Drawbacks of putting transaction log on system drive

Hi,
I use MS SQL Server 2000 SP3a on MS Windows 2000 Advanced Server (latest).
Would I come across any drawbacks if I put all transaction log files of a
database onto the system (OS installation) drive along with a page file and
maybe the tempdb? Most of the load in my database is due to read operations.
-- Many thanks, Oskar.Oskar wrote:
> Hi,
> I use MS SQL Server 2000 SP3a on MS Windows 2000 Advanced Server (latest).
> Would I come across any drawbacks if I put all transaction log files of a
> database onto the system (OS installation) drive along with a page file an
d
> maybe the tempdb? Most of the load in my database is due to read operation
s.
> -- Many thanks, Oskar.
>
Hi Oskar
There will most likely be a performance hit the more files you put on
the same drive, but if it will be noticable or a problem is hard to say
without knowing your load and application. The best advice it to test it
as good as you can and then make your decicion based on your tests.
Regards
Steen Schlüter Persson
Database Administrator / System Administrator

Drawbacks of putting transaction log on system drive

Hi,
I use MS SQL Server 2000 SP3a on MS Windows 2000 Advanced Server (latest).
Would I come across any drawbacks if I put all transaction log files of a
database onto the system (OS installation) drive along with a page file and
maybe the tempdb? Most of the load in my database is due to read operations.
-- Many thanks, Oskar.Oskar wrote:
> Hi,
> I use MS SQL Server 2000 SP3a on MS Windows 2000 Advanced Server (latest).
> Would I come across any drawbacks if I put all transaction log files of a
> database onto the system (OS installation) drive along with a page file and
> maybe the tempdb? Most of the load in my database is due to read operations.
> -- Many thanks, Oskar.
>
Hi Oskar
There will most likely be a performance hit the more files you put on
the same drive, but if it will be noticable or a problem is hard to say
without knowing your load and application. The best advice it to test it
as good as you can and then make your decicion based on your tests.
Regards
Steen Schlüter Persson
Database Administrator / System Administrator

Doubling up security on SQL Server system administrator

Hi All
Always baffled me this, but although I can set up complex SQL usernames and
passwords for my SQL database the main system administrator login details
only give me half the security because the username is always 'sa'. I can
only set a complex password for the most powerful user of them all.
This might be a very newbie question, but is it possible (and advisable -
knowing Microsoft's progs don't like changing core settings after the event)
to change the system admin's username to something else?
Please note that I already have a number of databases running on this SQL
server installation so would this implicate their use if I changed it?
Rgds
RobbieSee reply in .setup
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
http://www.sqldbatips.com
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"Astra" <info@.NoEmail.com> wrote in message
news:eqYQsd%239EHA.2680@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi All
> Always baffled me this, but although I can set up complex SQL usernames
> and
> passwords for my SQL database the main system administrator login details
> only give me half the security because the username is always 'sa'. I can
> only set a complex password for the most powerful user of them all.
> This might be a very newbie question, but is it possible (and advisable -
> knowing Microsoft's progs don't like changing core settings after the
> event)
> to change the system admin's username to something else?
> Please note that I already have a number of databases running on this SQL
> server installation so would this implicate their use if I changed it?
> Rgds
> Robbie
>|||Robbie,
Did you ever get the answer to this? I want to do the same as you -
how do I do it?
Darren.
Astra wrote:
> *Hi All
> Always baffled me this, but although I can set up complex SQL
> usernames and
> passwords for my SQL database the main system administrator login
> details
> only give me half the security because the username is always 'sa'.
> I can
> only set a complex password for the most powerful user of them all.
> This might be a very newbie question, but is it possible (and
> advisable -
> knowing Microsoft's progs don't like changing core settings after the
> event)
> to change the system admin's username to something else?
> Please note that I already have a number of databases running on this
> SQL
> server installation so would this implicate their use if I changed
> it?
> Rgds
> Robbie *
railex
---
Posted via http://www.mcse.ms
---
View this thread: http://www.mcse.ms/message1342852.html

Double Byte Character Support?

I have a Point of Sale System which uses SQL (MSDE or SQL
2000) as the back end database. We have a client that
wants to buy a Chinese version of the Point of Sale
System...so my question is, does SQL 2000 or MSDE support
the double byte character set? Is there anything special I
need to do to accomplish this, or is there a special
version of SQL to buy?Hi Ray
SQL Server supports double byte character sets ("unicode")
Types NCHAR, NVARCHAR NTEXT are unicode (double byte)
Types CHAR, VARCHAR, TEXT are single byte.
There are also collations which cover language character sets & sort orders
as well.
This applies to all editions of SQL Server.
HTH
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
"Ray" <rkano@.adctech.com> wrote in message
news:0f9601c38dfc$b9366290$a001280a@.phx.gbl...
> I have a Point of Sale System which uses SQL (MSDE or SQL
> 2000) as the back end database. We have a client that
> wants to buy a Chinese version of the Point of Sale
> System...so my question is, does SQL 2000 or MSDE support
> the double byte character set? Is there anything special I
> need to do to accomplish this, or is there a special
> version of SQL to buy?

DOS ODBC Driver

Does anyone know of an ODBC driver that can be used from
DOS? ie not from a DOS window, but from a system booted
into DOS 6.22?
Wanting to read a SQL or Access Database after making a
network connection from DOS.
Thanks,
Rob
There is not an ODBC driver for DOS.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.

DOS ODBC Driver

Does anyone know of an ODBC driver that can be used from
DOS? ie not from a DOS window, but from a system booted
into DOS 6.22?
Wanting to read a SQL or Access Database after making a
network connection from DOS.
Thanks,
RobThere is not an ODBC driver for DOS.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.

Don't delete data from linkedserver table .

when our system upgrade to sql server 2005 ,and create a linked server to localhost database , the script of create linkedserver is :

/****** Object: LinkedServer [localhost_boston] Script Date: 05/07/2006 18:37:15 ******/
EXEC master.dbo.sp_addlinkedserver @.server = N'localhost_boston',@.srvproduct='', @.provider=N'SQLNCLI', @.datasrc=N'localhost', @.provstr=N'UID=sa;PWD=007;', @.catalog=N'boston'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'collation compatible', @.optvalue=N'false'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'data access', @.optvalue=N'true'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'dist', @.optvalue=N'false'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'pub', @.optvalue=N'false'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'rpc', @.optvalue=N'true'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'rpc out', @.optvalue=N'true'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'sub', @.optvalue=N'false'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'connect timeout', @.optvalue=N'0'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'collation name', @.optvalue=null
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'lazy schema validation', @.optvalue=N'false'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'query timeout', @.optvalue=N'0'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'use remote collation', @.optvalue=N'true'

when I run the sql on local server :

delete a from localhost_boston.boston.dbo.Spot as a,
bica.tmpspot as b where a.spotid=b.spotid

it display 7 rows have deleted ,but when I run:

select * from localhost_boston.boston.dbo.Spot as a
join bica. tmpspot as b on a.spotid=b.spotid

find the 7 rows have not delete,I check the localhost_boston.boston.dbo.Spot

table ,and find 7 rows have deleted that it is not a.spotid=b.spotid ,why ?

If I run :

delete from localhost_boston.boston.dbo.Spot where spotid=28147

and the row can deleted .why ?

anyone can talk me how to do I can !

Thanks.

Your delete syntax is improper. You should use a subquery to constrain your deleted rows, not a join.

Code Snippet

delete localhost_boston.boston.dbo.Spot where spotid in (select spotid from bica.tmpspot)

Joins create a result set and using a generic join syntax you can get unexpected result sets. Always test your joins in a select statement 1st to make sure you are getting the results you expect.

Don't delete data from linkedserver table .

when our system upgrade to sql server 2005 ,and create a linked server to localhost database , the script of create linkedserver is :

/****** Object: LinkedServer [localhost_boston] Script Date: 05/07/2006 18:37:15 ******/
EXEC master.dbo.sp_addlinkedserver @.server = N'localhost_boston',@.srvproduct='', @.provider=N'SQLNCLI', @.datasrc=N'localhost', @.provstr=N'UID=sa;PWD=007;', @.catalog=N'boston'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'collation compatible', @.optvalue=N'false'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'data access', @.optvalue=N'true'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'dist', @.optvalue=N'false'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'pub', @.optvalue=N'false'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'rpc', @.optvalue=N'true'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'rpc out', @.optvalue=N'true'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'sub', @.optvalue=N'false'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'connect timeout', @.optvalue=N'0'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'collation name', @.optvalue=null
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'lazy schema validation', @.optvalue=N'false'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'query timeout', @.optvalue=N'0'
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption @.server=N'localhost_boston', @.optname=N'use remote collation', @.optvalue=N'true'

when I run the sql on local server :

delete a from localhost_boston.boston.dbo.Spot as a,
bica.tmpspot as b where a.spotid=b.spotid

it display 7 rows have deleted ,but when I run:

select * from localhost_boston.boston.dbo.Spot as a
join bica. tmpspot as b on a.spotid=b.spotid

find the 7 rows have not delete,I check the localhost_boston.boston.dbo.Spot

table ,and find 7 rows have deleted that it is not a.spotid=b.spotid ,why ?

If I run :

delete from localhost_boston.boston.dbo.Spot where spotid=28147

and the row can deleted .why ?

anyone can talk me how to do I can !

Thanks.

Your delete syntax is improper. You should use a subquery to constrain your deleted rows, not a join.

Code Snippet

delete localhost_boston.boston.dbo.Spot where spotid in (select spotid from bica.tmpspot)

Joins create a result set and using a generic join syntax you can get unexpected result sets. Always test your joins in a select statement 1st to make sure you are getting the results you expect.

Domain vs Local

What are gotchas for starting Sql & the agent with a Local system account
versus a system Domain account.Hi

IMO the main reason to use a domain account is permissions (lack of, or too
high) and the ability to assign them to the account.

John
"AHartman" <Hoosbruin@.Kconline.com> wrote in message
news:d6adndqf25WCUj3cRVn-oQ@.kconline.com...
>
> What are gotchas for starting Sql & the agent with a Local system account
> versus a system Domain account.|||AHartman (Hoosbruin@.Kconline.com) writes:
> What are gotchas for starting Sql & the agent with a Local system account
> versus a system Domain account.

One gotcha that people run from time to time, is that they want to access
network shares from SQL Server, for instance for BULK INSERT. This does not
work with Local System. Another gotcha is that SQL debugging from another
machine usually does not work if you are running under local system.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp|||In article <Xns95A8D9056DF1CYazorman@.127.0.0.1>, esquel@.sommarskog.se
says...
> AHartman (Hoosbruin@.Kconline.com) writes:
> > What are gotchas for starting Sql & the agent with a Local system account
> > versus a system Domain account.
> One gotcha that people run from time to time, is that they want to access
> network shares from SQL Server, for instance for BULK INSERT. This does not
> work with Local System. Another gotcha is that SQL debugging from another
> machine usually does not work if you are running under local system.

Actually, of you understand NET USE, then you don't have to have the SQL
Server in the domain. If you provide the credentials it works just fine.

In most cases, where there is some form of web interface, even for a
intranet, I always setup the servers without providing Domain User
account access to it. The one exception being an application that uses
Windows Authentication Accounts, instead of a programatic method, to
access data.

--
--
spamfree999@.rrohio.com
(Remove 999 to reply to me)

domain user or local system account ?

Hello,
My server is part of a W2K domain. What do you advice me as account to
run my SQL*Server, service started with a domain user account or as
local system ?

I need advices from a security point of view.

Thank's in advanceDepends on your requirements...

First, I would personally never recommend running SQL in a production
environment as Local System.

If the SQL proccess will ever need to connect to file shares on other
machines (like to backup data to remote location etc...) then you can either
use a domain account, or use local accounts with matching usernames and
passwords on the SQL server and any machine it may connect to.

If your SQL proccess will never connect to File shares, or similar resources
on the network, then you should run it with a Local User account on the box.

But of course, this is just my opinion.

GL

"Kona" <kona_iron@.yahoo.fr> wrote in message
news:a1de658a.0404191607.75ec6a49@.posting.google.c om...
> Hello,
> My server is part of a W2K domain. What do you advice me as account to
> run my SQL*Server, service started with a domain user account or as
> local system ?
> I need advices from a security point of view.
> Thank's in advance|||Thank you for your opinion.

And I also agree to not use Local System, all the more since this
account as network access into the same W2K domain (that was not the
case under NT).

