2000 SP4 client connect without problems to a SQL2000 SP3a
> server? We are planning on updating all the client pcs to SP4 before
> we upgrade the servers.
> Thanks
> Ron
I have a mix of 3a and 4 and my client db libs are 4. you should be ok.
(My 2)
Neil MacMurchy
http://spaces.msn.com/members/neilmacmurchy
http://spaces.msn.com/members/mctblogs|||You won't be able to use Query Analyzer's debugger against the SP3a
servers. In SP4, Microsoft upgraded the debugger to use the .NET
framework. Other than that, there should be no problems.
Josh
Ron wrote:
> Can a SQL2000 SP4 client connect without problems to a SQL2000 SP3a server
?
> We are planning on updating all the client pcs to SP4 before we upgrade th
e
> servers.
> Thanks
> Ronsql

Does SP4 client work OK with SP3a server?

Can a SQL2000 SP4 client connect without problems to a SQL2000 SP3a server?
We are planning on updating all the client pcs to SP4 before we upgrade the
servers.
Thanks
Rondid you hear =?Utf-8?B?Um9u?= <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> say in
news:0D2D4D7E-7BAF-4600-A545-0B2FB6E82291@.microsoft.com:
> Can a SQL2000 SP4 client connect without problems to a SQL2000 SP3a
> server? We are planning on updating all the client pcs to SP4 before
> we upgrade the servers.
> Thanks
> Ron
I have a mix of 3a and 4 and my client db libs are 4. you should be ok.
(My 2¢)
--
Neil MacMurchy
http://spaces.msn.com/members/neilmacmurchy
http://spaces.msn.com/members/mctblogs|||You won't be able to use Query Analyzer's debugger against the SP3a
servers. In SP4, Microsoft upgraded the debugger to use the .NET
framework. Other than that, there should be no problems.
Josh
Ron wrote:
> Can a SQL2000 SP4 client connect without problems to a SQL2000 SP3a server?
> We are planning on updating all the client pcs to SP4 before we upgrade the
> servers.
> Thanks
> Ron

Does sp3a Pretected SQL Server 2000 from Slammer?

We have a SQL Server 2000 with SP1 installation on a Windows 2000 Server PC,
which is connected to the internet. Everytime after the PC is rebooted, in
about 10 to 20 minutes, it starts sending out data packets to random IP addr
esses at a very high rate.
After I installed SP3a, it still does the same except at a much slower rate.
It looks like the PC is infected by the slammer virus. How can I tell for s
ure? If it is slammer virus, why doesn't SP3a fix it completely? Thanks.Make sure you actually have installed the service pack. What do you get if
you run @.@.Version?
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Frank" <frankxchen@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:363A6A75-D250-401C-A708-8E58604E86C1@.microsoft.com...
> We have a SQL Server 2000 with SP1 installation on a Windows 2000 Server
PC, which is connected to the internet. Everytime after the PC is rebooted,
in about 10 to 20 minutes, it starts sending out data packets to random IP
addresses at a very high rate. After I installed SP3a, it still does the
same except at a much slower rate. It looks like the PC is infected by the
slammer virus. How can I tell for sure? If it is slammer virus, why doesn't
SP3a fix it completely? Thanks.|||SP3a will resolve the problem with Slammer.
You should scan the machine to see what other patches your missing.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/se...s/mbsahome.mspx
Thanks,
Kevin McDonnell
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.

does database backup truncate tlog ?

