error 9002 occur

I found this error on my sql server:
The log file for database dbname is full. Back up the transaction log for
the database to free up some log space.
Then I run the backup program for transaction log, now my sql can work fine.
But the .LDF file still very big. Can I decrease this file's size?
Such as defrag or compress'Dear all:
I've check the file again and find out that the .LDF file was smaller then
before!
From 3G to 1M !!! I think its because the backup.
But why not change size immedialy?
Thank you very much!
"LetsCount" <come2@.ms1.pchome.com.tw> ¦b¶l¥ó
news:u82uPwQxDHA.2356@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl ¤¤¼¶¼g...
> I found this error on my sql server:
> The log file for database dbname is full. Back up the transaction log for
> the database to free up some log space.
> Then I run the backup program for transaction log, now my sql can work
fine.
> But the .LDF file still very big. Can I decrease this file's size?
> Such as defrag or compress'
>|||Check out below KB articles:
INF: How to Shrink the SQL Server 7.0 Transaction Log
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;256650
INF: Shrinking the Transaction Log in SQL Server 2000 with DBCC SHRINKFILE
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;272318
Log File Grows too big
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=317375
Log file filling up
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=110139
Considerations for Autogrow and AutoShrink
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=315512
http://www.mssqlserver.com/faq/logs-shrinklog.asp
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"LetsCount" <come2@.ms1.pchome.com.tw> wrote in message news:u82uPwQxDHA.2356@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I found this error on my sql server:
> The log file for database dbname is full. Back up the transaction log for
> the database to free up some log space.
> Then I run the backup program for transaction log, now my sql can work fine.
> But the .LDF file still very big. Can I decrease this file's size?
> Such as defrag or compress'
>

Error 823: SQL service won't start!

Hello all,
Our database server went down due to a power outage but everything came back
fine except the MSSQL serverice won't start. I get the following error
listed below when trying to start the service. I tried starting the service
with the -f switch, which didn't work. I also tried the rebuildm.exe which
also failed. Would installing SQL to different drive be worth the effort?
Thank you for any advice!
Troy
spid5 Clearing tempdb database.
spid5 Encountered an unexpected error while checking the sector size for
file 'C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\DATA\TEMPDB.MDF'. Check
the SQL Server error log for more information.
spid5 CREATE DATABASE failed. Some file names listed could not be created.
Check previous errors.
spid5 Error: 823, Severity: 24, State: 6
spid5 I/O error 38(Reached the end of the file.) detected during read at
offset 0000000000000000 in file 'C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL\DATA\TEMPDB.MDF'.
spid5 WARNING: problem activating all tempdb files. See previous errors.
Restart server with -f to correct the situation.Your disk has a fatal error and you will not be able to start the server as
the disk is where it's trying to create the TEMPDB database, which is
required for the server to startup. You should contact PSS who will be able
to help you (http://support.microsoft.com)
Regards.
--
Paul Randal
Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Travis" <Tkasch@.neb.rr.com> wrote in message
news:xzL%b.15820$QP.6929@.twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> Hello all,
> Our database server went down due to a power outage but everything came
back
> fine except the MSSQL serverice won't start. I get the following error
> listed below when trying to start the service. I tried starting the
service
> with the -f switch, which didn't work. I also tried the rebuildm.exe
which
> also failed. Would installing SQL to different drive be worth the effort?
> Thank you for any advice!
> Troy
> spid5 Clearing tempdb database.
> spid5 Encountered an unexpected error while checking the sector size for
> file 'C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\DATA\TEMPDB.MDF'. Check
> the SQL Server error log for more information.
> spid5 CREATE DATABASE failed. Some file names listed could not be created.
> Check previous errors.
> spid5 Error: 823, Severity: 24, State: 6
> spid5 I/O error 38(Reached the end of the file.) detected during read at
> offset 0000000000000000 in file 'C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\MSSQL\DATA\TEMPDB.MDF'.
> spid5 WARNING: problem activating all tempdb files. See previous errors.
> Restart server with -f to correct the situation.
>