"GL" <GL@.noSpam.ReplyToNewsgroup.com> wrote in message news:<108ddd45gbs8k69@.news.supernews.com>...
> Depends on your requirements...
> First, I would personally never recommend running SQL in a production
> environment as Local System.
> If the SQL proccess will ever need to connect to file shares on other
> machines (like to backup data to remote location etc...) then you can either
> use a domain account, or use local accounts with matching usernames and
> passwords on the SQL server and any machine it may connect to.
> If your SQL proccess will never connect to File shares, or similar resources
> on the network, then you should run it with a Local User account on the box.
> But of course, this is just my opinion.
> GL
> "Kona" <kona_iron@.yahoo.fr> wrote in message
> news:a1de658a.0404191607.75ec6a49@.posting.google.c om...
> > Hello,
> > My server is part of a W2K domain. What do you advice me as account to
> > run my SQL*Server, service started with a domain user account or as
> > local system ?
> > I need advices from a security point of view.
> > Thank's in advance|||Depends on your requirements...

First, I would personally never recommend running SQL in a production
environment as Local System.

If the SQL proccess will ever need to connect to file shares on other
machines (like to backup data to remote location etc...) then you can either
use a domain account, or use local accounts with matching usernames and
passwords on the SQL server and any machine it may connect to.

If your SQL proccess will never connect to File shares, or similar resources
on the network, then you should run it with a Local User account on the box.

But of course, this is just my opinion.

GL

"Kona" <kona_iron@.yahoo.fr> wrote in message
news:a1de658a.0404191607.75ec6a49@.posting.google.c om...
> Hello,
> My server is part of a W2K domain. What do you advice me as account to
> run my SQL*Server, service started with a domain user account or as
> local system ?
> I need advices from a security point of view.
> Thank's in advance|||Thank you for your opinion.

And I also agree to not use Local System, all the more since this
account as network access into the same W2K domain (that was not the
case under NT).

"GL" <GL@.noSpam.ReplyToNewsgroup.com> wrote in message news:<108ddd45gbs8k69@.news.supernews.com>...
> Depends on your requirements...
> First, I would personally never recommend running SQL in a production
> environment as Local System.
> If the SQL proccess will ever need to connect to file shares on other
> machines (like to backup data to remote location etc...) then you can either
> use a domain account, or use local accounts with matching usernames and
> passwords on the SQL server and any machine it may connect to.
> If your SQL proccess will never connect to File shares, or similar resources
> on the network, then you should run it with a Local User account on the box.
> But of course, this is just my opinion.
> GL
> "Kona" <kona_iron@.yahoo.fr> wrote in message
> news:a1de658a.0404191607.75ec6a49@.posting.google.c om...
> > Hello,
> > My server is part of a W2K domain. What do you advice me as account to
> > run my SQL*Server, service started with a domain user account or as
> > local system ?
> > I need advices from a security point of view.
> > Thank's in advance

Does Windows 2000 Professional supporte native HTTP access?

I'm trying to create a new webservice by sql 2005. My operational system is a windows 2000 professional, but when I try to create a endpoint, I've got the follow message error:

Msg 7812, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
The endpoint 'RetornarUsuarios' has been established in metadata, but HTTP listening has not been enabled because HTTP support did not start successfully. Verify that the operating system supports native HTTP access. Check the SQL Server error log for any errors while starting HTTP support.

Msg 7807, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
An error ('0x80004005') occurred while attempting to register the endpoint 'RetornarUsuarios'.

Could someone help me? I think the reason is the version of my operational system.

Att,

Leandro Carvalho

No, SQL Server 2005 does not support Native Web Services on Windows 2000. From SQL Server 2005 Books On-Line, section "Using Native XML Web Services in SQL Server 2005":

"HTTP support requires the HTTP listener: Http.sys. Http.sys is available only on Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP Service Pack 2. For more information, see Configuring the HTTP Kernel-Mode Driver (Http.sys)."

|||I use xp sp2 english version, but I can not create endpoint :-( With the same error Msg 7812.|||CREATE ENDPOINTS are also not allowed on SQL SERVER express.

Does Windows 2000 Professional supporte native HTTP access?

I'm trying to create a new webservice by sql 2005. My operational system is a windows 2000 professional, but when I try to create a endpoint, I've got the follow message error:

Msg 7812, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
The endpoint 'RetornarUsuarios' has been established in metadata, but HTTP listening has not been enabled because HTTP support did not start successfully. Verify that the operating system supports native HTTP access. Check the SQL Server error log for any errors while starting HTTP support.

Msg 7807, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
An error ('0x80004005') occurred while attempting to register the endpoint 'RetornarUsuarios'.

Could someone help me? I think the reason is the version of my operational system.

Att,

Leandro Carvalho

No. The HTTP listener component is only available on Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP SP2.