Search Results

Search found 126241 results on 5050 pages for 'windows server 2000'.

Page 1/5050 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • SQL 2000 Backup/Export Process - Can't find SQL 2000 Enterprise Manager, Can't use Mgmt Studio Expre

    - by 1nsane
    I need to make a backup of a client's SQL 2000 database, however there are a few issues preventing me from doing so using the traditional methods. I've tried using SQL Management Studio Express, but the host doesn't give sufficient privileges to create a backup and I'm getting some strange error messages. I've also tried doing the "Generate Scripts" to recreate the schema, then using the DTS Wizard to migrate the data, but the IDs set up with the identity specification property are not consistent with the live database once copied over. This results in some foreign key breakage... If I remember correctly, I was able to use Microsoft SQL 2000 Enterprise Manager to perform the task before, but I can't find this anywhere... it seems Microsoft has pulled most SQL Server 2000 stuff from their site. Does anyone know where I can find a copy of Enterprise Manager (or a trial of SQL Server 2000, which I believe comes with the component)? Or conversely, does anyone know of any other tools (preferably non-commercial) that are capable of mirroring remote SQL Server 2000 DBs? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Windows 2000 uninstall on a dual-boot 2000/XP system

    - by Viktor
    While several questions have already been answered about removing an OS from a dual-booting machine, most refer to Windows 7 vs. Linux/Vista/XP. I have W2K installed on my older HDD (Drive C). Later on I bought a new HDD and installed XP's under W2K environment. Each time I turned my PC on, I had the choice of W2K or XP OS, which I still have. I eventually stopped using the w2k OS and as the older HDD where this OS is installed is getting old, I plan to remove it completely. The problem is that the active master boot record is on this very HDD. So when I remove the HDD, I get no OS loader, no matter what boot drive I choose in BIOS. Apparently I have to set the boot record on the newer HDD with XP's. Some advise to use the bootable XP CD and try to set the active MBR from there.. I don't have the CD anymore. Regardless, I suspect there is much less to solving this problem than running the recovery console, like a simple boot.ini file edit. But I might be wrong.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2000, yes 2000 password hash

    - by Justin808
    I need to store a password has in a SQL server 2000 database. The information isn't critical but I really don't want to store the password in clear text. How can I get a unique hash (sha, sha1, md5, etc) in SQL server 2000 as HashBytes isn't available. I'm not looking for compiled DLL or the ilk, I dont have access to the server, needs to be pure MS SQL.

    Read the article

  • Simulate ROW_NUMBER in SQL 2000

    - by Derek Dieter
    While the row_number feature in sql 2005+ has proven to be a very powerful feature, there are still ways to implement that same functionality in SQL Server 2000. Let’s first look at the SQL 2005+ implementation of ROW_NUMBER, then compare it to the SQL 2000:-- SQL 2005+ SELECT RowNumber = ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY c.LastName ASC) ,c.LastName ,c.FirstName FROM [...]

    Read the article

  • Connectivity with SQL Server Express 2008 r2 and SQL Server 2000 on same machine

    - by Jim R
    At first glance this may same a duplicate of Installing both SQL Server 2000 and SQL Server 2008 on the same machine, but it is not. I have SQL Server 2000 and SQL Server 2008 R2 installed on the same machine and working fine. My problem lies with connecting to the 2008 R2 server from a remote machine. My connectivity needs to be TCP. The legacy installation or SQL 2000 uses the default port of 1433. The named instance is by default configured to use 'Shared Memory' and is working fine. When I configured the 2008 R2 server to use 1433 (I did not think that thru) the service refused to start becasue 1433 was already in use by the legacy SQL 2000 default instance. Doh! What I want to do is have both servers available simultaneously via TCP. both servers need not be on the same port, put if I cannot run them on the same port, then how do I configure the clients? Is there not some kind of proxy available that can monitor the 1433 port and pass the request thru to the correct SQL instance by name? Is this capability built into SQL server already? Thanks, Jim