Error 50007: xp_execresultset: unable to get a bound connection back to server

Hi,
I have just resinstalled my server and restored the backup of my database. I am now trying to re-setup replication and I get the above error. The server configuiration:
Win2k3
SQL Server 2000 SP4
Replication: Distributor & Publisher (intended Push Publisher)
Snapshot
Subscriber: Remote server
I have looked around the web for similar problems and resolutions but mine still does not want to work. I have completely removed the replication as per the information on this article: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/324401 but still cannot get it working.
I did not backup the distribution db, master or msdb - only the main database I want to replicate.
Any advice?
Thanx
Dave
From http://www.developmentnow.com/g/114_0_0_0_0_0/sql-server-replication.htm
Posted via DevelopmentNow.com Groups
http://www.developmentnow.com
You get this error when you have not set up your administrative link
password correctly. Either uncheck this option or ensure that when you
configure your publisher you enter the correct one.
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
"Dave" <nospam@.developmentnow.com> wrote in message
news:2ae92f81-6f29-41d1-ba10-e7841b355fbb@.developmentnow.com...
> Hi,
> I have just resinstalled my server and restored the backup of my database.
> I am now trying to re-setup replication and I get the above error. The
> server configuiration:
> Win2k3
> SQL Server 2000 SP4
> Replication: Distributor & Publisher (intended Push Publisher)
> Snapshot
> Subscriber: Remote server
> I have looked around the web for similar problems and resolutions but mine
> still does not want to work. I have completely removed the replication as
> per the information on this article:
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/324401 but still cannot get it working.
> I did not backup the distribution db, master or msdb - only the main
> database I want to replicate.
> Any advice?
> Thanx
> Dave
> From
> http://www.developmentnow.com/g/114_0_0_0_0_0/sql-server-replication.htm
> Posted via DevelopmentNow.com Groups
> http://www.developmentnow.com
|||Hi,
Thanx for the information. I have managed to get it to work again by creating a new username and password for the distribution agents to use. Initially it was set to impersonate the service account (which is a domain account that the SQL Services use). I would have thought that this would be sufficient. I even gave this account sysadmin privledges.
Also, when I first setup the replication it worked without having to change any usernames and/or passwords. Was the problem because I recovered from a backup?
Thanx
Dave
From http://www.developmentnow.com/g/114_2007_7_0_0_995269/Error-50007-xp-execresultset-unable-to-get-a-bound-connection-back-to-server.htm
Posted via DevelopmentNow.com Groups
http://www.developmentnow.com
|||Its hard to say what caused the problem, but I am glad you have solved it.
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
"Dave" <nospam@.developmentnow.com> wrote in message
news:2258406d-86c6-4c5e-87e2-1283b7f9b4e6@.developmentnow.com...
> Hi,
> Thanx for the information. I have managed to get it to work again by
> creating a new username and password for the distribution agents to use.
> Initially it was set to impersonate the service account (which is a domain
> account that the SQL Services use). I would have thought that this would
> be sufficient. I even gave this account sysadmin privledges.
> Also, when I first setup the replication it worked without having to
> change any usernames and/or passwords. Was the problem because I recovered
> from a backup?
> Thanx
> Dave
> From
> http://www.developmentnow.com/g/114_2007_7_0_0_995269/Error-50007-xp-execresultset-unable-to-get-a-bound-connection-back-to-server.htm
> Posted via DevelopmentNow.com Groups
> http://www.developmentnow.com

Error 3627 (Could not create worker thread) - Transaction Log Back

Recieved this error this morning, at the same time are users were kicked out
of SQL Server.
We have anout 1500 connections at a time. There are no SQL Error log entries
other than the Transaction Log failing, no Application Events or System
Events.
The server did not go down, the CPUs (8) went to almost zero.
SQL Server Enterprise Manager was getting a network error message when
trying to connect and within 5 minutes everything was OK.
Any help?
Thanks,
ThomasLL
Could it be that you were over your max worker threads?
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187024.aspx
When all worker threads are active with long running queries, SQL Server may
appear unresponsive until a worker thread completes and becomes available.
Though not a defect, this can sometimes be undesirable. If a process appears
to be unresponsive and no new queries can be processed, then connect to SQL
Server using the dedicated administrator connection (DAC), and kill the
process. To prevent this, increase the number of max worker threads.
/*
Warren Brunk - MCITP - SQL 2005, MCDBA
www.techintsolutions.com
*/
"Thomas.LeBlanc@.NoSpam.Com"
<ThomasLeBlancNoSpamCom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:759C0C8D-1413-45CB-BE38-743CF952CBF5@.microsoft.com...
> Recieved this error this morning, at the same time are users were kicked
> out
> of SQL Server.
> We have anout 1500 connections at a time. There are no SQL Error log
> entries
> other than the Transaction Log failing, no Application Events or System
> Events.
> The server did not go down, the CPUs (8) went to almost zero.
> SQL Server Enterprise Manager was getting a network error message when
> trying to connect and within 5 minutes everything was OK.
> Any help?
> Thanks,
> ThomasLL
|||Are you using any third party backup software?
You can also get this error if you are running low on system
resources - mostly memory.
You may have too much of a server load at the time you tried
to do the backup. You'd want to get some baselines numbers
using Performance Monitor.
-Sue
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 09:54:02 -0700, Thomas.LeBlanc@.NoSpam.Com
<ThomasLeBlancNoSpamCom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>Recieved this error this morning, at the same time are users were kicked out
>of SQL Server.
>We have anout 1500 connections at a time. There are no SQL Error log entries
>other than the Transaction Log failing, no Application Events or System
>Events.
>The server did not go down, the CPUs (8) went to almost zero.
>SQL Server Enterprise Manager was getting a network error message when
>trying to connect and within 5 minutes everything was OK.
>Any help?
>Thanks,
>ThomasLL
|||Thanks everyone!!!
Thanks,
ThomasLL, MCDBA
"Thomas.LeBlanc@.NoSpam.Com" wrote:

> Recieved this error this morning, at the same time are users were kicked out
> of SQL Server.
> We have anout 1500 connections at a time. There are no SQL Error log entries
> other than the Transaction Log failing, no Application Events or System
> Events.
> The server did not go down, the CPUs (8) went to almost zero.
> SQL Server Enterprise Manager was getting a network error message when
> trying to connect and within 5 minutes everything was OK.
> Any help?
> Thanks,
> ThomasLL

Error 3627 (Could not create worker thread) - Transaction Log Back

Recieved this error this morning, at the same time are users were kicked out
of SQL Server.
We have anout 1500 connections at a time. There are no SQL Error log entries
other than the Transaction Log failing, no Application Events or System
Events.
The server did not go down, the CPUs (8) went to almost zero.
SQL Server Enterprise Manager was getting a network error message when
trying to connect and within 5 minutes everything was OK.
Any help?
Thanks,
ThomasLLCould it be that you were over your max worker threads?
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187024.aspx
When all worker threads are active with long running queries, SQL Server may
appear unresponsive until a worker thread completes and becomes available.
Though not a defect, this can sometimes be undesirable. If a process appears
to be unresponsive and no new queries can be processed, then connect to SQL
Server using the dedicated administrator connection (DAC), and kill the
process. To prevent this, increase the number of max worker threads.
--
/*
Warren Brunk - MCITP - SQL 2005, MCDBA
www.techintsolutions.com
*/
"Thomas.LeBlanc@.NoSpam.Com"
<ThomasLeBlancNoSpamCom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:759C0C8D-1413-45CB-BE38-743CF952CBF5@.microsoft.com...
> Recieved this error this morning, at the same time are users were kicked
> out
> of SQL Server.
> We have anout 1500 connections at a time. There are no SQL Error log
> entries
> other than the Transaction Log failing, no Application Events or System
> Events.
> The server did not go down, the CPUs (8) went to almost zero.
> SQL Server Enterprise Manager was getting a network error message when
> trying to connect and within 5 minutes everything was OK.
> Any help?
> Thanks,
> ThomasLL|||Are you using any third party backup software?
You can also get this error if you are running low on system
resources - mostly memory.
You may have too much of a server load at the time you tried
to do the backup. You'd want to get some baselines numbers
using Performance Monitor.
-Sue
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 09:54:02 -0700, Thomas.LeBlanc@.NoSpam.Com
<ThomasLeBlancNoSpamCom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>Recieved this error this morning, at the same time are users were kicked out
>of SQL Server.
>We have anout 1500 connections at a time. There are no SQL Error log entries
>other than the Transaction Log failing, no Application Events or System
>Events.
>The server did not go down, the CPUs (8) went to almost zero.
>SQL Server Enterprise Manager was getting a network error message when
>trying to connect and within 5 minutes everything was OK.
>Any help?
>Thanks,
>ThomasLL|||We are on SQL Server 2000, no error message that we have exceeded Work Threads.
We do have 8 processors and 64 Gigs, neither are maxed out.
Thanks for your responce.
Most sites I have read say you should NOT increase worker threads because of
overhead with more threads.
Cache Hit Ratio 101.05824
Cache Flushes 0.0
Free Page Scan (Avg) 0.0
Free Page Scan (Max) 0.0
Min Free Buffers 331.0
Cache Size 4362.0
Free Buffers 2261.0
--
Thanks,
ThomasLL
"Warren Brunk" wrote:
> Could it be that you were over your max worker threads?
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187024.aspx
> When all worker threads are active with long running queries, SQL Server may
> appear unresponsive until a worker thread completes and becomes available.
> Though not a defect, this can sometimes be undesirable. If a process appears
> to be unresponsive and no new queries can be processed, then connect to SQL
> Server using the dedicated administrator connection (DAC), and kill the
> process. To prevent this, increase the number of max worker threads.
> --
> /*
> Warren Brunk - MCITP - SQL 2005, MCDBA
> www.techintsolutions.com
> */
>
> "Thomas.LeBlanc@.NoSpam.Com"
> <ThomasLeBlancNoSpamCom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:759C0C8D-1413-45CB-BE38-743CF952CBF5@.microsoft.com...
> > Recieved this error this morning, at the same time are users were kicked
> > out
> > of SQL Server.
> >
> > We have anout 1500 connections at a time. There are no SQL Error log
> > entries
> > other than the Transaction Log failing, no Application Events or System
> > Events.
> >
> > The server did not go down, the CPUs (8) went to almost zero.
> >
> > SQL Server Enterprise Manager was getting a network error message when
> > trying to connect and within 5 minutes everything was OK.
> >
> > Any help?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > ThomasLL
>
>|||> Are you using any third party backup software?
No
We are on SQL Server 2000, no error message that we have exceeded Work
Threads.
We do have 8 processors and 64 Gigs, neither are maxed out.
Thanks for your responce.
Most sites I have read say you should NOT increase worker threads because of
overhead with more threads.
Cache Hit Ratio 101.05824
Cache Flushes 0.0
Free Page Scan (Avg) 0.0
Free Page Scan (Max) 0.0
Min Free Buffers 331.0
Cache Size 4362.0
Free Buffers 2261.0
--
Thanks,
ThomasLL
--
Thanks,
ThomasLL,
"Sue Hoegemeier" wrote:
> Are you using any third party backup software?
> You can also get this error if you are running low on system
> resources - mostly memory.
> You may have too much of a server load at the time you tried
> to do the backup. You'd want to get some baselines numbers
> using Performance Monitor.
> -Sue
> On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 09:54:02 -0700, Thomas.LeBlanc@.NoSpam.Com
> <ThomasLeBlancNoSpamCom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >Recieved this error this morning, at the same time are users were kicked out
> >of SQL Server.
> >
> >We have anout 1500 connections at a time. There are no SQL Error log entries
> >other than the Transaction Log failing, no Application Events or System
> >Events.
> >
> >The server did not go down, the CPUs (8) went to almost zero.
> >
> >SQL Server Enterprise Manager was getting a network error message when
> >trying to connect and within 5 minutes everything was OK.
> >
> >Any help?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >ThomasLL
>|||You are correct about the worker threads which is why I
didn't suggest changing that setting. On SQL 2000, you will
almost always have problems if you increase the value from
the default 255. It is not advisable and you would want to
be monitoring UMS stats as well as other indicators before
even considering changing that.
But...most of the time the error you received is really due
to resource constraints. A one time snapshot of a few
performance metrics isn't going to tell you much. The
article on sql-server-performance.com for performance audits
provides some good information on what you want to check:
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/sql_server_performance_audit.asp
-Sue
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 13:32:01 -0700, Thomas.LeBlanc@.NoSpam.Com
<ThomasLeBlancNoSpamCom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>> Are you using any third party backup software?
>No
>We are on SQL Server 2000, no error message that we have exceeded Work
>Threads.
>We do have 8 processors and 64 Gigs, neither are maxed out.
>Thanks for your responce.
>Most sites I have read say you should NOT increase worker threads because of
>overhead with more threads.
>Cache Hit Ratio 101.05824
>Cache Flushes 0.0
>Free Page Scan (Avg) 0.0
>Free Page Scan (Max) 0.0
>Min Free Buffers 331.0
>Cache Size 4362.0
>Free Buffers 2261.0
>--
>Thanks,
>ThomasLL|||Thanks everyone!!!
--
Thanks,
ThomasLL, MCDBA
"Thomas.LeBlanc@.NoSpam.Com" wrote:
> Recieved this error this morning, at the same time are users were kicked out
> of SQL Server.
> We have anout 1500 connections at a time. There are no SQL Error log entries
> other than the Transaction Log failing, no Application Events or System
> Events.
> The server did not go down, the CPUs (8) went to almost zero.
> SQL Server Enterprise Manager was getting a network error message when
> trying to connect and within 5 minutes everything was OK.
> Any help?
> Thanks,
> ThomasLL

Error 3627 (Could not create worker thread) - Transaction Log Back

Recieved this error this morning, at the same time are users were kicked out
of SQL Server.
We have anout 1500 connections at a time. There are no SQL Error log entries
other than the Transaction Log failing, no Application Events or System
Events.
The server did not go down, the CPUs (8) went to almost zero.
SQL Server Enterprise Manager was getting a network error message when
trying to connect and within 5 minutes everything was OK.
Any help?
Thanks,
ThomasLLCould it be that you were over your max worker threads?
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187024.aspx
When all worker threads are active with long running queries, SQL Server may
appear unresponsive until a worker thread completes and becomes available.
Though not a defect, this can sometimes be undesirable. If a process appears
to be unresponsive and no new queries can be processed, then connect to SQL
Server using the dedicated administrator connection (DAC), and kill the
process. To prevent this, increase the number of max worker threads.
/*
Warren Brunk - MCITP - SQL 2005, MCDBA
www.techintsolutions.com
*/
"Thomas.LeBlanc@.NoSpam.Com"
<ThomasLeBlancNoSpamCom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:759C0C8D-1413-45CB-BE38-743CF952CBF5@.microsoft.com...
> Recieved this error this morning, at the same time are users were kicked
> out
> of SQL Server.
> We have anout 1500 connections at a time. There are no SQL Error log
> entries
> other than the Transaction Log failing, no Application Events or System
> Events.
> The server did not go down, the CPUs (8) went to almost zero.
> SQL Server Enterprise Manager was getting a network error message when
> trying to connect and within 5 minutes everything was OK.
> Any help?
> Thanks,
> ThomasLL|||Are you using any third party backup software?
You can also get this error if you are running low on system
resources - mostly memory.
You may have too much of a server load at the time you tried
to do the backup. You'd want to get some baselines numbers
using Performance Monitor.
-Sue
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 09:54:02 -0700, Thomas.LeBlanc@.NoSpam.Com
<ThomasLeBlancNoSpamCom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>Recieved this error this morning, at the same time are users were kicked ou
t
>of SQL Server.
>We have anout 1500 connections at a time. There are no SQL Error log entrie
s
>other than the Transaction Log failing, no Application Events or System
>Events.
>The server did not go down, the CPUs (8) went to almost zero.
>SQL Server Enterprise Manager was getting a network error message when
>trying to connect and within 5 minutes everything was OK.
>Any help?
>Thanks,
>ThomasLL|||Thanks everyone!!!
--
Thanks,
ThomasLL, MCDBA
"Thomas.LeBlanc@.NoSpam.Com" wrote:

> Recieved this error this morning, at the same time are users were kicked o
ut
> of SQL Server.
> We have anout 1500 connections at a time. There are no SQL Error log entri
es
> other than the Transaction Log failing, no Application Events or System
> Events.
> The server did not go down, the CPUs (8) went to almost zero.
> SQL Server Enterprise Manager was getting a network error message when
> trying to connect and within 5 minutes everything was OK.
> Any help?
> Thanks,
> ThomasLL

Error 3624 again!

SQL 2000 SP3a running on W2K Server SP4. Access 97 front end. Back end was
ported from Access. I get the following two errors several times a day.
Searched in the KB and the only article (827714) that comes close doesn't
seem to address my problem. Unless the hotfix it mentions is the answer...
SQL Server Assertion: File: <recbase.cpp>, line=1378
Failed Assertion = 'm_offBeginVar < m_SizeRec'.
SQL Server Assertion: File: <p:\sql\ntdbms\storeng\drs\include\record.inl>,
line=1447
Failed Assertion = 'm_SizeRec > 0 && m_SizeRec <= MAXDATAROW'.
Has anyone else seen these problems? It is always a query - I've never seen
it on a statement.Hi Ron,
I am not sure what Service Pack level you are on or if you are running into
the same situation as mentioned in the symptom section of article 827714.
Normally you would see this type of assertion when you have corruption in a
database. As a starting point I would like you to run DBCC CHECKDB on your
database. Make sure that you have no corruption in the database by making
sure that DBCC CHECKB shows "0" allocation and "0" consistency errors.
If you do find corruption in the database, restore it from a good backup.
Hope that helps !!!
Thanks,
Fargham Butt
Microsoft - SQL Server

Error 3624 again!

SQL 2000 SP3a running on W2K Server SP4. Access 97 front end. Back end was
ported from Access. I get the following two errors several times a day.
Searched in the KB and the only article (827714) that comes close doesn't
seem to address my problem. Unless the hotfix it mentions is the answer...
SQL Server Assertion: File: <recbase.cpp>, line=1378
Failed Assertion = 'm_offBeginVar < m_SizeRec'.
SQL Server Assertion: File: <p:\sql\ntdbms\storeng\drs\include\record.inl>,
line=1447
Failed Assertion = 'm_SizeRec > 0 && m_SizeRec <= MAXDATAROW'.
Has anyone else seen these problems? It is always a query - I've never seen
it on a statement.
Hi Ron,
I am not sure what Service Pack level you are on or if you are running into
the same situation as mentioned in the symptom section of article 827714.
Normally you would see this type of assertion when you have corruption in a
database. As a starting point I would like you to run DBCC CHECKDB on your
database. Make sure that you have no corruption in the database by making
sure that DBCC CHECKB shows "0" allocation and "0" consistency errors.
If you do find corruption in the database, restore it from a good backup.
Hope that helps !!!
Thanks,
Fargham Butt
Microsoft - SQL Server

Error 3624 again!

SQL 2000 SP3a running on W2K Server SP4. Access 97 front end. Back end was
ported from Access. I get the following two errors several times a day.
Searched in the KB and the only article (827714) that comes close doesn't
seem to address my problem. Unless the hotfix it mentions is the answer...
SQL Server Assertion: File: <recbase.cpp>, line=1378
Failed Assertion = 'm_offBeginVar < m_SizeRec'.
SQL Server Assertion: File: < p:\sql\ntdbms\storeng\drs\include\record
.inl>,
line=1447
Failed Assertion = 'm_SizeRec > 0 && m_SizeRec <= MAXDATAROW'.
Has anyone else seen these problems? It is always a query - I've never seen
it on a statement.Hi Ron,
I am not sure what Service Pack level you are on or if you are running into
the same situation as mentioned in the symptom section of article 827714.
Normally you would see this type of assertion when you have corruption in a
database. As a starting point I would like you to run DBCC CHECKDB on your
database. Make sure that you have no corruption in the database by making
sure that DBCC CHECKB shows "0" allocation and "0" consistency errors.
If you do find corruption in the database, restore it from a good backup.
Hope that helps !!!
Thanks,
Fargham Butt
Microsoft - SQL Server

Error 21776 [SQL-DMO] name XXXX not found in Transpublication table.

Hi,
Does anyone know how to get over this problem in SQL 2000 without
removing all replication then adding back in?
Could not create a Pull subscription to publication XXX
Error 21776 [SQL-DMO] name XXXX not found in Transpublication table.
Thanks
Dave
Is the pull subscriber in the dbo role on the publisher and the distributor?
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
"David Gray" <grayd@.turpin-distribution.com> wrote in message
news:28j6s25v4j97onbjvg6j05pdv1uq56pmob@.4ax.com...
> Hi,
> Does anyone know how to get over this problem in SQL 2000 without
> removing all replication then adding back in?
> Could not create a Pull subscription to publication XXX
> Error 21776 [SQL-DMO] name XXXX not found in Transpublication table.
> Thanks
> Dave
|||On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 10:37:32 -0500, "Hilary Cotter"
<hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote:

>Is the pull subscriber in the dbo role on the publisher and the distributor?
Hi,
I'm not sure what you mean. I'm not able to add the subscriber
because of the error mentioned in the subject line.
The other strange thing is that none of the other subscribers on this
SQL 2K box appear in the Replication | Subscriptions tree (EM Console)
even after I refresh.
Dave

Error 208 Failed to open new connection

Your help and a reboot put us back in business. Thanks.
Regards,
Jamie
"John Bell" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi
> It could be that your 32 bit drivers have not been installed correctly, in
> which case you would have other issues with 32 bit application.
> It may be worthwhile running the DTA clean up script
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/899634/
> John
> "thejamie" wrote:
Not sure what I contributed! Did you find out what was missing?
John
"thejamie" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Your help and a reboot put us back in business. Thanks.
> --
> Regards,
> Jamie
>
> "John Bell" wrote:
|||I think you are right about the red herring. There is definitely an issue
here due to the 64 bit Enterprise server running SQL 2000 Std... we can't get
DTS to run the older OLE Excel when it is used in a package. I suspect but
did not isolate the cause but suspect the security is tighter on the 64 bit
servers. The 64 bit server has other surprises - if you set up a new one the
64 bit servers that are already in the network quarantine it until after they
are rebooted. The 64 bit machine requires that security be altered on the
temp directory profile of the service account if you want the SQLAgent to
kick off email for anyone except the admin accounts (this includes sa).
All this - running a Std 2000 SQL package. We must upgrade to SQL 2005 64
bit. As far as the DTS is concerned, I don't think there is a fix.
Regards,
Jamie
"John Bell" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Not sure what I contributed! Did you find out what was missing?
> John
> "thejamie" wrote:
|||Hi
Have you tried creating a new package with an excel data source?
Moving to SQL 2005 you should be using the benefits of SSIS.
John
"thejamie" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> I think you are right about the red herring. There is definitely an issue
> here due to the 64 bit Enterprise server running SQL 2000 Std... we can't get
> DTS to run the older OLE Excel when it is used in a package. I suspect but
> did not isolate the cause but suspect the security is tighter on the 64 bit
> servers. The 64 bit server has other surprises - if you set up a new one the
> 64 bit servers that are already in the network quarantine it until after they
> are rebooted. The 64 bit machine requires that security be altered on the
> temp directory profile of the service account if you want the SQLAgent to
> kick off email for anyone except the admin accounts (this includes sa).
> All this - running a Std 2000 SQL package. We must upgrade to SQL 2005 64
> bit. As far as the DTS is concerned, I don't think there is a fix.
> --
> Regards,
> Jamie
>
> "John Bell" wrote:
|||The 208 message is a red-herring. That was as good an answer as I might
expect. As far as running a 32 bit SQL 2000 Std version on a 64 bit
Enterprise 2003 R2, the jury is still out but we have stablized and the
system appears solid. I hate to say it for sure because that'll jinx it.
Around here it is sometimes hard to distinguish what is a programming error
on our part versus what is bad data causing failures internally. It is
extremely difficult to predict what surprises will come through on our EDI
system. Other than the Excel blip - which might be something as simple as
group policy, the system in general, including linked servers, MCI
connections, routers, nic cards, jobs, dts packages, logins, moving
databases, tcp/ip aliasing... this part has been relatively smooth. There
were some rough spots that were only resolved by server reboots. As my
supervisor stated returning from the warehouse "No bullet holes... that's a
good thing."
I've yet to try to put together an Excel package with SSIS.
Regards,
Jamie
"John Bell" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Not sure what I contributed! Did you find out what was missing?
> John
> "thejamie" wrote:
|||I'm actually still stumbling with one of the issues.
Example:
A query that uses an absolute reference to a server over a linked server...
Select * from servera.database1.dbo.table where mycolumn='xyz'
will pretty much give instant results whereas
Declare @.var varchar(25)
set @.var='xyz'
select * from servera.database1.dbo.table where mycolumn=@.var
takes forever and ever and there is no error message - just a huge delay for
the data to relay. I tried creating a role with permission to
(select,update,delete,insert,execute,references) all tables, all views, all
procs and all functions and adding the domain users to the role. This does
not work to make the query any faster.
The example above takes about 8 minutes to process with the variable less
than one second to process.
What is the difference?
Regards,
Jamie
"John Bell" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Not sure what I contributed! Did you find out what was missing?
> John
> "thejamie" wrote:
|||Here is the answer to the Error 208 failed to open connection
A DTS package can be saved on the 64-bit server, and a DTS package can be
run against a SQL Server 2000 (64-bit) dataset, but the package must run from
a 32-bit machine that is set up with SQL Server 2000 tools.
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Miscellaneous/overviewof64bitsql/1166/
Regards,
Jamie
"John Bell" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi
> Have you tried creating a new package with an excel data source?
> Moving to SQL 2005 you should be using the benefits of SSIS.
> John
> "thejamie" wrote:
|||Hi
This may be something to do with where the filter is applied, check out the
query plans to see the difference. To get around this you could use EXEC or
OPENQUERY and concatenate the value
John
"thejamie" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> I'm actually still stumbling with one of the issues.
> Example:
> A query that uses an absolute reference to a server over a linked server...
> Select * from servera.database1.dbo.table where mycolumn='xyz'
> will pretty much give instant results whereas
> Declare @.var varchar(25)
> set @.var='xyz'
> select * from servera.database1.dbo.table where mycolumn=@.var
> takes forever and ever and there is no error message - just a huge delay for
> the data to relay. I tried creating a role with permission to
> (select,update,delete,insert,execute,references) all tables, all views, all
> procs and all functions and adding the domain users to the role. This does
> not work to make the query any faster.
> The example above takes about 8 minutes to process with the variable less
> than one second to process.
> What is the difference?
> --
> Regards,
> Jamie
>
> "John Bell" wrote: