2005 Shared Nothing

I though 2005 was going to have a feature where you could face multiple
instances of a DB towards your customers with all the lock and transaction
bits accomplished in the background? The most common question I get about
Clustering is whether it is HA or really is a scalibility solution as well.
Avokia makes a piece that effectively accomplishes this.Are you referring to database snapshots?
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.datamanipulation.net
--
"Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:2C6CD6C9-2655-4E5F-8DD7-83B21DE43F12@.microsoft.com...
> I though 2005 was going to have a feature where you could face multiple
> instances of a DB towards your customers with all the lock and transaction
> bits accomplished in the background? The most common question I get about
> Clustering is whether it is HA or really is a scalibility solution as
well.
> Avokia makes a piece that effectively accomplishes this.|||Hi
Clustering is HA and no Windows Clustering implantation is intended for
scale out.
SQL server 2005 has never has a scale out feature in it's feature list.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:2C6CD6C9-2655-4E5F-8DD7-83B21DE43F12@.microsoft.com...
>I though 2005 was going to have a feature where you could face multiple
> instances of a DB towards your customers with all the lock and transaction
> bits accomplished in the background? The most common question I get about
> Clustering is whether it is HA or really is a scalibility solution as
> well.
> Avokia makes a piece that effectively accomplishes this.|||Database mirroring seems to be like what I thought I heard 2005 to have.
This would be more like having a separate server instance to improve
performance.
"Adam Machanic" wrote:
> Are you referring to database snapshots?
>
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> http://www.datamanipulation.net
> --
>
> "Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:2C6CD6C9-2655-4E5F-8DD7-83B21DE43F12@.microsoft.com...
> > I though 2005 was going to have a feature where you could face multiple
> > instances of a DB towards your customers with all the lock and transaction
> > bits accomplished in the background? The most common question I get about
> > Clustering is whether it is HA or really is a scalibility solution as
> well.
> > Avokia makes a piece that effectively accomplishes this.
>
>|||Database mirroring, with a snapshot running against the mirror gives you a
real-time read only copy of the data.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:D22D9678-ACC0-4A67-B9B0-ECB89990694E@.microsoft.com...
> Database mirroring seems to be like what I thought I heard 2005 to have.
> This would be more like having a separate server instance to improve
> performance.
> "Adam Machanic" wrote:
>> Are you referring to database snapshots?
>>
>> --
>> Adam Machanic
>> SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.datamanipulation.net
>> --
>>
>> "Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> message news:2C6CD6C9-2655-4E5F-8DD7-83B21DE43F12@.microsoft.com...
>> > I though 2005 was going to have a feature where you could face multiple
>> > instances of a DB towards your customers with all the lock and
>> > transaction
>> > bits accomplished in the background? The most common question I get
>> > about
>> > Clustering is whether it is HA or really is a scalibility solution as
>> well.
>> > Avokia makes a piece that effectively accomplishes this.
>>|||As Mike mentioned, database mirroring really doesn't accomplish that.
Sounds like a merge replication scenario to me...
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.datamanipulation.net
--
"Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:D22D9678-ACC0-4A67-B9B0-ECB89990694E@.microsoft.com...
> Database mirroring seems to be like what I thought I heard 2005 to have.
> This would be more like having a separate server instance to improve
> performance.
> "Adam Machanic" wrote:
> > Are you referring to database snapshots?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Adam Machanic
> > SQL Server MVP
> > http://www.datamanipulation.net
> > --
> >
> >
> > "Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
in
> > message news:2C6CD6C9-2655-4E5F-8DD7-83B21DE43F12@.microsoft.com...
> > > I though 2005 was going to have a feature where you could face
multiple
> > > instances of a DB towards your customers with all the lock and
transaction
> > > bits accomplished in the background? The most common question I get
about
> > > Clustering is whether it is HA or really is a scalibility solution as
> > well.
> > > Avokia makes a piece that effectively accomplishes this.
> >
> >
> >

2005 Shared Nothing

I though 2005 was going to have a feature where you could face multiple
instances of a DB towards your customers with all the lock and transaction
bits accomplished in the background? The most common question I get about
Clustering is whether it is HA or really is a scalibility solution as well.
Avokia makes a piece that effectively accomplishes this.
Are you referring to database snapshots?
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.datamanipulation.net
"Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:2C6CD6C9-2655-4E5F-8DD7-83B21DE43F12@.microsoft.com...
> I though 2005 was going to have a feature where you could face multiple
> instances of a DB towards your customers with all the lock and transaction
> bits accomplished in the background? The most common question I get about
> Clustering is whether it is HA or really is a scalibility solution as
well.
> Avokia makes a piece that effectively accomplishes this.
|||Hi
Clustering is HA and no Windows Clustering implantation is intended for
scale out.
SQL server 2005 has never has a scale out feature in it's feature list.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:2C6CD6C9-2655-4E5F-8DD7-83B21DE43F12@.microsoft.com...
>I though 2005 was going to have a feature where you could face multiple
> instances of a DB towards your customers with all the lock and transaction
> bits accomplished in the background? The most common question I get about
> Clustering is whether it is HA or really is a scalibility solution as
> well.
> Avokia makes a piece that effectively accomplishes this.
|||Database mirroring seems to be like what I thought I heard 2005 to have.
This would be more like having a separate server instance to improve
performance.
"Adam Machanic" wrote:

> Are you referring to database snapshots?
>
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> http://www.datamanipulation.net
> --
>
> "Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:2C6CD6C9-2655-4E5F-8DD7-83B21DE43F12@.microsoft.com...
> well.
>
>
|||Database mirroring, with a snapshot running against the mirror gives you a
real-time read only copy of the data.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:D22D9678-ACC0-4A67-B9B0-ECB89990694E@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Database mirroring seems to be like what I thought I heard 2005 to have.
> This would be more like having a separate server instance to improve
> performance.
> "Adam Machanic" wrote:
|||As Mike mentioned, database mirroring really doesn't accomplish that.
Sounds like a merge replication scenario to me...
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.datamanipulation.net
"Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:D22D9678-ACC0-4A67-B9B0-ECB89990694E@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Database mirroring seems to be like what I thought I heard 2005 to have.
> This would be more like having a separate server instance to improve
> performance.
> "Adam Machanic" wrote:
in[vbcol=seagreen]
multiple[vbcol=seagreen]
transaction[vbcol=seagreen]
about[vbcol=seagreen]

2005 Shared Nothing

I though 2005 was going to have a feature where you could face multiple
instances of a DB towards your customers with all the lock and transaction
bits accomplished in the background? The most common question I get about
Clustering is whether it is HA or really is a scalibility solution as well.
Avokia makes a piece that effectively accomplishes this.Are you referring to database snapshots?
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.datamanipulation.net
--
"Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:2C6CD6C9-2655-4E5F-8DD7-83B21DE43F12@.microsoft.com...
> I though 2005 was going to have a feature where you could face multiple
> instances of a DB towards your customers with all the lock and transaction
> bits accomplished in the background? The most common question I get about
> Clustering is whether it is HA or really is a scalibility solution as
well.
> Avokia makes a piece that effectively accomplishes this.|||Hi
Clustering is HA and no Windows Clustering implantation is intended for
scale out.
SQL server 2005 has never has a scale out feature in it's feature list.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:2C6CD6C9-2655-4E5F-8DD7-83B21DE43F12@.microsoft.com...
>I though 2005 was going to have a feature where you could face multiple
> instances of a DB towards your customers with all the lock and transaction
> bits accomplished in the background? The most common question I get about
> Clustering is whether it is HA or really is a scalibility solution as
> well.
> Avokia makes a piece that effectively accomplishes this.|||Database mirroring seems to be like what I thought I heard 2005 to have.
This would be more like having a separate server instance to improve
performance.
"Adam Machanic" wrote:

> Are you referring to database snapshots?
>
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> http://www.datamanipulation.net
> --
>
> "Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:2C6CD6C9-2655-4E5F-8DD7-83B21DE43F12@.microsoft.com...
> well.
>
>|||Database mirroring, with a snapshot running against the mirror gives you a
real-time read only copy of the data.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:D22D9678-ACC0-4A67-B9B0-ECB89990694E@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Database mirroring seems to be like what I thought I heard 2005 to have.
> This would be more like having a separate server instance to improve
> performance.
> "Adam Machanic" wrote:
>|||As Mike mentioned, database mirroring really doesn't accomplish that.
Sounds like a merge replication scenario to me...
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.datamanipulation.net
--
"Jeffrey K. Ericson" <JeffreyKEricson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:D22D9678-ACC0-4A67-B9B0-ECB89990694E@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Database mirroring seems to be like what I thought I heard 2005 to have.
> This would be more like having a separate server instance to improve
> performance.
> "Adam Machanic" wrote:
>
in[vbcol=seagreen]
multiple[vbcol=seagreen]
transaction[vbcol=seagreen]
about[vbcol=seagreen]

2005 Eval

Hi All,

I've just downloaded and installed the evaluation version of msql2005, it all seemed to go ok apart from a message towards the end of the install saying the event log was full. I cleared it an the install finished. Problem is I don't have the server manager on my menu, nor kind I find any way to run it

Hope someone can help

Regards

There is no such thing as Server Manager as there was in SQL2K. Instead, we have the SQL Configuration Manager which allows you to stop and start the services and other things besides eg as a replacement for the SQL Server Network Utility.

HTH!

|||

Hi many thanks for the reply but I am confused.

How do I create a new database or set permissions, view the tables etc etc?

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms174173.aspx

This link details Introducing SQL Server Management Studio as being new in SQL Server 2005. It also states that:-

By default, SQL Server Management Studio is installed in C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\90\Tools\Binn\VSShell\Common7\IDE.

I've looked there and the folder is empty.

best Regards

|||

Ah, sorry- my mistake.

There is no such thing as Query Analyzer or Enterprise Manager in SQL2005 - as you've discovered, the new GUI is SQL Server Management Studio.

When you ran through the install, you should have had an option to select workstation components. Do know if this was selected?

If not, have a look at this article to install them.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/913967

HTH!

|||

Many thanks for pointing me in the right direction, I now have it installed. Just one more question you may be kind enough to answer. I installed everything on the c: drive of my server, thinking that would be safest. However, I really want to keep my .MDF files etc on the local D: Drive of the server. Is that possible?

Best Regards

|||

Yes it is possible you have to detach all the databases and move the mdf or ldf files as per your desire and reattach it.......for user dbs its quite simple but for system databases you need to use Trace flag 3608 (- T3608) and then perform detach\attach dbs ...you can refer these links for moving the dbs,

http://www.sql-articles.com/articles/msysdb.htm

http://deepakinsql.blogspot.com/2007/08/moving-system-databases-in-sql-2005.html

http://support.microsoft.com/?id=224071

|||

Mmany thanks DeePak those links were very helpfull. I'll give it a try

Best Regards

2005 Eval

Hi All,

I've just downloaded and installed the evaluation version of msql2005, it all seemed to go ok apart from a message towards the end of the install saying the event log was full. I cleared it an the install finished. Problem is I don't have the server manager on my menu, nor kind I find any way to run it

Hope someone can help

Regards

There is no such thing as Server Manager as there was in SQL2K. Instead, we have the SQL Configuration Manager which allows you to stop and start the services and other things besides eg as a replacement for the SQL Server Network Utility.

HTH!

|||

Hi many thanks for the reply but I am confused.

How do I create a new database or set permissions, view the tables etc etc?

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms174173.aspx

This link details Introducing SQL Server Management Studio as being new in SQL Server 2005. It also states that:-

By default, SQL Server Management Studio is installed in C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\90\Tools\Binn\VSShell\Common7\IDE.

I've looked there and the folder is empty.

best Regards

|||

Ah, sorry- my mistake.

There is no such thing as Query Analyzer or Enterprise Manager in SQL2005 - as you've discovered, the new GUI is SQL Server Management Studio.

When you ran through the install, you should have had an option to select workstation components. Do know if this was selected?

If not, have a look at this article to install them.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/913967

HTH!

|||

Many thanks for pointing me in the right direction, I now have it installed. Just one more question you may be kind enough to answer. I installed everything on the c: drive of my server, thinking that would be safest. However, I really want to keep my .MDF files etc on the local D: Drive of the server. Is that possible?

Best Regards

|||

Yes it is possible you have to detach all the databases and move the mdf or ldf files as per your desire and reattach it.......for user dbs its quite simple but for system databases you need to use Trace flag 3608 (- T3608) and then perform detach\attach dbs ...you can refer these links for moving the dbs,

http://www.sql-articles.com/articles/msysdb.htm

http://deepakinsql.blogspot.com/2007/08/moving-system-databases-in-sql-2005.html

http://support.microsoft.com/?id=224071

|||

Mmany thanks DeePak those links were very helpfull. I'll give it a try

Best Regards