I am running sql server 2000 sp3a on win2k. does complete database backup do
tlog backup and truncate it also ?Jay
No,it does not
This is a great thing in SQL Server that you can have a full backup that
was done let me say at 1 May and at 1 June and doing t-log file backup. In
case of disaster you restore a full backup (at 1 May ) and apply all t-log
file backups till a point of distaster .
If sql server was trunucated a log file during the backup you was not be
able to restore all log files due to breaking chaines of transactions
"Jay" <Jay@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A4A8062F-6DA1-4AA8-B33B-63F91E3E9737@.microsoft.com...
>I am running sql server 2000 sp3a on win2k. does complete database backup
>do
> tlog backup and truncate it also ?
>|||does complete database backup do
> tlog backup and truncate it also ?
No when your db is in bulk_logged or full recovery model. In order to
truncate the log, you should backup the transaction log, using "backup log".
The db should be set to use bulk_logged or full recovery model in order to
backup the transaction log.
If your database's recovery model is simple, you can not backup the
transaction log. SQL Server will truncate the transaction log after a
checkpoint.
AMB
"Jay" wrote:
> I am running sql server 2000 sp3a on win2k. does complete database backup do
> tlog backup and truncate it also ?
>|||Correction,
> No when your db is in bulk_logged or full recovery model.
No, a full backup of the db does not truncate the log, no matter what
recovery model is it using.
AMB
"Alejandro Mesa" wrote:
> does complete database backup do
> > tlog backup and truncate it also ?
> No when your db is in bulk_logged or full recovery model. In order to
> truncate the log, you should backup the transaction log, using "backup log".
> The db should be set to use bulk_logged or full recovery model in order to
> backup the transaction log.
> If your database's recovery model is simple, you can not backup the
> transaction log. SQL Server will truncate the transaction log after a
> checkpoint.
>
> AMB
> "Jay" wrote:
> > I am running sql server 2000 sp3a on win2k. does complete database backup do
> > tlog backup and truncate it also ?
> >

does database backup truncate tlog ?

I am running sql server 2000 sp3a on win2k. does complete database backup do
tlog backup and truncate it also ?
Jay
No,it does not
This is a great thing in SQL Server that you can have a full backup that
was done let me say at 1 May and at 1 June and doing t-log file backup. In
case of disaster you restore a full backup (at 1 May ) and apply all t-log
file backups till a point of distaster .
If sql server was trunucated a log file during the backup you was not be
able to restore all log files due to breaking chaines of transactions
"Jay" <Jay@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A4A8062F-6DA1-4AA8-B33B-63F91E3E9737@.microsoft.com...
>I am running sql server 2000 sp3a on win2k. does complete database backup
>do
> tlog backup and truncate it also ?
>
|||does complete database backup do
> tlog backup and truncate it also ?
No when your db is in bulk_logged or full recovery model. In order to
truncate the log, you should backup the transaction log, using "backup log".
The db should be set to use bulk_logged or full recovery model in order to
backup the transaction log.
If your database's recovery model is simple, you can not backup the
transaction log. SQL Server will truncate the transaction log after a
checkpoint.
AMB
"Jay" wrote:

> I am running sql server 2000 sp3a on win2k. does complete database backup do
> tlog backup and truncate it also ?
>
|||Correction,

> No when your db is in bulk_logged or full recovery model.
No, a full backup of the db does not truncate the log, no matter what
recovery model is it using.
AMB
"Alejandro Mesa" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> does complete database backup do
> No when your db is in bulk_logged or full recovery model. In order to
> truncate the log, you should backup the transaction log, using "backup log".
> The db should be set to use bulk_logged or full recovery model in order to
> backup the transaction log.
> If your database's recovery model is simple, you can not backup the
> transaction log. SQL Server will truncate the transaction log after a
> checkpoint.
>
> AMB
> "Jay" wrote:

does database backup truncate tlog ?

I am running sql server 2000 sp3a on win2k. does complete database backup do
tlog backup and truncate it also ?Jay
No,it does not
This is a great thing in SQL Server that you can have a full backup that
was done let me say at 1 May and at 1 June and doing t-log file backup. In
case of disaster you restore a full backup (at 1 May ) and apply all t-log
file backups till a point of distaster .
If sql server was trunucated a log file during the backup you was not be
able to restore all log files due to breaking chaines of transactions
"Jay" <Jay@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A4A8062F-6DA1-4AA8-B33B-63F91E3E9737@.microsoft.com...
>I am running sql server 2000 sp3a on win2k. does complete database backup
>do
> tlog backup and truncate it also ?
>|||does complete database backup do
> tlog backup and truncate it also ?
No when your db is in bulk_logged or full recovery model. In order to
truncate the log, you should backup the transaction log, using "backup log".
The db should be set to use bulk_logged or full recovery model in order to
backup the transaction log.
If your database's recovery model is simple, you can not backup the
transaction log. SQL Server will truncate the transaction log after a
checkpoint.
AMB
"Jay" wrote:

> I am running sql server 2000 sp3a on win2k. does complete database backup
do
> tlog backup and truncate it also ?
>|||Correction,

> No when your db is in bulk_logged or full recovery model.
No, a full backup of the db does not truncate the log, no matter what
recovery model is it using.
AMB
"Alejandro Mesa" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> does complete database backup do
> No when your db is in bulk_logged or full recovery model. In order to
> truncate the log, you should backup the transaction log, using "backup log
".
> The db should be set to use bulk_logged or full recovery model in order to
> backup the transaction log.
> If your database's recovery model is simple, you can not backup the
> transaction log. SQL Server will truncate the transaction log after a
> checkpoint.
>
> AMB
> "Jay" wrote:
>

Does a FK constraint create an index?

(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
Hello all!
I was wondering if a foreign key constraint will create an index like a prim
ary key
constraint?
Thanks!
John PetersonNope.
Tom
---
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eG2RnlF3DHA.1720@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
Hello all!
I was wondering if a foreign key constraint will create an index like a
primary key
constraint?
Thanks!
John Peterson|||Nope, you'll have to build one yourself.
HTH
--
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eG2RnlF3DHA.1720@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

quote:

---

> (SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
> Hello all!
> I was wondering if a foreign key constraint will create an index like a

---

primary key

quote:

---

> constraint?
> Thanks!
> John Peterson
>

---

|||Thanks Tom/Kalen! That's what I thought -- but wanted to double-check, as t
he CREATE
TABLE entry in BOL wasn't wholly specific on whether an index was created in
the PK
context (though, it alludes to it later), and I thought maybe the FK descrip
tion was
potentially similarly vague.
Thanks again!
John Peterson
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eG2RnlF3DHA.1720@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

quote:

---

> (SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
> Hello all!
> I was wondering if a foreign key constraint will create an index like a pr
imary key
> constraint?
> Thanks!
> John Peterson
>

---

Does a FK constraint create an index?

(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
Hello all!
I was wondering if a foreign key constraint will create an index like a primary key
constraint?
Thanks!
John PetersonThis is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--=_NextPart_000_0071_01C3DC30.22A93000
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Nope.
--
Tom
---
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eG2RnlF3DHA.1720@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
Hello all!
I was wondering if a foreign key constraint will create an index like a
primary key
constraint?
Thanks!
John Peterson
--=_NextPart_000_0071_01C3DC30.22A93000
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
&

---

Nope.
-- Tom
---T=homas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBASQL Server MVPColumnist, SQL =Server ProfessionalToronto, ON Canadahttp://www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql">www.pinnaclepublishing.com=/sql
"John Peterson" wrote in =message news:eG2RnlF3DHA.1720=@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)Hello all!I was wondering if a foreign =key constraint will create an index like a primary keyconstraint?Thanks!John =Peterson

---

--=_NextPart_000_0071_01C3DC30.22A93000--|||Nope, you'll have to build one yourself.
--
HTH
--
Kalen Delaney
SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eG2RnlF3DHA.1720@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> (SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
> Hello all!
> I was wondering if a foreign key constraint will create an index like a
primary key
> constraint?
> Thanks!
> John Peterson
>|||Thanks Tom/Kalen! That's what I thought -- but wanted to double-check, as the CREATE
TABLE entry in BOL wasn't wholly specific on whether an index was created in the PK
context (though, it alludes to it later), and I thought maybe the FK description was
potentially similarly vague.
Thanks again!
John Peterson
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eG2RnlF3DHA.1720@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> (SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
> Hello all!
> I was wondering if a foreign key constraint will create an index like a primary key
> constraint?
> Thanks!
> John Peterson
>