i realize the term "clustered index" is a MS thing. i also know that the
clustered index is the physical sort order of data in a table. And once i
have this technique available to me, i can take advantage of it to group
low-cardinality rows together, where an index would not be selective enough.
So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance tuning
option. Does Oracle, MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical sort order
of a table - and be able to take advantage of that for query optimization?I recall a long long time ago working with the OS/2 version of DB2 (DB2/2):
You did a rebuild of the table to cluster it. This was a once operation. At the end of the table
(imagine pages and extents), you had overflow pages. New rows were not inserted in place, but were
added to these overflow pages. So, you didn't get the fragmentation aspects of SQL Server, but there
was some extra cost for looking up these overflow pages.
All above is from memory, from around 1991. This might have been special to the OS/2 version of DB2,
and/or it might have been changed since.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Ian Boyd" <ian.msnews010@.avatopia.com> wrote in message
news:%235qm3VU5FHA.3532@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>i realize the term "clustered index" is a MS thing. i also know that the clustered index is the
>physical sort order of data in a table. And once i have this technique available to me, i can take
>advantage of it to group low-cardinality rows together, where an index would not be selective
>enough.
> So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance tuning option. Does Oracle,
> MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical sort order of a table - and be able to take advantage
> of that for query optimization?
>|||With DB2 you can create a single clustered index on a table and specify
whether or not you want it ASC or DESC. You can also specify to either
allow or disallow Reverse Scans.
In addition DB2 v. 8.2 has added functionality to eliminate the limit
of one clustered index per table. They have what is call an MDC (Multi
Dimensional Cluster) which allows you to effectively create more than
one clustered index on a single table. They do this by arranging the
data into blocks rather than index pages. The are extremely effective
in performance tuning where you have a large data set.|||Oracle's Index Organized tables aka IOT are quite similar to MS SQL
Servers clustered index.
DB2's clustered index and its table are separate objects. The docs used
to say that DB2 will try to maintain physical order, but there was no
guarantee - you needed to reorganize the table periodically once the
clustering factor dropped too low. ("clustering factor" is statistics
present in DB2 and Oracle, but not relevant to MS SQL Server, because
MS SQL Server uses bookmarks, not Row identifiers to locate a row from
a non-clustered index)|||"Ian Boyd" <ian.msnews010@.avatopia.com> wrote in message
news:%235qm3VU5FHA.3532@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>i realize the term "clustered index" is a MS thing. i also know that the
>clustered index is the physical sort order of data in a table. And once i
>have this technique available to me, i can take advantage of it to group
>low-cardinality rows together, where an index would not be selective
>enough.
> So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance
> tuning option. Does Oracle, MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical
> sort order of a table - and be able to take advantage of that for query
> optimization?
In Oracle an "Index-Organized Table" is the equivalent as a SQL Server
clustered index. There are some minor differences in implementation, for
instance, the requirement that the "clustered index" must be the primary
key. But they are pretty much the same thing.
David|||Alexander Kuznetsov wrote:
> Oracle's Index Organized tables aka IOT are quite similar to MS SQL
> Servers clustered index.
> DB2's clustered index and its table are separate objects. The docs
> used to say that DB2 will try to maintain physical order, but there
> was no guarantee - you needed to reorganize the table periodically
> once the clustering factor dropped too low. ("clustering factor" is
> statistics present in DB2 and Oracle, but not relevant to MS SQL
> Server, because MS SQL Server uses bookmarks, not Row identifiers to
> locate a row from a non-clustered index)
MaxDB has a similar feature: *all* tables are stored the way MS SQL Server
tables with a clustered index are stored. The index used is the PK of the
table and if there is no PK then a hidden column with a synthetic value is
added and used for the PK.
Kind regards
robert
Showing posts with label order. Show all posts
Showing posts with label order. Show all posts
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Do other RDMS have clustered indexes?
i realize the term "clustered index" is a MS thing. i also know that the
clustered index is the physical sort order of data in a table. And once i
have this technique available to me, i can take advantage of it to group
low-cardinality rows together, where an index would not be selective enough.
So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance tuning
option. Does Oracle, MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical sort order
of a table - and be able to take advantage of that for query optimization?I recall a long long time ago working with the OS/2 version of DB2 (DB2/2):
You did a rebuild of the table to cluster it. This was a once operation. At
the end of the table
(imagine pages and extents), you had overflow pages. New rows were not inser
ted in place, but were
added to these overflow pages. So, you didn't get the fragmentation aspects
of SQL Server, but there
was some extra cost for looking up these overflow pages.
All above is from memory, from around 1991. This might have been special to
the OS/2 version of DB2,
and/or it might have been changed since.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Ian Boyd" <ian.msnews010@.avatopia.com> wrote in message
news:%235qm3VU5FHA.3532@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>i realize the term "clustered index" is a MS thing. i also know that the cl
ustered index is the
>physical sort order of data in a table. And once i have this technique avai
lable to me, i can take
>advantage of it to group low-cardinality rows together, where an index woul
d not be selective
>enough.
> So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance tunin
g option. Does Oracle,
> MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical sort order of a table - and be
able to take advantage
> of that for query optimization?
>|||With DB2 you can create a single clustered index on a table and specify
whether or not you want it ASC or DESC. You can also specify to either
allow or disallow Reverse Scans.
In addition DB2 v. 8.2 has added functionality to eliminate the limit
of one clustered index per table. They have what is call an MDC (Multi
Dimensional Cluster) which allows you to effectively create more than
one clustered index on a single table. They do this by arranging the
data into blocks rather than index pages. The are extremely effective
in performance tuning where you have a large data set.|||Oracle's Index Organized tables aka IOT are quite similar to MS SQL
Servers clustered index.
DB2's clustered index and its table are separate objects. The docs used
to say that DB2 will try to maintain physical order, but there was no
guarantee - you needed to reorganize the table periodically once the
clustering factor dropped too low. ("clustering factor" is statistics
present in DB2 and Oracle, but not relevant to MS SQL Server, because
MS SQL Server uses bookmarks, not Row identifiers to locate a row from
a non-clustered index)|||"Ian Boyd" <ian.msnews010@.avatopia.com> wrote in message
news:%235qm3VU5FHA.3532@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>i realize the term "clustered index" is a MS thing. i also know that the
>clustered index is the physical sort order of data in a table. And once i
>have this technique available to me, i can take advantage of it to group
>low-cardinality rows together, where an index would not be selective
>enough.
> So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance
> tuning option. Does Oracle, MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical
> sort order of a table - and be able to take advantage of that for query
> optimization?
In Oracle an "Index-Organized Table" is the equivalent as a SQL Server
clustered index. There are some minor differences in implementation, for
instance, the requirement that the "clustered index" must be the primary
key. But they are pretty much the same thing.
David|||Alexander Kuznetsov wrote:
> Oracle's Index Organized tables aka IOT are quite similar to MS SQL
> Servers clustered index.
> DB2's clustered index and its table are separate objects. The docs
> used to say that DB2 will try to maintain physical order, but there
> was no guarantee - you needed to reorganize the table periodically
> once the clustering factor dropped too low. ("clustering factor" is
> statistics present in DB2 and Oracle, but not relevant to MS SQL
> Server, because MS SQL Server uses bookmarks, not Row identifiers to
> locate a row from a non-clustered index)
MaxDB has a similar feature: *all* tables are stored the way MS SQL Server
tables with a clustered index are stored. The index used is the PK of the
table and if there is no PK then a hidden column with a synthetic value is
added and used for the PK.
Kind regards
robert
clustered index is the physical sort order of data in a table. And once i
have this technique available to me, i can take advantage of it to group
low-cardinality rows together, where an index would not be selective enough.
So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance tuning
option. Does Oracle, MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical sort order
of a table - and be able to take advantage of that for query optimization?I recall a long long time ago working with the OS/2 version of DB2 (DB2/2):
You did a rebuild of the table to cluster it. This was a once operation. At
the end of the table
(imagine pages and extents), you had overflow pages. New rows were not inser
ted in place, but were
added to these overflow pages. So, you didn't get the fragmentation aspects
of SQL Server, but there
was some extra cost for looking up these overflow pages.
All above is from memory, from around 1991. This might have been special to
the OS/2 version of DB2,
and/or it might have been changed since.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Ian Boyd" <ian.msnews010@.avatopia.com> wrote in message
news:%235qm3VU5FHA.3532@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>i realize the term "clustered index" is a MS thing. i also know that the cl
ustered index is the
>physical sort order of data in a table. And once i have this technique avai
lable to me, i can take
>advantage of it to group low-cardinality rows together, where an index woul
d not be selective
>enough.
> So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance tunin
g option. Does Oracle,
> MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical sort order of a table - and be
able to take advantage
> of that for query optimization?
>|||With DB2 you can create a single clustered index on a table and specify
whether or not you want it ASC or DESC. You can also specify to either
allow or disallow Reverse Scans.
In addition DB2 v. 8.2 has added functionality to eliminate the limit
of one clustered index per table. They have what is call an MDC (Multi
Dimensional Cluster) which allows you to effectively create more than
one clustered index on a single table. They do this by arranging the
data into blocks rather than index pages. The are extremely effective
in performance tuning where you have a large data set.|||Oracle's Index Organized tables aka IOT are quite similar to MS SQL
Servers clustered index.
DB2's clustered index and its table are separate objects. The docs used
to say that DB2 will try to maintain physical order, but there was no
guarantee - you needed to reorganize the table periodically once the
clustering factor dropped too low. ("clustering factor" is statistics
present in DB2 and Oracle, but not relevant to MS SQL Server, because
MS SQL Server uses bookmarks, not Row identifiers to locate a row from
a non-clustered index)|||"Ian Boyd" <ian.msnews010@.avatopia.com> wrote in message
news:%235qm3VU5FHA.3532@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>i realize the term "clustered index" is a MS thing. i also know that the
>clustered index is the physical sort order of data in a table. And once i
>have this technique available to me, i can take advantage of it to group
>low-cardinality rows together, where an index would not be selective
>enough.
> So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance
> tuning option. Does Oracle, MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical
> sort order of a table - and be able to take advantage of that for query
> optimization?
In Oracle an "Index-Organized Table" is the equivalent as a SQL Server
clustered index. There are some minor differences in implementation, for
instance, the requirement that the "clustered index" must be the primary
key. But they are pretty much the same thing.
David|||Alexander Kuznetsov wrote:
> Oracle's Index Organized tables aka IOT are quite similar to MS SQL
> Servers clustered index.
> DB2's clustered index and its table are separate objects. The docs
> used to say that DB2 will try to maintain physical order, but there
> was no guarantee - you needed to reorganize the table periodically
> once the clustering factor dropped too low. ("clustering factor" is
> statistics present in DB2 and Oracle, but not relevant to MS SQL
> Server, because MS SQL Server uses bookmarks, not Row identifiers to
> locate a row from a non-clustered index)
MaxDB has a similar feature: *all* tables are stored the way MS SQL Server
tables with a clustered index are stored. The index used is the PK of the
table and if there is no PK then a hidden column with a synthetic value is
added and used for the PK.
Kind regards
robert
Do other RDMS have clustered indexes?
i realize the term "clustered index" is a MS thing. i also know that the
clustered index is the physical sort order of data in a table. And once i
have this technique available to me, i can take advantage of it to group
low-cardinality rows together, where an index would not be selective enough.
So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance tuning
option. Does Oracle, MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical sort order
of a table - and be able to take advantage of that for query optimization?
I recall a long long time ago working with the OS/2 version of DB2 (DB2/2):
You did a rebuild of the table to cluster it. This was a once operation. At the end of the table
(imagine pages and extents), you had overflow pages. New rows were not inserted in place, but were
added to these overflow pages. So, you didn't get the fragmentation aspects of SQL Server, but there
was some extra cost for looking up these overflow pages.
All above is from memory, from around 1991. This might have been special to the OS/2 version of DB2,
and/or it might have been changed since.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Ian Boyd" <ian.msnews010@.avatopia.com> wrote in message
news:%235qm3VU5FHA.3532@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>i realize the term "clustered index" is a MS thing. i also know that the clustered index is the
>physical sort order of data in a table. And once i have this technique available to me, i can take
>advantage of it to group low-cardinality rows together, where an index would not be selective
>enough.
> So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance tuning option. Does Oracle,
> MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical sort order of a table - and be able to take advantage
> of that for query optimization?
>
|||With DB2 you can create a single clustered index on a table and specify
whether or not you want it ASC or DESC. You can also specify to either
allow or disallow Reverse Scans.
In addition DB2 v. 8.2 has added functionality to eliminate the limit
of one clustered index per table. They have what is call an MDC (Multi
Dimensional Cluster) which allows you to effectively create more than
one clustered index on a single table. They do this by arranging the
data into blocks rather than index pages. The are extremely effective
in performance tuning where you have a large data set.
|||Oracle's Index Organized tables aka IOT are quite similar to MS SQL
Servers clustered index.
DB2's clustered index and its table are separate objects. The docs used
to say that DB2 will try to maintain physical order, but there was no
guarantee - you needed to reorganize the table periodically once the
clustering factor dropped too low. ("clustering factor" is statistics
present in DB2 and Oracle, but not relevant to MS SQL Server, because
MS SQL Server uses bookmarks, not Row identifiers to locate a row from
a non-clustered index)
|||"Ian Boyd" <ian.msnews010@.avatopia.com> wrote in message
news:%235qm3VU5FHA.3532@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>i realize the term "clustered index" is a MS thing. i also know that the
>clustered index is the physical sort order of data in a table. And once i
>have this technique available to me, i can take advantage of it to group
>low-cardinality rows together, where an index would not be selective
>enough.
> So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance
> tuning option. Does Oracle, MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical
> sort order of a table - and be able to take advantage of that for query
> optimization?
In Oracle an "Index-Organized Table" is the equivalent as a SQL Server
clustered index. There are some minor differences in implementation, for
instance, the requirement that the "clustered index" must be the primary
key. But they are pretty much the same thing.
David
|||Alexander Kuznetsov wrote:
> Oracle's Index Organized tables aka IOT are quite similar to MS SQL
> Servers clustered index.
> DB2's clustered index and its table are separate objects. The docs
> used to say that DB2 will try to maintain physical order, but there
> was no guarantee - you needed to reorganize the table periodically
> once the clustering factor dropped too low. ("clustering factor" is
> statistics present in DB2 and Oracle, but not relevant to MS SQL
> Server, because MS SQL Server uses bookmarks, not Row identifiers to
> locate a row from a non-clustered index)
MaxDB has a similar feature: *all* tables are stored the way MS SQL Server
tables with a clustered index are stored. The index used is the PK of the
table and if there is no PK then a hidden column with a synthetic value is
added and used for the PK.
Kind regards
robert
clustered index is the physical sort order of data in a table. And once i
have this technique available to me, i can take advantage of it to group
low-cardinality rows together, where an index would not be selective enough.
So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance tuning
option. Does Oracle, MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical sort order
of a table - and be able to take advantage of that for query optimization?
I recall a long long time ago working with the OS/2 version of DB2 (DB2/2):
You did a rebuild of the table to cluster it. This was a once operation. At the end of the table
(imagine pages and extents), you had overflow pages. New rows were not inserted in place, but were
added to these overflow pages. So, you didn't get the fragmentation aspects of SQL Server, but there
was some extra cost for looking up these overflow pages.
All above is from memory, from around 1991. This might have been special to the OS/2 version of DB2,
and/or it might have been changed since.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Ian Boyd" <ian.msnews010@.avatopia.com> wrote in message
news:%235qm3VU5FHA.3532@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>i realize the term "clustered index" is a MS thing. i also know that the clustered index is the
>physical sort order of data in a table. And once i have this technique available to me, i can take
>advantage of it to group low-cardinality rows together, where an index would not be selective
>enough.
> So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance tuning option. Does Oracle,
> MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical sort order of a table - and be able to take advantage
> of that for query optimization?
>
|||With DB2 you can create a single clustered index on a table and specify
whether or not you want it ASC or DESC. You can also specify to either
allow or disallow Reverse Scans.
In addition DB2 v. 8.2 has added functionality to eliminate the limit
of one clustered index per table. They have what is call an MDC (Multi
Dimensional Cluster) which allows you to effectively create more than
one clustered index on a single table. They do this by arranging the
data into blocks rather than index pages. The are extremely effective
in performance tuning where you have a large data set.
|||Oracle's Index Organized tables aka IOT are quite similar to MS SQL
Servers clustered index.
DB2's clustered index and its table are separate objects. The docs used
to say that DB2 will try to maintain physical order, but there was no
guarantee - you needed to reorganize the table periodically once the
clustering factor dropped too low. ("clustering factor" is statistics
present in DB2 and Oracle, but not relevant to MS SQL Server, because
MS SQL Server uses bookmarks, not Row identifiers to locate a row from
a non-clustered index)
|||"Ian Boyd" <ian.msnews010@.avatopia.com> wrote in message
news:%235qm3VU5FHA.3532@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>i realize the term "clustered index" is a MS thing. i also know that the
>clustered index is the physical sort order of data in a table. And once i
>have this technique available to me, i can take advantage of it to group
>low-cardinality rows together, where an index would not be selective
>enough.
> So, with clustered indexes in SQL Server, i have another performance
> tuning option. Does Oracle, MySQL, DB2 let the user change the physical
> sort order of a table - and be able to take advantage of that for query
> optimization?
In Oracle an "Index-Organized Table" is the equivalent as a SQL Server
clustered index. There are some minor differences in implementation, for
instance, the requirement that the "clustered index" must be the primary
key. But they are pretty much the same thing.
David
|||Alexander Kuznetsov wrote:
> Oracle's Index Organized tables aka IOT are quite similar to MS SQL
> Servers clustered index.
> DB2's clustered index and its table are separate objects. The docs
> used to say that DB2 will try to maintain physical order, but there
> was no guarantee - you needed to reorganize the table periodically
> once the clustering factor dropped too low. ("clustering factor" is
> statistics present in DB2 and Oracle, but not relevant to MS SQL
> Server, because MS SQL Server uses bookmarks, not Row identifiers to
> locate a row from a non-clustered index)
MaxDB has a similar feature: *all* tables are stored the way MS SQL Server
tables with a clustered index are stored. The index used is the PK of the
table and if there is no PK then a hidden column with a synthetic value is
added and used for the PK.
Kind regards
robert
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Do Inserts into Temptable enforce order of select?
I have a temp table which I am trying to do a select INTO. The temptable has an identity field which increments by one. In the select query, I am doing an order by. It does not appear that the temp table retains the physical ordering of the records from the order by. When I do a select * FROM temptable without an order by, the first record that is displayed as an id of 113. Then about the 42nd record in the temp table is the ID=1 record. In addition, the table records are not ordered by the original order of the select that inserted into the temp table.
From this I am led to believe that SQL does not enforce the orders of records on INSERT into statesments. Is this a correct assumption, or might there be something else going on?Please take a look at the blog post below:
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqltips/archive/2005/07/20/441053.aspx
Ordering is not guaranteed for SELECT queries unless you include an explicit ORDER BY in the outer-most query. Similarly, the order of insertion of rows is not guranteed either. The identity values are however generated based on the order specified in the ORDER BY in INSERT...SELECT statement.
Do I need x86, x64 or IA64?
Can anyone please help me select the correct version of SQL Server 2005
to order?
I'm running Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition on an AMD Opteron. Now
as far as I've been able to work out that rules out the IA64 which is
only for Intel Itanium based machines, but as for the choice between
x86 and x64 I am still confused. Does the x64 version need to be run on
a special x64 version of Windows 2003? And if so, how can I tell if
that's what I'm running?
Many thanks, TH.Start|Run|msinfo32.exe should sort it.
--
Regards,
Dave Patrick ...Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
Microsoft Certified Professional
Microsoft MVP [Windows]
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
"TH" wrote:
| Can anyone please help me select the correct version of SQL Server 2005
| to order?
|
| I'm running Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition on an AMD Opteron. Now
| as far as I've been able to work out that rules out the IA64 which is
| only for Intel Itanium based machines, but as for the choice between
| x86 and x64 I am still confused. Does the x64 version need to be run on
| a special x64 version of Windows 2003? And if so, how can I tell if
| that's what I'm running?
|
| Many thanks, TH.
||||Thanks Dave. Msinfo32.exe seems to be telling me my Windows is 32 bit,
so does that mean that SQL Server x86 is the only version I can use,
even though the Opteron is a 64 bit processor?
Thanks again. TH.|||Seems you need a 64 bit OS to take full advantage.
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/64bit/overview.mspx
--
Regards,
Dave Patrick ...Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
Microsoft Certified Professional
Microsoft MVP [Windows]
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
"TH" wrote:
| Thanks Dave. Msinfo32.exe seems to be telling me my Windows is 32 bit,
| so does that mean that SQL Server x86 is the only version I can use,
| even though the Opteron is a 64 bit processor?
|
| Thanks again. TH.
||||Cheers Dave.
Dave Patrick wrote:
> Seems you need a 64 bit OS to take full advantage.
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/64bit/overview.mspx
> --
> Regards,
> Dave Patrick ...Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
> Microsoft Certified Professional
> Microsoft MVP [Windows]|||You're welcome.
--
Regards,
Dave Patrick ...Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
Microsoft Certified Professional
Microsoft MVP [Windows]
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
"TH" wrote:
| Cheers Dave.
to order?
I'm running Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition on an AMD Opteron. Now
as far as I've been able to work out that rules out the IA64 which is
only for Intel Itanium based machines, but as for the choice between
x86 and x64 I am still confused. Does the x64 version need to be run on
a special x64 version of Windows 2003? And if so, how can I tell if
that's what I'm running?
Many thanks, TH.Start|Run|msinfo32.exe should sort it.
--
Regards,
Dave Patrick ...Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
Microsoft Certified Professional
Microsoft MVP [Windows]
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
"TH" wrote:
| Can anyone please help me select the correct version of SQL Server 2005
| to order?
|
| I'm running Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition on an AMD Opteron. Now
| as far as I've been able to work out that rules out the IA64 which is
| only for Intel Itanium based machines, but as for the choice between
| x86 and x64 I am still confused. Does the x64 version need to be run on
| a special x64 version of Windows 2003? And if so, how can I tell if
| that's what I'm running?
|
| Many thanks, TH.
||||Thanks Dave. Msinfo32.exe seems to be telling me my Windows is 32 bit,
so does that mean that SQL Server x86 is the only version I can use,
even though the Opteron is a 64 bit processor?
Thanks again. TH.|||Seems you need a 64 bit OS to take full advantage.
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/64bit/overview.mspx
--
Regards,
Dave Patrick ...Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
Microsoft Certified Professional
Microsoft MVP [Windows]
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
"TH" wrote:
| Thanks Dave. Msinfo32.exe seems to be telling me my Windows is 32 bit,
| so does that mean that SQL Server x86 is the only version I can use,
| even though the Opteron is a 64 bit processor?
|
| Thanks again. TH.
||||Cheers Dave.
Dave Patrick wrote:
> Seems you need a 64 bit OS to take full advantage.
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/64bit/overview.mspx
> --
> Regards,
> Dave Patrick ...Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
> Microsoft Certified Professional
> Microsoft MVP [Windows]|||You're welcome.
--
Regards,
Dave Patrick ...Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
Microsoft Certified Professional
Microsoft MVP [Windows]
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
"TH" wrote:
| Cheers Dave.
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Do I need to install microsoft outlook ?
I want to be emailed when certain alerts are trigger.
There's a place where I'm told I need to install microsoft outlook in
order to do this.
Doesn't come SQL Server with some email capabilities installed ?
The IT guys don't allow me install outlook in the server.
What else can I do ? Even if I need, I would program a command-line
email client in an hour if needed, but I wonder if I would be able to
use it.Craig,
See:
<craigkenisston@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1129050195.157365.278430@.g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I want to be emailed when certain alerts are trigger.
> There's a place where I'm told I need to install microsoft outlook in
> order to do this.
> Doesn't come SQL Server with some email capabilities installed ?
> The IT guys don't allow me install outlook in the server.
> What else can I do ? Even if I need, I would program a command-line
> email client in an hour if needed, but I wonder if I would be able to
> use it.
>|||Craig,
See:
http://www.aspfaq.com/show.asp?id=2403
and
http://sqldev.net/xp/xpsmtp.htm
HTH
Jerry
For a non-Outlook environment see:
<craigkenisston@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1129050195.157365.278430@.g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I want to be emailed when certain alerts are trigger.
> There's a place where I'm told I need to install microsoft outlook in
> order to do this.
> Doesn't come SQL Server with some email capabilities installed ?
> The IT guys don't allow me install outlook in the server.
> What else can I do ? Even if I need, I would program a command-line
> email client in an hour if needed, but I wonder if I would be able to
> use it.
>|||SQL Mail and SQL Agent mail need a mapi compliant email client to work. It
does not have to be outlook and your mail server does not have to be Exchange.
HTH
"craigkenisston@.hotmail.com" wrote:
> I want to be emailed when certain alerts are trigger.
> There's a place where I'm told I need to install microsoft outlook in
> order to do this.
> Doesn't come SQL Server with some email capabilities installed ?
> The IT guys don't allow me install outlook in the server.
> What else can I do ? Even if I need, I would program a command-line
> email client in an hour if needed, but I wonder if I would be able to
> use it.
>sql
There's a place where I'm told I need to install microsoft outlook in
order to do this.
Doesn't come SQL Server with some email capabilities installed ?
The IT guys don't allow me install outlook in the server.
What else can I do ? Even if I need, I would program a command-line
email client in an hour if needed, but I wonder if I would be able to
use it.Craig,
See:
<craigkenisston@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1129050195.157365.278430@.g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I want to be emailed when certain alerts are trigger.
> There's a place where I'm told I need to install microsoft outlook in
> order to do this.
> Doesn't come SQL Server with some email capabilities installed ?
> The IT guys don't allow me install outlook in the server.
> What else can I do ? Even if I need, I would program a command-line
> email client in an hour if needed, but I wonder if I would be able to
> use it.
>|||Craig,
See:
http://www.aspfaq.com/show.asp?id=2403
and
http://sqldev.net/xp/xpsmtp.htm
HTH
Jerry
For a non-Outlook environment see:
<craigkenisston@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1129050195.157365.278430@.g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I want to be emailed when certain alerts are trigger.
> There's a place where I'm told I need to install microsoft outlook in
> order to do this.
> Doesn't come SQL Server with some email capabilities installed ?
> The IT guys don't allow me install outlook in the server.
> What else can I do ? Even if I need, I would program a command-line
> email client in an hour if needed, but I wonder if I would be able to
> use it.
>|||SQL Mail and SQL Agent mail need a mapi compliant email client to work. It
does not have to be outlook and your mail server does not have to be Exchange.
HTH
"craigkenisston@.hotmail.com" wrote:
> I want to be emailed when certain alerts are trigger.
> There's a place where I'm told I need to install microsoft outlook in
> order to do this.
> Doesn't come SQL Server with some email capabilities installed ?
> The IT guys don't allow me install outlook in the server.
> What else can I do ? Even if I need, I would program a command-line
> email client in an hour if needed, but I wonder if I would be able to
> use it.
>sql
Do I need Enterprise to do clustering?
I'm confused. Reading the SQL 2000 Resource Kit, it definitely says I need
Enterprise in order to do failover clustering. But reading the product
guide on the 2005 version says Standard has clustering capabilities. Is
this something new to 2005 or is it a different type of clustering? We're
looking at clustering and it's all new to me so I'd appreciate any help you
can give me. Thanks.
--Sandy
It is a different feature set for a different product SKU matrix. SQL 2000
requires Enterprise Edition for any clustering. SQL 2005 will allow
two-node clusters in Standard Edition. Both are MSCS failover clustering.
I have been recommending SQL 2005 Standard Edition for lower-cost clustering
with several of my clients. So far, all the systems have performed very
well.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Sandy Proesch" <sproe@.spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:%23dNoaEFSGHA.5908@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> I'm confused. Reading the SQL 2000 Resource Kit, it definitely says I
> need Enterprise in order to do failover clustering. But reading the
> product guide on the 2005 version says Standard has clustering
> capabilities. Is this something new to 2005 or is it a different type of
> clustering? We're looking at clustering and it's all new to me so I'd
> appreciate any help you can give me. Thanks.
> --Sandy
>
|||Thank you, that is exactly what we're looking to do - a 2-node failover
cluster.
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OeBsiWFSGHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> It is a different feature set for a different product SKU matrix. SQL
> 2000 requires Enterprise Edition for any clustering. SQL 2005 will allow
> two-node clusters in Standard Edition. Both are MSCS failover clustering.
> I have been recommending SQL 2005 Standard Edition for lower-cost
> clustering with several of my clients. So far, all the systems have
> performed very well.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Sandy Proesch" <sproe@.spamcop.net> wrote in message
> news:%23dNoaEFSGHA.5908@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
|||Make sure and check out the 64-bit and dual-core processors. No difference
in licensing costs to go with either or both, but you get a huge performance
boost.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Sandy Proesch" <sproe@.spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:%23Fq7LwFSGHA.4900@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thank you, that is exactly what we're looking to do - a 2-node failover
> cluster.
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OeBsiWFSGHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>
|||Geoff,
If you have to do an upgrade in place on a cluster from 2000 to 2005, can
you go from 2000 Enterprise to 2005 Standard without problems?
Thanks
Chris Wood
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Q8l%23OGSGHA.1204@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Make sure and check out the 64-bit and dual-core processors. No
> difference in licensing costs to go with either or both, but you get a
> huge performance boost.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Sandy Proesch" <sproe@.spamcop.net> wrote in message
> news:%23Fq7LwFSGHA.4900@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
|||You cannot do this as an in-place upgrade. You can install a second
instance of SQL 2005 on the same hardware and do a database migration. I
would take the opportunity to build a cluster based on new hardware if your
system is more than a few years old.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:e4yn1oeSGHA.5884@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Geoff,
> If you have to do an upgrade in place on a cluster from 2000 to 2005, can
> you go from 2000 Enterprise to 2005 Standard without problems?
> Thanks
> Chris Wood
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Q8l%23OGSGHA.1204@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
|||Geoff,
But we could upgrade SQL2000 Enterprise to SQL2005 Enterprise in place could
we not?
Chris
Currently there is no plan to purchase new hardware for the clustered
production server.
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23okTDKfSGHA.5808@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> You cannot do this as an in-place upgrade. You can install a second
> instance of SQL 2005 on the same hardware and do a database migration. I
> would take the opportunity to build a cluster based on new hardware if
> your system is more than a few years old.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
> "Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:e4yn1oeSGHA.5884@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
|||Now that I have tested (for giggles only) and it works, but I really hate
upgrades!! Especially for HA systems!
Cheers,
Rodney R. Fournier
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website
http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training
ClusterHelp.com is a Microsoft Certified Gold Partner
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23MmSCyfSGHA.4600@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Geoff,
> But we could upgrade SQL2000 Enterprise to SQL2005 Enterprise in place
> could we not?
> Chris
> Currently there is no plan to purchase new hardware for the clustered
> production server.
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23okTDKfSGHA.5808@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
|||In theory, yes. In practice, I have heard of a lot of problems with the
in-place cluster upgrade wizard and would not recommend that path at this
time. Side-by-side or new platform is the safest way to go.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23MmSCyfSGHA.4600@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Geoff,
> But we could upgrade SQL2000 Enterprise to SQL2005 Enterprise in place
> could we not?
> Chris
> Currently there is no plan to purchase new hardware for the clustered
> production server.
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23okTDKfSGHA.5808@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thank you Geoff. Not really the sort of news I wanted to hear.
Chris
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23$b804fSGHA.4616@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> In theory, yes. In practice, I have heard of a lot of problems with the
> in-place cluster upgrade wizard and would not recommend that path at this
> time. Side-by-side or new platform is the safest way to go.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:%23MmSCyfSGHA.4600@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>
Enterprise in order to do failover clustering. But reading the product
guide on the 2005 version says Standard has clustering capabilities. Is
this something new to 2005 or is it a different type of clustering? We're
looking at clustering and it's all new to me so I'd appreciate any help you
can give me. Thanks.
--Sandy
It is a different feature set for a different product SKU matrix. SQL 2000
requires Enterprise Edition for any clustering. SQL 2005 will allow
two-node clusters in Standard Edition. Both are MSCS failover clustering.
I have been recommending SQL 2005 Standard Edition for lower-cost clustering
with several of my clients. So far, all the systems have performed very
well.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Sandy Proesch" <sproe@.spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:%23dNoaEFSGHA.5908@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> I'm confused. Reading the SQL 2000 Resource Kit, it definitely says I
> need Enterprise in order to do failover clustering. But reading the
> product guide on the 2005 version says Standard has clustering
> capabilities. Is this something new to 2005 or is it a different type of
> clustering? We're looking at clustering and it's all new to me so I'd
> appreciate any help you can give me. Thanks.
> --Sandy
>
|||Thank you, that is exactly what we're looking to do - a 2-node failover
cluster.
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OeBsiWFSGHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> It is a different feature set for a different product SKU matrix. SQL
> 2000 requires Enterprise Edition for any clustering. SQL 2005 will allow
> two-node clusters in Standard Edition. Both are MSCS failover clustering.
> I have been recommending SQL 2005 Standard Edition for lower-cost
> clustering with several of my clients. So far, all the systems have
> performed very well.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Sandy Proesch" <sproe@.spamcop.net> wrote in message
> news:%23dNoaEFSGHA.5908@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
|||Make sure and check out the 64-bit and dual-core processors. No difference
in licensing costs to go with either or both, but you get a huge performance
boost.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Sandy Proesch" <sproe@.spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:%23Fq7LwFSGHA.4900@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thank you, that is exactly what we're looking to do - a 2-node failover
> cluster.
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OeBsiWFSGHA.4440@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>
|||Geoff,
If you have to do an upgrade in place on a cluster from 2000 to 2005, can
you go from 2000 Enterprise to 2005 Standard without problems?
Thanks
Chris Wood
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Q8l%23OGSGHA.1204@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Make sure and check out the 64-bit and dual-core processors. No
> difference in licensing costs to go with either or both, but you get a
> huge performance boost.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Sandy Proesch" <sproe@.spamcop.net> wrote in message
> news:%23Fq7LwFSGHA.4900@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
|||You cannot do this as an in-place upgrade. You can install a second
instance of SQL 2005 on the same hardware and do a database migration. I
would take the opportunity to build a cluster based on new hardware if your
system is more than a few years old.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:e4yn1oeSGHA.5884@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Geoff,
> If you have to do an upgrade in place on a cluster from 2000 to 2005, can
> you go from 2000 Enterprise to 2005 Standard without problems?
> Thanks
> Chris Wood
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Q8l%23OGSGHA.1204@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
|||Geoff,
But we could upgrade SQL2000 Enterprise to SQL2005 Enterprise in place could
we not?
Chris
Currently there is no plan to purchase new hardware for the clustered
production server.
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23okTDKfSGHA.5808@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> You cannot do this as an in-place upgrade. You can install a second
> instance of SQL 2005 on the same hardware and do a database migration. I
> would take the opportunity to build a cluster based on new hardware if
> your system is more than a few years old.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
> "Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:e4yn1oeSGHA.5884@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
|||Now that I have tested (for giggles only) and it works, but I really hate
upgrades!! Especially for HA systems!
Cheers,
Rodney R. Fournier
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website
http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training
ClusterHelp.com is a Microsoft Certified Gold Partner
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23MmSCyfSGHA.4600@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Geoff,
> But we could upgrade SQL2000 Enterprise to SQL2005 Enterprise in place
> could we not?
> Chris
> Currently there is no plan to purchase new hardware for the clustered
> production server.
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23okTDKfSGHA.5808@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
|||In theory, yes. In practice, I have heard of a lot of problems with the
in-place cluster upgrade wizard and would not recommend that path at this
time. Side-by-side or new platform is the safest way to go.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23MmSCyfSGHA.4600@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Geoff,
> But we could upgrade SQL2000 Enterprise to SQL2005 Enterprise in place
> could we not?
> Chris
> Currently there is no plan to purchase new hardware for the clustered
> production server.
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23okTDKfSGHA.5808@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thank you Geoff. Not really the sort of news I wanted to hear.
Chris
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23$b804fSGHA.4616@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> In theory, yes. In practice, I have heard of a lot of problems with the
> in-place cluster upgrade wizard and would not recommend that path at this
> time. Side-by-side or new platform is the safest way to go.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Chris Wood" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:%23MmSCyfSGHA.4600@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>
Do I need CAL for a customized program connect to SQL Server 2005 Express Edition?
Hi all,
I am developing a program to connect to SQL 2005 Express. I don't know if I need any CAL license in order to make the connection. If it is not necessary for the Express Edition case, how about if my client upgrate to SQL 2005 in the future? Do I need CAL license for SQL 2005?
Thanks for any advice given.
You do not need a CAL to connect to SQL Server Express. Each cient does need a CAL for all other editions.
Buck Woody
Do I need CAL for a customized program connect to SQL Server 2005 Express Edition?
Hi all,
I am developing a program to connect to SQL 2005 Express. I don't know if I need any CAL license in order to make the connection. If it is not necessary for the Express Edition case, how about if my client upgrate to SQL 2005 in the future? Do I need CAL license for SQL 2005?
Thanks for any advice given.
You do not need a CAL to connect to SQL Server Express. Each cient does need a CAL for all other editions.
Buck Woody
Thursday, March 22, 2012
do I need a domain in order to run a cluster?
Hi, I am a complete newbie with windows clustering -
still reading the white papers etc. From what I have read
it seems that I need a Windows Domain in order to run
clustering. Is this true? Is there any way I can cluster
SQL server without having to setup a domain?
thanks
christos
Yes. You must have a domain to run a cluster. No, you can't get around
having a domain.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Christos Kritikos" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:030001c49b56$400d9060$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi, I am a complete newbie with windows clustering -
> still reading the white papers etc. From what I have read
> it seems that I need a Windows Domain in order to run
> clustering. Is this true? Is there any way I can cluster
> SQL server without having to setup a domain?
> thanks
> christos
>
|||Hi Geoff,
I too have the same doubt. What are some Technical
reasons forcing cluster to run in a domain?
Thanks
Chip.
>--Original Message--
>Yes. You must have a domain to run a cluster. No, you
can't get around
>having a domain.
>--
>Geoff N. Hiten
>Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>Senior Database Administrator
>Careerbuilder.com
>I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
>www.sqlpass.org
>"Christos Kritikos"
<anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message[vbcol=seagreen]
>news:030001c49b56$400d9060$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
read[vbcol=seagreen]
cluster
>
>.
>
|||You have to have a common security context for the cluster service to manage
resources on multiple machines. Parallel usernames and paswords will not
work. You have to have a domain (NT4 or AD) to provide cluster-wide access
to resources.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Chip" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:150e01c49c9d$f0cd9560$a301280a@.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Geoff,
> I too have the same doubt. What are some Technical
> reasons forcing cluster to run in a domain?
> Thanks
> Chip.
> can't get around
> <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> read
> cluster
|||There is some good information in
281662 Windows 2000 and Windows Server 2003 Cluster Nodes As Domain Controllers
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=281662
Here is a section from the same.
To have Windows Clustering function properly (where the Cluster service starts on each node) the node that forms the cluster must be able to validate the Cluster service domain account, which is the account that you
configure during the Windows Clustering installation. To accomplish this, each node must be able to establish a secure channel with a domain controller to validate this account. If the node cannot validate the
account, the Cluster service does not start. This is also true for other clustered programs that must have account validation for services to start, such as Microsoft SQL Server and Microsoft Exchange.
If you have a cluster deployment in which there is no link with either a Windows NT 4.0 domain, a Windows 2000 domain, or a Windows Server 2003 domain, you must configure the cluster nodes as domain
controllers so that the Cluster service account can always be validated to allow for proper cluster functionality.
If the connectivity between cluster nodes and domain controllers is such that the link is either slow or unreliable, consider having a domain controller co-located with the cluster, or configuring the cluster nodes as
domain controllers.
Consider the following important points when you are deploying Windows Clustering nodes as domain controllers:
--> See the above KB (http://support.microsoft.com/?id=281662)
Best Regards,
Uttam Parui
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Are you secure? For information about the Strategic Technology Protection Program and to order your FREE Security Tool Kit, please visit http://www.microsoft.com/security.
Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet access update their Microsoft software to better protect against viruses and security vulnerabilities. The easiest way to do this is to visit the following websites:
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
http://www.microsoft.com/security/guidance/default.mspx
|||Thanks Geoff & Uttam.
Chip
>--Original Message--
>There is some good information in
>281662 Windows 2000 and Windows Server 2003 Cluster Nodes
As Domain Controllers
>http://support.microsoft.com/?id=281662
>Here is a section from the same.
>To have Windows Clustering function properly (where the
Cluster service starts on each node) the node that forms
the cluster must be able to validate the Cluster service
domain account, which is the account that you
>configure during the Windows Clustering installation. To
accomplish this, each node must be able to establish a
secure channel with a domain controller to validate this
account. If the node cannot validate the
>account, the Cluster service does not start. This is also
true for other clustered programs that must have account
validation for services to start, such as Microsoft SQL
Server and Microsoft Exchange.
>If you have a cluster deployment in which there is no
link with either a Windows NT 4.0 domain, a Windows 2000
domain, or a Windows Server 2003 domain, you must
configure the cluster nodes as domain
>controllers so that the Cluster service account can
always be validated to allow for proper cluster
functionality.
>If the connectivity between cluster nodes and domain
controllers is such that the link is either slow or
unreliable, consider having a domain controller co-located
with the cluster, or configuring the cluster nodes as
>domain controllers.
>Consider the following important points when you are
deploying Windows Clustering nodes as domain controllers:
> --> See the above KB
(http://support.microsoft.com/?id=281662)
>Best Regards,
>Uttam Parui
>Microsoft Corporation
>This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no rights.
>Are you secure? For information about the Strategic
Technology Protection Program and to order your FREE
Security Tool Kit, please visit
http://www.microsoft.com/security.
>Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet
access update their Microsoft software to better protect
against viruses and security vulnerabilities. The easiest
way to do this is to visit the following websites:
>http://www.microsoft.com/protect
>http://www.microsoft.com/security/guidance/default.mspx
>
>.
>
still reading the white papers etc. From what I have read
it seems that I need a Windows Domain in order to run
clustering. Is this true? Is there any way I can cluster
SQL server without having to setup a domain?
thanks
christos
Yes. You must have a domain to run a cluster. No, you can't get around
having a domain.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Christos Kritikos" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:030001c49b56$400d9060$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi, I am a complete newbie with windows clustering -
> still reading the white papers etc. From what I have read
> it seems that I need a Windows Domain in order to run
> clustering. Is this true? Is there any way I can cluster
> SQL server without having to setup a domain?
> thanks
> christos
>
|||Hi Geoff,
I too have the same doubt. What are some Technical
reasons forcing cluster to run in a domain?
Thanks
Chip.
>--Original Message--
>Yes. You must have a domain to run a cluster. No, you
can't get around
>having a domain.
>--
>Geoff N. Hiten
>Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>Senior Database Administrator
>Careerbuilder.com
>I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
>www.sqlpass.org
>"Christos Kritikos"
<anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message[vbcol=seagreen]
>news:030001c49b56$400d9060$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
read[vbcol=seagreen]
cluster
>
>.
>
|||You have to have a common security context for the cluster service to manage
resources on multiple machines. Parallel usernames and paswords will not
work. You have to have a domain (NT4 or AD) to provide cluster-wide access
to resources.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Chip" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:150e01c49c9d$f0cd9560$a301280a@.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Geoff,
> I too have the same doubt. What are some Technical
> reasons forcing cluster to run in a domain?
> Thanks
> Chip.
> can't get around
> <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> read
> cluster
|||There is some good information in
281662 Windows 2000 and Windows Server 2003 Cluster Nodes As Domain Controllers
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=281662
Here is a section from the same.
To have Windows Clustering function properly (where the Cluster service starts on each node) the node that forms the cluster must be able to validate the Cluster service domain account, which is the account that you
configure during the Windows Clustering installation. To accomplish this, each node must be able to establish a secure channel with a domain controller to validate this account. If the node cannot validate the
account, the Cluster service does not start. This is also true for other clustered programs that must have account validation for services to start, such as Microsoft SQL Server and Microsoft Exchange.
If you have a cluster deployment in which there is no link with either a Windows NT 4.0 domain, a Windows 2000 domain, or a Windows Server 2003 domain, you must configure the cluster nodes as domain
controllers so that the Cluster service account can always be validated to allow for proper cluster functionality.
If the connectivity between cluster nodes and domain controllers is such that the link is either slow or unreliable, consider having a domain controller co-located with the cluster, or configuring the cluster nodes as
domain controllers.
Consider the following important points when you are deploying Windows Clustering nodes as domain controllers:
--> See the above KB (http://support.microsoft.com/?id=281662)
Best Regards,
Uttam Parui
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Are you secure? For information about the Strategic Technology Protection Program and to order your FREE Security Tool Kit, please visit http://www.microsoft.com/security.
Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet access update their Microsoft software to better protect against viruses and security vulnerabilities. The easiest way to do this is to visit the following websites:
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
http://www.microsoft.com/security/guidance/default.mspx
|||Thanks Geoff & Uttam.
Chip
>--Original Message--
>There is some good information in
>281662 Windows 2000 and Windows Server 2003 Cluster Nodes
As Domain Controllers
>http://support.microsoft.com/?id=281662
>Here is a section from the same.
>To have Windows Clustering function properly (where the
Cluster service starts on each node) the node that forms
the cluster must be able to validate the Cluster service
domain account, which is the account that you
>configure during the Windows Clustering installation. To
accomplish this, each node must be able to establish a
secure channel with a domain controller to validate this
account. If the node cannot validate the
>account, the Cluster service does not start. This is also
true for other clustered programs that must have account
validation for services to start, such as Microsoft SQL
Server and Microsoft Exchange.
>If you have a cluster deployment in which there is no
link with either a Windows NT 4.0 domain, a Windows 2000
domain, or a Windows Server 2003 domain, you must
configure the cluster nodes as domain
>controllers so that the Cluster service account can
always be validated to allow for proper cluster
functionality.
>If the connectivity between cluster nodes and domain
controllers is such that the link is either slow or
unreliable, consider having a domain controller co-located
with the cluster, or configuring the cluster nodes as
>domain controllers.
>Consider the following important points when you are
deploying Windows Clustering nodes as domain controllers:
> --> See the above KB
(http://support.microsoft.com/?id=281662)
>Best Regards,
>Uttam Parui
>Microsoft Corporation
>This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no rights.
>Are you secure? For information about the Strategic
Technology Protection Program and to order your FREE
Security Tool Kit, please visit
http://www.microsoft.com/security.
>Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet
access update their Microsoft software to better protect
against viruses and security vulnerabilities. The easiest
way to do this is to visit the following websites:
>http://www.microsoft.com/protect
>http://www.microsoft.com/security/guidance/default.mspx
>
>.
>
Do I have the right to modify third-party applications stored procedures?
Our current concern deals with stored procedures from a third-party application that were modified in order to correct future data inconsistency that was being generated. Since the stored procedures were not encrypted, I was able to modify them and correct the problem. At the same time, we developed a small in-house application to correct the current data inconsistency and we created new stored procedures in the same database. Now I'm concern about if I had the right to modify those stored procedures and additionally, created new ones inside this database? Am I restricted somehow to use our full version of MS SQL Server with a scenario like this?It'd really depend on what sort of deal you have with the vendor of the third party app.
A lot of the vendors that I have dealt with in the past have allowed the changing of stored procedures and the addition of new ones on a "at your own risk" type of deal (eg. future versions will be be guaranteed to work, the database is no longer covered by their support etc).
I'd suggest having a talk to the vendor, don't tell them you have changed anything but ask them what their views on changing stored procedures etc are.
HTH|||If it clearly creates data inconsistency then I at least would have no second thaughts abut changing the sp's. I would sort of stick to the "what they don't know can't hurt'em"-plan if this was me...|||I'll try to describe better our situation.
Before I did the changes, the provider notified us that they were closing their doors. Thus, we didn't have any support for sometime. After a while, they came to us offering the source code which we rejected considering the fact that it was a very poor developed application. Afterwards, we decide to develop, with our own effort, an application to replace the existing. In short, there is a legal process running for last 4 years where they have alleged we have commited several violations to their rights which so far, we have disproved. Now, they are conducting their efforts toward the fact I modified 2 procs and also, created new ones. I know I didn't do wrong. But, how can I show the attorneys? Perhaps, I need leads to articles, statements or disclaims from, lets say, Microsoft that contain information about the pros and cons of leaving procs as text. How can a solution provider protect procs source code or even better, their know-how?
Originally posted by rokslide
It'd really depend on what sort of deal you have with the vendor of the third party app.
A lot of the vendors that I have dealt with in the past have allowed the changing of stored procedures and the addition of new ones on a "at your own risk" type of deal (eg. future versions will be be guaranteed to work, the database is no longer covered by their support etc).
I'd suggest having a talk to the vendor, don't tell them you have changed anything but ask them what their views on changing stored procedures etc are.
HTH|||This ha NOTHING to do with M$
Did you sign a contract with them?
Did you pay them anything?
Did they build this code for you exclusively?
If I contract out, any code I build belongs to the Client (usually)
It's all a matter of what's on paper...
Check this out:
The part about self employeement...
http://weblogs.sqlteam.com/markc/|||Wow, I didn't realize it was this serious. It is possible to encrypt sp's in sql-server and if this company has let you have direct access to the database then this would have been a good idea from their side. It is not common for software-vendors to expose their sourcecode and this company you are been in a dispute with should know this.
An sp can be encrypted like this:
CREATE PROCEDURE myProcName WITH ENCRYPTION
AS
...
This way you or any others will not be able to access the sorcecode of the procedure. You can try it yourself for verification:
EXEC sp_helptext myProcName
Now when it comes to your legal rights to change their sourcecode my belief is that you unfortunately have a weak case. Brett Kaiser is partially right I belive that it comes down to what you have on paper and not, but since you have used their software you automatically agree that their software is usable and if you hae paid for it aswell you aknowledge that they are the rightful owners. I would try to go down the lane of putting the blame on them for not fulfilling their duties as a software vendor, and because they didn't perform their duties you had to remedy the bugs yourself.
Good luck man, I'm sorry to say that I'll think you'll need it :(|||I apologize...I wasn't meaning to be offensive...
But I guess I was...
Sorry|||What are you suggesting? That they don't have laws in Venezuela? I really hope I misunderstood this message of yours because I found it to be quite rude, but I will give you the benifit of the doubt...|||Frettmaestro, I'm sure Brett didn't mean to be insulting. If you know the different parts of the US well, then, you know how those guys from Jersey can be. (Right Brett? :D )
j_shaw, not being a lawyer anywhere, much less knowledgeable about Venezuelan law, everything I say here is totally my opinion and not to be taken as legal advice. But here goes: Regardless of whether the procedures were encrypted or not, I think you overstepped the bounds by changing them without first establishing ownership or at least permission. If the work was done for you custom, then there's a good chance your company owns them, but if it was a commercial product, there's a good chance that you only had license to use, not change. And as Brett pointed out, this all comes down to what the paperwork says.
Just because someone doesn't encrypt their procedures doesn't mean you have the right to change them. It may be a stupid move on their part to leave them hanging out there so easy to read and altered, but it's not an excuse to say, "if you didn't want me to do it, you should have locked it". That's like saying if somebody leaves the door to their house unlocked, or a window open, then it's okay to enter and take anything you want. Wrong!
And nobody should be under the misperception that using SQL Server's WITH ENCRYPTION is a guaranteed secure lock. I've heard that it has been cracked. It's still a good idea, but not foolproof.
(P.S. Brett, thanks for the referral!)|||The story is a little longer. My company hired this guys to develop a solution for us. But, we are unable to prove it because in one update they changed our personalized version with one that they had previously registered.
Originally posted by Frettmaestro
Wow, I didn't realize it was this serious. It is possible to encrypt sp's in sql-server and if this company has let you have direct access to the database then this would have been a good idea from their side. It is not common for software-vendors to expose their sourcecode and this company you are been in a dispute with should know this.
An sp can be encrypted like this:
CREATE PROCEDURE myProcName WITH ENCRYPTION
AS
...
This way you or any others will not be able to access the sorcecode of the procedure. You can try it yourself for verification:
EXEC sp_helptext myProcName
Now when it comes to your legal rights to change their sourcecode my belief is that you unfortunately have a weak case. Brett Kaiser is partially right I belive that it comes down to what you have on paper and not, but since you have used their software you automatically agree that their software is usable and if you hae paid for it aswell you aknowledge that they are the rightful owners. I would try to go down the lane of putting the blame on them for not fulfilling their duties as a software vendor, and because they didn't perform their duties you had to remedy the bugs yourself.
Good luck man, I'm sorry to say that I'll think you'll need it :(|||Originally posted by AjarnMark
Frettmaestro, I'm sure Brett didn't mean to be insulting. If you know the different parts of the US well, then, you know how those guys from Jersey can be. (Right Brett? :D )
(P.S. Brett, thanks for the referral!)
Just being the ignorant American...
But to re-address in (hopefully) a different tone....
There were hardly ANY US laws for software and stuff till just recently...
How and what the laws are for Venezuala...I have no idea...
And wouldn't you want to counter-sue anyway for your time it took to do the data sanitation?
Don't you have the expectation/right to expect their product to work?|||My own cursory knowledge of law probably does not apply, but it does not sound like you made a profit by re-selling the application with your changes, so you should be safe from lawsuits by SCO. When you found that the application could invalidate your data, did you go to the software company and ask for a fix? If they refused, then you may be able to sue them (if you have in writing that the application promises to do so-and-such). Since they are bringing the suit, they have to prove that your changes have somehow damaged them.
In general, I do not allow any schema (or data) updates to a third party application database, as this can invalidate the service contract. Extra lawsuits have never come into the picture (as far as I know).|||A company I have been working for is currently in a legal dispute with a hosting provider. The case is not at all similar but this company did not have a signed agreement of any sort, and here in England that didn't matter because we supposedly accepted their terms and conditions automatically when they paid the first bill and made use of their services. The company I worked for will most likely get the case dismissed because the hosting company breached their own contract on several counts but my point is simply that even though no written contract has been signed you can still be legally obliged. This can offcourse be different in Venezuela, but I don't know that...
When it comes to altering software I do belive that you will have to make a case on the fact that their software was incapable of doing what it was supposed to and because they offered no real help, you had to change it yourself to save your business. You can't go bankrupt because some moron developer don't know what he's doing...|||Ok. Lets change the subject.
We also had to create an application to fix the already corrupted data. We created new sprocs and placed them in the same database. Do I have the right to add new objects to the existing database?
Originally posted by Frettmaestro
A company I have been working for is currently in a legal dispute with a hosting provider. The case is not at all similar but this company did not have a signed agreement of any sort, and here in England that didn't matter because we supposedly accepted their terms and conditions automatically when they paid the first bill and made use of their services. The company I worked for will most likely get the case dismissed because the hosting company breached their own contract on several counts but my point is simply that even though no written contract has been signed you can still be legally obliged. This can offcourse be different in Venezuela, but I don't know that...
When it comes to altering software I do belive that you will have to make a case on the fact that their software was incapable of doing what it was supposed to and because they offered no real help, you had to change it yourself to save your business. You can't go bankrupt because some moron developer don't know what he's doing...|||All in favor say 'eye'! EYE!
I don't think this will get you anywhere, we can say this and that but it all comes down to the laws of your country and your best bet is some venezuelan lawyers ;)|||A couple of things spring to light here...
The story is a little longer. My company hired this guys to develop a solution for us. But, we are unable to prove it because in one update they changed our personalized version with one that they had previously registered.
Okie,.. well if you hired them to develop a solution for you there should be documents showing it yes?
If they gave you a solution that was something they developed for others or that they in turn sold to others then they are in breach of contract (assuming standard contract laws apply).
If the application they gave you/developed for you is faulty as suggested...
We also had to create an application to fix the already corrupted data. We created new sprocs and placed them in the same database. Do I have the right to add new objects to the existing database?
...and you gave them the opportunity to fix it (which they didn't) then I don't see what the issue should be legally. Yes, you are on somewhat shakey ground for changing their code but they are on equally unstable ground for their practises during the development and delivery of the application.
You could also use the facts that their application was faulty and that they code was unprotected to show that they had made false claims about their abilities...
Of course I'm not a lawyer and I haven't studied law (except for what I have come across in the industry) and I don't have any leads/examples to point to, but I'm sure if you raised these points with an attorney he would be able to help you more.|||It's like the line from Animal House...
My advice to you is to drink heavily...
I didn't know you where in pre Med?
Pre Med, SQL Server DBA, what's the difference?
A lot of the vendors that I have dealt with in the past have allowed the changing of stored procedures and the addition of new ones on a "at your own risk" type of deal (eg. future versions will be be guaranteed to work, the database is no longer covered by their support etc).
I'd suggest having a talk to the vendor, don't tell them you have changed anything but ask them what their views on changing stored procedures etc are.
HTH|||If it clearly creates data inconsistency then I at least would have no second thaughts abut changing the sp's. I would sort of stick to the "what they don't know can't hurt'em"-plan if this was me...|||I'll try to describe better our situation.
Before I did the changes, the provider notified us that they were closing their doors. Thus, we didn't have any support for sometime. After a while, they came to us offering the source code which we rejected considering the fact that it was a very poor developed application. Afterwards, we decide to develop, with our own effort, an application to replace the existing. In short, there is a legal process running for last 4 years where they have alleged we have commited several violations to their rights which so far, we have disproved. Now, they are conducting their efforts toward the fact I modified 2 procs and also, created new ones. I know I didn't do wrong. But, how can I show the attorneys? Perhaps, I need leads to articles, statements or disclaims from, lets say, Microsoft that contain information about the pros and cons of leaving procs as text. How can a solution provider protect procs source code or even better, their know-how?
Originally posted by rokslide
It'd really depend on what sort of deal you have with the vendor of the third party app.
A lot of the vendors that I have dealt with in the past have allowed the changing of stored procedures and the addition of new ones on a "at your own risk" type of deal (eg. future versions will be be guaranteed to work, the database is no longer covered by their support etc).
I'd suggest having a talk to the vendor, don't tell them you have changed anything but ask them what their views on changing stored procedures etc are.
HTH|||This ha NOTHING to do with M$
Did you sign a contract with them?
Did you pay them anything?
Did they build this code for you exclusively?
If I contract out, any code I build belongs to the Client (usually)
It's all a matter of what's on paper...
Check this out:
The part about self employeement...
http://weblogs.sqlteam.com/markc/|||Wow, I didn't realize it was this serious. It is possible to encrypt sp's in sql-server and if this company has let you have direct access to the database then this would have been a good idea from their side. It is not common for software-vendors to expose their sourcecode and this company you are been in a dispute with should know this.
An sp can be encrypted like this:
CREATE PROCEDURE myProcName WITH ENCRYPTION
AS
...
This way you or any others will not be able to access the sorcecode of the procedure. You can try it yourself for verification:
EXEC sp_helptext myProcName
Now when it comes to your legal rights to change their sourcecode my belief is that you unfortunately have a weak case. Brett Kaiser is partially right I belive that it comes down to what you have on paper and not, but since you have used their software you automatically agree that their software is usable and if you hae paid for it aswell you aknowledge that they are the rightful owners. I would try to go down the lane of putting the blame on them for not fulfilling their duties as a software vendor, and because they didn't perform their duties you had to remedy the bugs yourself.
Good luck man, I'm sorry to say that I'll think you'll need it :(|||I apologize...I wasn't meaning to be offensive...
But I guess I was...
Sorry|||What are you suggesting? That they don't have laws in Venezuela? I really hope I misunderstood this message of yours because I found it to be quite rude, but I will give you the benifit of the doubt...|||Frettmaestro, I'm sure Brett didn't mean to be insulting. If you know the different parts of the US well, then, you know how those guys from Jersey can be. (Right Brett? :D )
j_shaw, not being a lawyer anywhere, much less knowledgeable about Venezuelan law, everything I say here is totally my opinion and not to be taken as legal advice. But here goes: Regardless of whether the procedures were encrypted or not, I think you overstepped the bounds by changing them without first establishing ownership or at least permission. If the work was done for you custom, then there's a good chance your company owns them, but if it was a commercial product, there's a good chance that you only had license to use, not change. And as Brett pointed out, this all comes down to what the paperwork says.
Just because someone doesn't encrypt their procedures doesn't mean you have the right to change them. It may be a stupid move on their part to leave them hanging out there so easy to read and altered, but it's not an excuse to say, "if you didn't want me to do it, you should have locked it". That's like saying if somebody leaves the door to their house unlocked, or a window open, then it's okay to enter and take anything you want. Wrong!
And nobody should be under the misperception that using SQL Server's WITH ENCRYPTION is a guaranteed secure lock. I've heard that it has been cracked. It's still a good idea, but not foolproof.
(P.S. Brett, thanks for the referral!)|||The story is a little longer. My company hired this guys to develop a solution for us. But, we are unable to prove it because in one update they changed our personalized version with one that they had previously registered.
Originally posted by Frettmaestro
Wow, I didn't realize it was this serious. It is possible to encrypt sp's in sql-server and if this company has let you have direct access to the database then this would have been a good idea from their side. It is not common for software-vendors to expose their sourcecode and this company you are been in a dispute with should know this.
An sp can be encrypted like this:
CREATE PROCEDURE myProcName WITH ENCRYPTION
AS
...
This way you or any others will not be able to access the sorcecode of the procedure. You can try it yourself for verification:
EXEC sp_helptext myProcName
Now when it comes to your legal rights to change their sourcecode my belief is that you unfortunately have a weak case. Brett Kaiser is partially right I belive that it comes down to what you have on paper and not, but since you have used their software you automatically agree that their software is usable and if you hae paid for it aswell you aknowledge that they are the rightful owners. I would try to go down the lane of putting the blame on them for not fulfilling their duties as a software vendor, and because they didn't perform their duties you had to remedy the bugs yourself.
Good luck man, I'm sorry to say that I'll think you'll need it :(|||Originally posted by AjarnMark
Frettmaestro, I'm sure Brett didn't mean to be insulting. If you know the different parts of the US well, then, you know how those guys from Jersey can be. (Right Brett? :D )
(P.S. Brett, thanks for the referral!)
Just being the ignorant American...
But to re-address in (hopefully) a different tone....
There were hardly ANY US laws for software and stuff till just recently...
How and what the laws are for Venezuala...I have no idea...
And wouldn't you want to counter-sue anyway for your time it took to do the data sanitation?
Don't you have the expectation/right to expect their product to work?|||My own cursory knowledge of law probably does not apply, but it does not sound like you made a profit by re-selling the application with your changes, so you should be safe from lawsuits by SCO. When you found that the application could invalidate your data, did you go to the software company and ask for a fix? If they refused, then you may be able to sue them (if you have in writing that the application promises to do so-and-such). Since they are bringing the suit, they have to prove that your changes have somehow damaged them.
In general, I do not allow any schema (or data) updates to a third party application database, as this can invalidate the service contract. Extra lawsuits have never come into the picture (as far as I know).|||A company I have been working for is currently in a legal dispute with a hosting provider. The case is not at all similar but this company did not have a signed agreement of any sort, and here in England that didn't matter because we supposedly accepted their terms and conditions automatically when they paid the first bill and made use of their services. The company I worked for will most likely get the case dismissed because the hosting company breached their own contract on several counts but my point is simply that even though no written contract has been signed you can still be legally obliged. This can offcourse be different in Venezuela, but I don't know that...
When it comes to altering software I do belive that you will have to make a case on the fact that their software was incapable of doing what it was supposed to and because they offered no real help, you had to change it yourself to save your business. You can't go bankrupt because some moron developer don't know what he's doing...|||Ok. Lets change the subject.
We also had to create an application to fix the already corrupted data. We created new sprocs and placed them in the same database. Do I have the right to add new objects to the existing database?
Originally posted by Frettmaestro
A company I have been working for is currently in a legal dispute with a hosting provider. The case is not at all similar but this company did not have a signed agreement of any sort, and here in England that didn't matter because we supposedly accepted their terms and conditions automatically when they paid the first bill and made use of their services. The company I worked for will most likely get the case dismissed because the hosting company breached their own contract on several counts but my point is simply that even though no written contract has been signed you can still be legally obliged. This can offcourse be different in Venezuela, but I don't know that...
When it comes to altering software I do belive that you will have to make a case on the fact that their software was incapable of doing what it was supposed to and because they offered no real help, you had to change it yourself to save your business. You can't go bankrupt because some moron developer don't know what he's doing...|||All in favor say 'eye'! EYE!
I don't think this will get you anywhere, we can say this and that but it all comes down to the laws of your country and your best bet is some venezuelan lawyers ;)|||A couple of things spring to light here...
The story is a little longer. My company hired this guys to develop a solution for us. But, we are unable to prove it because in one update they changed our personalized version with one that they had previously registered.
Okie,.. well if you hired them to develop a solution for you there should be documents showing it yes?
If they gave you a solution that was something they developed for others or that they in turn sold to others then they are in breach of contract (assuming standard contract laws apply).
If the application they gave you/developed for you is faulty as suggested...
We also had to create an application to fix the already corrupted data. We created new sprocs and placed them in the same database. Do I have the right to add new objects to the existing database?
...and you gave them the opportunity to fix it (which they didn't) then I don't see what the issue should be legally. Yes, you are on somewhat shakey ground for changing their code but they are on equally unstable ground for their practises during the development and delivery of the application.
You could also use the facts that their application was faulty and that they code was unprotected to show that they had made false claims about their abilities...
Of course I'm not a lawyer and I haven't studied law (except for what I have come across in the industry) and I don't have any leads/examples to point to, but I'm sure if you raised these points with an attorney he would be able to help you more.|||It's like the line from Animal House...
My advice to you is to drink heavily...
I didn't know you where in pre Med?
Pre Med, SQL Server DBA, what's the difference?
Friday, February 24, 2012
Distribution agent schedule
Hi,
1. I need to configure automatic stop of the distribution agent for
transactional replication and start in 3 hours in order guys could run their
reports on the replicated site. This means that distribution agent should run
all the time except the time 7.00-10.00, stop automatic at 7.00 and start at
10.00. How can I configure that through the schedule in the distribution
agent job settings (agent’s properties)?
2. What another solution could be suggested to run queries without
interrupting continuous work of distribution agent for transactional
replication (pull subscriber)?
1) Right click on your distribution agent, select agent properties,
schedules, and create a reoccurring daily schedule which starts at 10:00 and
stops at 7:00.
2) Have them look at Reporting Services or Analysis Services. These products
may be what they are looking for depending on their requirements.
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
"Elena" <Elena@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7CFF7D5E-F884-4885-8459-6D396E644796@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> 1. I need to configure automatic stop of the distribution agent for
> transactional replication and start in 3 hours in order guys could run
> their
> reports on the replicated site. This means that distribution agent should
> run
> all the time except the time 7.00-10.00, stop automatic at 7.00 and start
> at
> 10.00. How can I configure that through the schedule in the distribution
> agent job settings (agent's properties)?
> 2. What another solution could be suggested to run queries without
> interrupting continuous work of distribution agent for transactional
> replication (pull subscriber)?
>
|||1) But what shall I choose in the hours option?
2) Reporting guys are already using Reporting Services. But not in the right
way I guess. Some Reports use multiple joins of huge tables.
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:
> 1) Right click on your distribution agent, select agent properties,
> schedules, and create a reoccurring daily schedule which starts at 10:00 and
> stops at 7:00.
> 2) Have them look at Reporting Services or Analysis Services. These products
> may be what they are looking for depending on their requirements.
> --
> 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
> "Elena" <Elena@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:7CFF7D5E-F884-4885-8459-6D396E644796@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||1) In the schedules table, select reoccurring. Click Change, Click daily,
and I'd select occurs every 5 minutes. With a start at 10:00 pm and stop at
7:00 am. Its not clear to me when you want it to start and stop. Can you use
am and pm or military times?
2) I can't comment if they are using it correctly or not. If you/they are
concerned about it, I would post to
microsoft.public.sqlserver.reportingservices
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
"Elena" <Elena@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2950DC12-CE3B-48A7-B679-19872DD907C2@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> 1) But what shall I choose in the hours option?
> 2) Reporting guys are already using Reporting Services. But not in the
> right
> way I guess. Some Reports use multiple joins of huge tables.
> "Hilary Cotter" wrote:
1. I need to configure automatic stop of the distribution agent for
transactional replication and start in 3 hours in order guys could run their
reports on the replicated site. This means that distribution agent should run
all the time except the time 7.00-10.00, stop automatic at 7.00 and start at
10.00. How can I configure that through the schedule in the distribution
agent job settings (agent’s properties)?
2. What another solution could be suggested to run queries without
interrupting continuous work of distribution agent for transactional
replication (pull subscriber)?
1) Right click on your distribution agent, select agent properties,
schedules, and create a reoccurring daily schedule which starts at 10:00 and
stops at 7:00.
2) Have them look at Reporting Services or Analysis Services. These products
may be what they are looking for depending on their requirements.
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
"Elena" <Elena@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7CFF7D5E-F884-4885-8459-6D396E644796@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> 1. I need to configure automatic stop of the distribution agent for
> transactional replication and start in 3 hours in order guys could run
> their
> reports on the replicated site. This means that distribution agent should
> run
> all the time except the time 7.00-10.00, stop automatic at 7.00 and start
> at
> 10.00. How can I configure that through the schedule in the distribution
> agent job settings (agent's properties)?
> 2. What another solution could be suggested to run queries without
> interrupting continuous work of distribution agent for transactional
> replication (pull subscriber)?
>
|||1) But what shall I choose in the hours option?
2) Reporting guys are already using Reporting Services. But not in the right
way I guess. Some Reports use multiple joins of huge tables.
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:
> 1) Right click on your distribution agent, select agent properties,
> schedules, and create a reoccurring daily schedule which starts at 10:00 and
> stops at 7:00.
> 2) Have them look at Reporting Services or Analysis Services. These products
> may be what they are looking for depending on their requirements.
> --
> 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
> "Elena" <Elena@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:7CFF7D5E-F884-4885-8459-6D396E644796@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||1) In the schedules table, select reoccurring. Click Change, Click daily,
and I'd select occurs every 5 minutes. With a start at 10:00 pm and stop at
7:00 am. Its not clear to me when you want it to start and stop. Can you use
am and pm or military times?
2) I can't comment if they are using it correctly or not. If you/they are
concerned about it, I would post to
microsoft.public.sqlserver.reportingservices
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
"Elena" <Elena@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2950DC12-CE3B-48A7-B679-19872DD907C2@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> 1) But what shall I choose in the hours option?
> 2) Reporting guys are already using Reporting Services. But not in the
> right
> way I guess. Some Reports use multiple joins of huge tables.
> "Hilary Cotter" wrote:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)