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2000 tables

    - by user40766
    We currently have an SQL Server 2000 database with one table containing data for multiple users. The data is keyed by memberid which is an integer field. The table has a clustered index on memberid. The table is now about 200 million rows. Indexing and maintenance are becoming issues. We are debating splitting the table into one table per user model. This would imply that we would end up with a very large number of tables potentially upto the 2,147,483,647, considering just positive values. My questions: Does anyone have any experience with a SQL Server (2000/2005) installation with millions of tables? What are the implications of this architecture with regards to maintenance and access using Query Analyzer, Enterprise Manager etc. What are the implications to having such a large number of indexes in a database instance. All comments are appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Intgrating windows 2000 server in a windows 2008 domain [on hold]

    - by user199121
    I have a network enviroment where my windows 2000 server is just acting as fileserver for sharing, so all the users has an account there with username, password and a list of access rights. Now i want to keep this server cause i am running from there an application that 20 users access but also i want to add a new Windows 2008 R2 64 bit server as a domain controller. Is this possible ? 1-It is ok to make the new windows 2008 server a domain controller ? 2- I want all the users accounts to be the same in the domain controller so they can still use the same username and password to login into the domain as well into the windows 2000 server that is setup as a Workgroup. 3- Do i need to do something to the windows 2000 sever to still be functional in the environment so it can be accessed by the clients computers? note:My clients computers are windows 2000 pro, xp pro and windows 7 32/64 bit. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Can I upgrade a Windows 2000 domain to 2008 and demote the 2000 server without clients attached?

    - by techie007
    Hi all, We're planning to replace a Windows 2000 domain controller with a new 2008 DC (new hardware). We've elected to take the route of getting the 2000 domain schema up-to-snuff, join the 2008 server, upgrade it to a DC, and after replication demote the 2000 server (eventually to be taken off-line). The goal being to not have to visit all the workstations, and limited domain down-time. :) We want bring the old server here and do all the backups, Domain prep, migration and role transfers here, and then (hopefully) just plop the new 2008 back in place after it's done, and join the 2000 server back as a member server (so we can then do folder migrations, etc.). Can this server work be done off-site, without the workstations attached? If we do this will anything need to be done to the clients, once the new DC is physically in place, so they contact the new 2008 DC; or will they just 'know' and continue on using the existing domain settings/user profiles, etc.? Thanks in advance! :)

    Read the article

  • SQLAuthority News – 2 Security Updates for SQL Server 2000 SP 4 Users

    - by pinaldave
    If you are using SQL Server 2000 still today my very first recommendation to you is to upgrade to SQL Server 2012. SQL Server 2000 is now 12 years old product and since then many new enhancements as well features which are relevant to current growth and progress in Informational Industry. Now is the time to catch up with the latest trends. Here is one more point for you to notice if this helps you consider to upgrade to the latest version. One can’t upgrade directly from SQL Server 2000 to SQL Server 2012. You need to first upgrade to either SQL Server 2005/2008/R2 and then further plan to upgrade to SQL Server 2012. There is no direct upgrade path for SQL Server 2000 to SQL Server 2012. I strongly believe this is the time to upgrade to the latest version. Well, also there is a rule that to let something continue if it is not broken and working fine. If you are following that rule and still using SQL Server 2000 I strongly suggest that you upgrade your SQL Server 2000 SP4 and update it with latest Security updates. Here are two important SQL Server Security Updates. Security Update for SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 4 (KB983811) Security Update for SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 4 (KB983812) As we are talking about SQL Server 2000 let me ask you a quick question – how many of you are still using SQL Server 2000 or earlier version in a production system on at least one server? Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com) Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Download, SQL Query, SQL Security, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • Attaching databases of sql 2000

    - by jbp117
    I have few databses of sql 2000 on windows 2000. Can I attach these databases to another instance of SQL Server 2000 on anothermachine having windows 2003 installed?? Does attach and detach of databases are platform independent??

    Read the article

  • SQL 2000: Intermittent Error 7399 with OLE DB Provider for Microsoft Jet

    - by Tim Lara
    I am using SQL Server 2000 on Windows Server 2003 SP2 and have set up a linked server to point at an Access 97 database using the OLE DB Provider 4.0 for Microsoft Jet. The problem I am having sounds almost exactly like the one described in this Microsoft KB article, except that the error I am getting is intermittent: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/814398 The SQL Server is running under the Local System account (which I don't have authority to change), and the Access 97 .mdb file that the linked server points to is on a Win XP Pro machine on the same LAN as the SQL Server machine, inside of a shared folder with permissions set to "Everyone" and "Full Control". Now, if the linked server connection never worked, it would make more sense that the problem is merely a permissions issue with the Local System account as the KB article above suggests, but the maddening thing is that sometimes the connection works just fine. When it fails, the error message is always the same: Error 7399: OLE DB provider 'Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0' reported an error. [OLE/DB provider returned message: Unspecified error] OLE DB error trace [OLE/DB Provider 'Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0' IDBInitialize::Initialize returned 0x80004005: ]. Also, not only does the linked server setup occasionally work just fine on this one particular SQL Server, what is supposed to be exactly the same setup on 25 other servers works just fine EVERY TIME! Obviously, something in the non-working setup must not be exactly the same, but I'm having trouble figuring out where to look for the differences since the error message SQL Server returns is so vague. I know our sysadmins have had numerous issues with Active Directory replication across our domain, so my best guess is that there is some sort of odd group policy corruption going on, but I thought I'd ask here to see if I might be overlooking something more straightforward. Any ideas on how to further isolate the error would be greatly appreciated! For the record, here is a list of things I've already tried: Rebooting the SQL Server machine. Fixes the issue temporarily, then the error returns within a minute or two of startup. (This is why I suspect a rogue group policy that is slow to apply fouling things up.) Importing all database objects from the Access 97 mdb into a new, clean mdb file. Makes no difference. Moving the Access 97 mdb file to a local directory on the SQL Server machine instead of accessing it via a share on the Win XP Pro LAN machine. This works, but does not solve the problem because the mdb needs to be on the client machine for performance reasons and the ability to work "stand alone". Plus, the same shared folder access works fine on all other servers / clients on my network. Compared all the SQL Server, Windows Server, etc versions to a known working setup and everything appears to be the same.

    Read the article

  • SQL 2000: Intermittent Error 7399 with OLE DB Provider for Microsoft Jet

    - by Tim Lara
    I am using SQL Server 2000 on Windows Server 2003 SP2 and have set up a linked server to point at an Access 97 database using the OLE DB Provider 4.0 for Microsoft Jet. The problem I am having sounds almost exactly like the one described in this Microsoft KB article, except that the error I am getting is intermittent: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/814398 The SQL Server is running under the Local System account (which I don't have authority to change), and the Access 97 .mdb file that the linked server points to is on a Win XP Pro machine on the same LAN as the SQL Server machine, inside of a shared folder with permissions set to "Everyone" and "Full Control". Now, if the linked server connection never worked, it would make more sense that the problem is merely a permissions issue with the Local System account as the KB article above suggests, but the maddening thing is that sometimes the connection works just fine. When it fails, the error message is always the same: Error 7399: OLE DB provider 'Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0' reported an error. [OLE/DB provider returned message: Unspecified error] OLE DB error trace [OLE/DB Provider 'Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0' IDBInitialize::Initialize returned 0x80004005: ]. Also, not only does the linked server setup occasionally work just fine on this one particular SQL Server, what is supposed to be exactly the same setup on 25 other servers works just fine EVERY TIME! Obviously, something in the non-working setup must not be exactly the same, but I'm having trouble figuring out where to look for the differences since the error message SQL Server returns is so vague. I know our sysadmins have had numerous issues with Active Directory replication across our domain, so my best guess is that there is some sort of odd group policy corruption going on, but I thought I'd ask here to see if I might be overlooking something more straightforward. Any ideas on how to further isolate the error would be greatly appreciated! For the record, here is a list of things I've already tried: Rebooting the SQL Server machine. Fixes the issue temporarily, then the error returns within a minute or two of startup. (This is why I suspect a rogue group policy that is slow to apply fouling things up.) Importing all database objects from the Access 97 mdb into a new, clean mdb file. Makes no difference. Moving the Access 97 mdb file to a local directory on the SQL Server machine instead of accessing it via a share on the Win XP Pro LAN machine. This works, but does not solve the problem because the mdb needs to be on the client machine for performance reasons and the ability to work "stand alone". Plus, the same shared folder access works fine on all other servers / clients on my network. Compared all the SQL Server, Windows Server, etc versions to a known working setup and everything appears to be the same.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2000 -- Log Shipping reliability?

    - by Chris J
    I've been asked to look into log shipping for SQL Server 2000 (yes, 2000): something in my memory tells me that I looked at this years ago and there were question marks over it's reliability. I'm trying to google stuff, but given the age of 2000 now I've put pulled up anything to confirm this -- most seem to say they're using it without problem, so just want confirm whether I'm just being delusional, or whether there were problems, but with a fully patched SP4 box these don't exist any more. Cheers!

    Read the article

  • Slow (to none) performance on SQL 2005 after attaching SQL 2000 database

    - by ploft
    Issue: Using the detach/attach SQL database from a SQL 2000 SP4 instance to a much beefier SQL 2005 SP2 server. Run reindex, reorganize and update statistics a couple of times, but without any success. Queries on SQL 2000 took about 1-2 sec. to complete, now the same queries take 2-3 min on the SQL 2005 (and even 2008 - tested it there also). Have looked at the execution plans and the overall percent matches or are alike on each server.

    Read the article

  • SQL 2000 and group names

    - by Nasa
    I have a SQL 2000 server which has databases, under user section of the database object, I have some NT 4.0 groups. These groups were migrated over to Active Directory some time ago using ADMT with SID history. The original source domain groups have since been deleted. The access shown is olddomain\groupname. I don't know why, if they were ntfs permissions they would update automatically to target\groupname. The users in the AD domain still have access to the database as they are a member of the migrated group (Target\groupname). I was wondering 1) Why does the old group (source\groupname) show up as it doesn't exist anymore. But access is still granted to the target group? 2) Is there any easy way to update the group name from source\groupname to target\groupname? Thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • Sql server 2000 replication error

    - by Renato
    Good morning, I have a sql server 2000 machine, with SP4. I have a transactional replication. A keep receving this error message: The process could not execute 'sp_replcmds' on 'servername' the logreader stops responding.When i click start it starts fine, and the replication starts fine.And then, works for hours, and the problem comes back. In the begining i though it could be timeouts, but i already set a couple of parameters in the logreader profile,like querytimeout/readbatchsize. Sometimes when the logreader stops,it generates a dump, but not always. In event viewer, it appears this message: 17066 : SQL Server Assertion: File: , line=1985 Failed Assertion = 'startLSN = m_curLSN'. 18052 : Error: 3624, Severity: 20, State: 1. 17066 : SQL Server Assertion: File: , line=2223 Failed Assertion = 'm_noOfScAlloc == 0'. I also executed checkdb in the databases, and they are fine. have you every experienced something similar? thanks in advance, Renato Alves.

    Read the article

  • Search Files (Preferably with index) on Windows 2000 Server

    - by ThinkBohemian
    I have many files on a windows server 2000 machine that is setup to act as a networked disk drive, is there anyway I can index the files and make that index available as a search to more people than just me? Bonus if the index can look inside of documents such as readme.txt? If there is no easy way to do this globaly (for all users) Is there a way I could generate and store an index locally on my computer? If this is the wrong place to ask this question, any advice on community more suited?

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >