Help for setting up SQL 2000!

I got sbs 2003 server with sql 2000, and using backup data function to move
the database to another 2k server w/sql2k, after I restore on the 2k server,
I from workstation try to login by using that data, but there is no account
appear on the screen.
What is wrong with it or I did something wrong in SQL setting?
Thanks!
Danny
The new server may not have the login accounts.
See these articles for more information:
Moving Server/Database/Logins
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/moving_sql_server.htm Moving DBs
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=314546 Moving DB's between Servers
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=224071 Moving SQL Server Databases to a
New Location with Detach/Attach
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=221465 Using WITH MOVE in a Restore
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/colu...rdatabases.asp
Moving Users
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=246133 How To Transfer Logins and
Passwords Between SQL Servers
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274188 Troubleshooting Orphan Logins
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=240872 Resolve Permission
Issues -Database Is Moved Between SQL Servers
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Danny" <dannyf@.deny.com> wrote in message
news:%23%23TSFV49GHA.4464@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>I got sbs 2003 server with sql 2000, and using backup data function to move
>the database to another 2k server w/sql2k, after I restore on the 2k
>server, I from workstation try to login by using that data, but there is no
>account appear on the screen.
> What is wrong with it or I did something wrong in SQL setting?
> Thanks!
> Danny
>

Help for setting up SQL 2000!

I got sbs 2003 server with sql 2000, and using backup data function to move
the database to another 2k server w/sql2k, after I restore on the 2k server,
I from workstation try to login by using that data, but there is no account
appear on the screen.
What is wrong with it or I did something wrong in SQL setting'
Thanks!
DannyThe new server may not have the login accounts.
See these articles for more information:
Moving Server/Database/Logins
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/moving_sql_server.htm Moving DBs
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=314546 Moving DB's between Servers
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=224071 Moving SQL Server Databases to a
New Location with Detach/Attach
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=221465 Using WITH MOVE in a Restore
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/col...se
s.asp
Moving Users
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=246133 How To Transfer Logins and
Passwords Between SQL Servers
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/274188 Troubleshooting Orphan Logins
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=240872 Resolve Permission
Issues -Database Is Moved Between SQL Servers
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"Danny" <dannyf@.deny.com> wrote in message
news:%23%23TSFV49GHA.4464@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>I got sbs 2003 server with sql 2000, and using backup data function to move
>the database to another 2k server w/sql2k, after I restore on the 2k
>server, I from workstation try to login by using that data, but there is no
>account appear on the screen.
> What is wrong with it or I did something wrong in SQL setting'
> Thanks!
> Danny
>

Help for a real newbie

A problem so simple I'm a little embarrassed to post it... I am setting up a trigger in which I want to, among other things, record the network ID of the user who performs the action that triggers the trigger. I know there is a variable or function out there to pull that information, but I can't find it, and have tried every variation of "login logname usr_id network_id....." I can find.

So first.... could somebody please tell me the variable or function that will return that piece of information. And second, if you also could point me to a good place, either in print or on line, to look up that kind of information, I would be most grateful.

Thanks.

Hello Leslie. The first thing to remember, there is no stupid question (well almost never )

The second thing I will point you to is the Downloadable version of the "BOL" (Books On Line).

It can be found here. http://search.microsoft.com/results.aspx?mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&q=SQL+BOL If you are using SQL 2005 then it will be the 4th link down. You should also be able to access this by hitting F1 in your Enterprise Manager or inside of SQL Studio. Then switch over to the Index.

Then remmeber that most variables in SQL that are global either scoped to the whole server or the current connection will usually begin with a @.@.. Typing the @.@. in the index will get you in the near vicinity.

I personally found the @.@.PROCID which

Returns the object identifier (ID) of the current Transact-SQL module. A Transact-SQL module can be a stored procedure, user-defined function, or trigger. @.@.PROCID cannot be specified in CLR modules or the in-process data access provider.

and @.@.SPID

Returns the session ID of the current user process.

Try both of those and see if one of those does what you are looking for.

Hope that helps. If you have further questions feel free to ask.

|||

Hi Leslie,

I think you're after the SYSTEM_USER function, which will return the windows login name in the form of ADomain\AUser (if the current user has used a trusted win connection of course).

Cheers,

Rob

help and advice on waittype 0x0044

Hi,
I wonder if anyone can shed any light on the following as i just can't
explain it.
A user is running an update on a 500m+ row table setting a column
value, computing its value from another column in the table. It's now
been running for 23hours.
The server is Itanium 64, enterprise 2005, SAN based storage and it
usually handles anything with this volume quite quickly, probably
about 30 mins or so.
There is nothing else running currently although overnight batches,
backups etc have been running within the last 23 hours.
In sysprocess it showing the following :-
spid kpid blocked waittype waittime
lastwaittype waitresource
52 5236 0 0x0044 30
PAGEIOLATCH_EX 6:13:1754732
the process seems to stay in this waittype for a few secnds and then
goes to a 0x0000 and then back into this one again. I can see from the
IO counter that IO is increasing and also looking at the current IO i
see the following so presume the query is still working :-
select
database_id,
file_id,
io_stall,
io_pending_ms_ticks,
scheduler_address
from sys.dm_io_virtual_file_stats(NULL, NULL)t1,
sys.dm_io_pending_io_requests as t2
where t1.file_handle = t2.io_handle
gives results :-
6 13 151115052 10 0x0000000008624080
I just can't explain why it is so slow when nothing else is ruuning.
Anyone have any ideas on what i can check on?
Thanks
Ian.Regarding PAGEIOLATCH_EX --I/O page latch exclusive. Waiting for the write of
an I/O page.
I think its just showing that disk activity is getting performed as updates
are currently executing. There is a possibility of slow disk subsystem(that
you can verify using disk counters in performance monitor like average disk
queue length, %disk time etc.).
Is it possible in your case to perform batch by batch updates? Also, whts
the recovery model of this database.
Manu
"ianwr" wrote:
> Hi,
> I wonder if anyone can shed any light on the following as i just can't
> explain it.
> A user is running an update on a 500m+ row table setting a column
> value, computing its value from another column in the table. It's now
> been running for 23hours.
> The server is Itanium 64, enterprise 2005, SAN based storage and it
> usually handles anything with this volume quite quickly, probably
> about 30 mins or so.
> There is nothing else running currently although overnight batches,
> backups etc have been running within the last 23 hours.
> In sysprocess it showing the following :-
> spid kpid blocked waittype waittime
> lastwaittype waitresource
> 52 5236 0 0x0044 30
> PAGEIOLATCH_EX 6:13:1754732
> the process seems to stay in this waittype for a few secnds and then
> goes to a 0x0000 and then back into this one again. I can see from the
> IO counter that IO is increasing and also looking at the current IO i
> see the following so presume the query is still working :-
> select
> database_id,
> file_id,
> io_stall,
> io_pending_ms_ticks,
> scheduler_address
> from sys.dm_io_virtual_file_stats(NULL, NULL)t1,
> sys.dm_io_pending_io_requests as t2
> where t1.file_handle = t2.io_handle
> gives results :-
> 6 13 151115052 10 0x0000000008624080
> I just can't explain why it is so slow when nothing else is ruuning.
> Anyone have any ideas on what i can check on?
> Thanks
> Ian.
>|||Hi Manu,
The recovery model is simple mode and i suppose the developer can do
it in batches but is a one off and i told him to leave it running
because it would take just as long to roll back.
Disk subsystem is usally quite quick, i can create an index on 600m+
row table in about 25 mins so for this to take 23 hours is really
strange|||Ian,
I see that on my machines a non-zero current waittype (almost?) always is
paired with the same lastwaittype, so I assume that (with no information to
the contrary) that 0x0044 = PAGEIOLATCH_EX.
It that is correct, then from
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179984.aspx it says: Occurs when
a task is waiting on a latch for a buffer that is in an I/O request. The
latch request is in Exclusive mode. Long waits may indicate problems with
the disk subsystem.
So, although I don't know what is wrong, this seems to indicate some
problems with your SAN. I am not SAN wise, but it suggests that either
there is a communication problem between server and SAN or the SAN is having
disk problems.
FWIW,
RLF
"ianwr" <ianwrigglesworth@.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:b794459f-13ed-49b4-b444-3609f30ac354@.v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> I wonder if anyone can shed any light on the following as i just can't
> explain it.
> A user is running an update on a 500m+ row table setting a column
> value, computing its value from another column in the table. It's now
> been running for 23hours.
> The server is Itanium 64, enterprise 2005, SAN based storage and it
> usually handles anything with this volume quite quickly, probably
> about 30 mins or so.
> There is nothing else running currently although overnight batches,
> backups etc have been running within the last 23 hours.
> In sysprocess it showing the following :-
> spid kpid blocked waittype waittime
> lastwaittype waitresource
> 52 5236 0 0x0044 30
> PAGEIOLATCH_EX 6:13:1754732
> the process seems to stay in this waittype for a few secnds and then
> goes to a 0x0000 and then back into this one again. I can see from the
> IO counter that IO is increasing and also looking at the current IO i
> see the following so presume the query is still working :-
> select
> database_id,
> file_id,
> io_stall,
> io_pending_ms_ticks,
> scheduler_address
> from sys.dm_io_virtual_file_stats(NULL, NULL)t1,
> sys.dm_io_pending_io_requests as t2
> where t1.file_handle = t2.io_handle
> gives results :-
> 6 13 151115052 10 0x0000000008624080
> I just can't explain why it is so slow when nothing else is ruuning.
> Anyone have any ideas on what i can check on?
> Thanks
> Ian.|||Thanks Russell,
I'm thinking its probably the SAN, I suspect they probably have other
apps running on the same spindles as everythign seems to be setup
completely wrong at this client site.
I'm wondering if there is something else happening on the san that is
causing things to go slow ... how lovely it would be to have some SAN
diagnostic tool that i could run from my desktop rather than go
through the san people. lol.
Anyway thanks for your help
Ian.

help and advice on waittype 0x0044

Hi,
I wonder if anyone can shed any light on the following as i just can't
explain it.
A user is running an update on a 500m+ row table setting a column
value, computing its value from another column in the table. It's now
been running for 23hours.
The server is Itanium 64, enterprise 2005, SAN based storage and it
usually handles anything with this volume quite quickly, probably
about 30 mins or so.
There is nothing else running currently although overnight batches,
backups etc have been running within the last 23 hours.
In sysprocess it showing the following :-
spid kpid blocked waittype waittime
lastwaittype waitresource
52 5236 0 0x0044 30
PAGEIOLATCH_EX 6:13:1754732
the process seems to stay in this waittype for a few secnds and then
goes to a 0x0000 and then back into this one again. I can see from the
IO counter that IO is increasing and also looking at the current IO i
see the following so presume the query is still working :-
select
database_id,
file_id,
io_stall,
io_pending_ms_ticks,
scheduler_address
from sys.dm_io_virtual_file_stats(NULL, NULL)t1,
sys.dm_io_pending_io_requests as t2
where t1.file_handle = t2.io_handle
gives results :-
613151115052100x0000000008624080
I just can't explain why it is so slow when nothing else is ruuning.
Anyone have any ideas on what i can check on?
Thanks
Ian.
Regarding PAGEIOLATCH_EX --I/O page latch exclusive. Waiting for the write of
an I/O page.
I think its just showing that disk activity is getting performed as updates
are currently executing. There is a possibility of slow disk subsystem(that
you can verify using disk counters in performance monitor like average disk
queue length, %disk time etc.).
Is it possible in your case to perform batch by batch updates? Also, whts
the recovery model of this database.
Manu
"ianwr" wrote:

> Hi,
> I wonder if anyone can shed any light on the following as i just can't
> explain it.
> A user is running an update on a 500m+ row table setting a column
> value, computing its value from another column in the table. It's now
> been running for 23hours.
> The server is Itanium 64, enterprise 2005, SAN based storage and it
> usually handles anything with this volume quite quickly, probably
> about 30 mins or so.
> There is nothing else running currently although overnight batches,
> backups etc have been running within the last 23 hours.
> In sysprocess it showing the following :-
> spid kpid blocked waittype waittime
> lastwaittype waitresource
> 52 5236 0 0x0044 30
> PAGEIOLATCH_EX 6:13:1754732
> the process seems to stay in this waittype for a few secnds and then
> goes to a 0x0000 and then back into this one again. I can see from the
> IO counter that IO is increasing and also looking at the current IO i
> see the following so presume the query is still working :-
> select
> database_id,
> file_id,
> io_stall,
> io_pending_ms_ticks,
> scheduler_address
> from sys.dm_io_virtual_file_stats(NULL, NULL)t1,
> sys.dm_io_pending_io_requests as t2
> where t1.file_handle = t2.io_handle
> gives results :-
> 613151115052100x0000000008624080
> I just can't explain why it is so slow when nothing else is ruuning.
> Anyone have any ideas on what i can check on?
> Thanks
> Ian.
>
|||Ian,
I see that on my machines a non-zero current waittype (almost?) always is
paired with the same lastwaittype, so I assume that (with no information to
the contrary) that 0x0044 = PAGEIOLATCH_EX.
It that is correct, then from
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179984.aspx it says: Occurs when
a task is waiting on a latch for a buffer that is in an I/O request. The
latch request is in Exclusive mode. Long waits may indicate problems with
the disk subsystem.
So, although I don't know what is wrong, this seems to indicate some
problems with your SAN. I am not SAN wise, but it suggests that either
there is a communication problem between server and SAN or the SAN is having
disk problems.
FWIW,
RLF
"ianwr" <ianwrigglesworth@.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:b794459f-13ed-49b4-b444-3609f30ac354@.v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> I wonder if anyone can shed any light on the following as i just can't
> explain it.
> A user is running an update on a 500m+ row table setting a column
> value, computing its value from another column in the table. It's now
> been running for 23hours.
> The server is Itanium 64, enterprise 2005, SAN based storage and it
> usually handles anything with this volume quite quickly, probably
> about 30 mins or so.
> There is nothing else running currently although overnight batches,
> backups etc have been running within the last 23 hours.
> In sysprocess it showing the following :-
> spid kpid blocked waittype waittime
> lastwaittype waitresource
> 52 5236 0 0x0044 30
> PAGEIOLATCH_EX 6:13:1754732
> the process seems to stay in this waittype for a few secnds and then
> goes to a 0x0000 and then back into this one again. I can see from the
> IO counter that IO is increasing and also looking at the current IO i
> see the following so presume the query is still working :-
> select
> database_id,
> file_id,
> io_stall,
> io_pending_ms_ticks,
> scheduler_address
> from sys.dm_io_virtual_file_stats(NULL, NULL)t1,
> sys.dm_io_pending_io_requests as t2
> where t1.file_handle = t2.io_handle
> gives results :-
> 6 13 151115052 10 0x0000000008624080
> I just can't explain why it is so slow when nothing else is ruuning.
> Anyone have any ideas on what i can check on?
> Thanks
> Ian.
|||Hi Manu,
The recovery model is simple mode and i suppose the developer can do
it in batches but is a one off and i told him to leave it running
because it would take just as long to roll back.
Disk subsystem is usally quite quick, i can create an index on 600m+
row table in about 25 mins so for this to take 23 hours is really
strange
|||Thanks Russell,
I'm thinking its probably the SAN, I suspect they probably have other
apps running on the same spindles as everythign seems to be setup
completely wrong at this client site.
I'm wondering if there is something else happening on the san that is
causing things to go slow ... how lovely it would be to have some SAN
diagnostic tool that i could run from my desktop rather than go
through the san people. lol.
Anyway thanks for your help
Ian.

help and advice on waittype 0x0044

Hi,
I wonder if anyone can shed any light on the following as i just can't
explain it.
A user is running an update on a 500m+ row table setting a column
value, computing its value from another column in the table. It's now
been running for 23hours.
The server is Itanium 64, enterprise 2005, SAN based storage and it
usually handles anything with this volume quite quickly, probably
about 30 mins or so.
There is nothing else running currently although overnight batches,
backups etc have been running within the last 23 hours.
In sysprocess it showing the following :-
spid kpid blocked waittype waittime
lastwaittype waitresource
52 5236 0 0x0044 30
PAGEIOLATCH_EX 6:13:1754732
the process seems to stay in this waittype for a few secnds and then
goes to a 0x0000 and then back into this one again. I can see from the
IO counter that IO is increasing and also looking at the current IO i
see the following so presume the query is still working :-
select
database_id,
file_id,
io_stall,
io_pending_ms_ticks,
scheduler_address
from sys.dm_io_virtual_file_stats(NULL, NULL)t1,
sys.dm_io_pending_io_requests as t2
where t1.file_handle = t2.io_handle
gives results :-
6 13 151115052 10 0x0000000008624080
I just can't explain why it is so slow when nothing else is ruuning.
Anyone have any ideas on what i can check on?
Thanks
Ian.Regarding PAGEIOLATCH_EX --I/O page latch exclusive. Waiting for the write o
f
an I/O page.
I think its just showing that disk activity is getting performed as updates
are currently executing. There is a possibility of slow disk subsystem(that
you can verify using disk counters in performance monitor like average disk
queue length, %disk time etc.).
Is it possible in your case to perform batch by batch updates? Also, whts
the recovery model of this database.
Manu
"ianwr" wrote:

> Hi,
> I wonder if anyone can shed any light on the following as i just can't
> explain it.
> A user is running an update on a 500m+ row table setting a column
> value, computing its value from another column in the table. It's now
> been running for 23hours.
> The server is Itanium 64, enterprise 2005, SAN based storage and it
> usually handles anything with this volume quite quickly, probably
> about 30 mins or so.
> There is nothing else running currently although overnight batches,
> backups etc have been running within the last 23 hours.
> In sysprocess it showing the following :-
> spid kpid blocked waittype waittime
> lastwaittype waitresource
> 52 5236 0 0x0044 30
> PAGEIOLATCH_EX 6:13:1754732
> the process seems to stay in this waittype for a few secnds and then
> goes to a 0x0000 and then back into this one again. I can see from the
> IO counter that IO is increasing and also looking at the current IO i
> see the following so presume the query is still working :-
> select
> database_id,
> file_id,
> io_stall,
> io_pending_ms_ticks,
> scheduler_address
> from sys.dm_io_virtual_file_stats(NULL, NULL)t1,
> sys.dm_io_pending_io_requests as t2
> where t1.file_handle = t2.io_handle
> gives results :-
> 6 13 151115052 10 0x0000000008624080
> I just can't explain why it is so slow when nothing else is ruuning.
> Anyone have any ideas on what i can check on?
> Thanks
> Ian.
>|||Ian,
I see that on my machines a non-zero current waittype (almost?) always is
paired with the same lastwaittype, so I assume that (with no information to
the contrary) that 0x0044 = PAGEIOLATCH_EX.
It that is correct, then from
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179984.aspx it says: Occurs when
a task is waiting on a latch for a buffer that is in an I/O request. The
latch request is in Exclusive mode. Long waits may indicate problems with
the disk subsystem.
So, although I don't know what is wrong, this seems to indicate some
problems with your SAN. I am not SAN wise, but it suggests that either
there is a communication problem between server and SAN or the SAN is having
disk problems.
FWIW,
RLF
"ianwr" <ianwrigglesworth@.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:b794459f-13ed-49b4-b444-3609f30ac354@.v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> I wonder if anyone can shed any light on the following as i just can't
> explain it.
> A user is running an update on a 500m+ row table setting a column
> value, computing its value from another column in the table. It's now
> been running for 23hours.
> The server is Itanium 64, enterprise 2005, SAN based storage and it
> usually handles anything with this volume quite quickly, probably
> about 30 mins or so.
> There is nothing else running currently although overnight batches,
> backups etc have been running within the last 23 hours.
> In sysprocess it showing the following :-
> spid kpid blocked waittype waittime
> lastwaittype waitresource
> 52 5236 0 0x0044 30
> PAGEIOLATCH_EX 6:13:1754732
> the process seems to stay in this waittype for a few secnds and then
> goes to a 0x0000 and then back into this one again. I can see from the
> IO counter that IO is increasing and also looking at the current IO i
> see the following so presume the query is still working :-
> select
> database_id,
> file_id,
> io_stall,
> io_pending_ms_ticks,
> scheduler_address
> from sys.dm_io_virtual_file_stats(NULL, NULL)t1,
> sys.dm_io_pending_io_requests as t2
> where t1.file_handle = t2.io_handle
> gives results :-
> 6 13 151115052 10 0x0000000008624080
> I just can't explain why it is so slow when nothing else is ruuning.
> Anyone have any ideas on what i can check on?
> Thanks
> Ian.|||Hi Manu,
The recovery model is simple mode and i suppose the developer can do
it in batches but is a one off and i told him to leave it running
because it would take just as long to roll back.
Disk subsystem is usally quite quick, i can create an index on 600m+
row table in about 25 mins so for this to take 23 hours is really
strange|||Thanks Russell,
I'm thinking its probably the SAN, I suspect they probably have other
apps running on the same spindles as everythign seems to be setup
completely wrong at this client site.
I'm wondering if there is something else happening on the san that is
causing things to go slow ... how lovely it would be to have some SAN
diagnostic tool that i could run from my desktop rather than go
through the san people. lol.
Anyway thanks for your help
Ian.