I would need to know if the MSDE SP3a is aleady Upgraded.
I didn't search registy and Enterprise Manager(other PC)
Thank for your help
Hi,
Login to sql server using below command from command prompt:-
OSQL -sa -Ppassword -Sserver_name (enter)
1>select serverproperty('productlevel')
2>go
This will give you the service pack level of your sql server.
For older versions < SQL 2000, use the command
select @.@.version
It will give you the service pack number. with you can check the below link
to get the service pack details.
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/sqlsps.htm
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"peter" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:62a701c47528$ec661070$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> I would need to know if the MSDE SP3a is aleady Upgraded.
> I didn't search registy and Enterprise Manager(other PC)
> Thank for your help
|||http://www.aspfaq.com/2160
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"peter" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:62a701c47528$ec661070$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> I would need to know if the MSDE SP3a is aleady Upgraded.
> I didn't search registy and Enterprise Manager(other PC)
> Thank for your help
Showing posts with label sp3a. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sp3a. Show all posts
Friday, March 30, 2012
Friday, March 23, 2012
How can I back up a log-shipped database?
(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
Hello all!
I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-shipped pair. Whe
never I try
and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message that the database i
s in a
READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and make a database backup
of a
log-shipped database?
Thanks!Hi,
Just for my benefit, what would be the purpose of backing up a database that
does not change? I assume that the secondary DB of the pair resides in DR an
d
as a result the site will be protected (fire proof etc.) secondly the
Database in the prod environment is being backed up and the backups are sent
off site.
- You might want to consider Replication over logshipping of you really must
backup the secondary DB .
"John Peterson" wrote:
> (SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
> Hello all!
> I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-shipped pair. W
henever I try
> and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message that the database
is in a
> READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
> Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and make a database back
up of a
> log-shipped database?
> Thanks!
>
>|||Hello Olu!
We had hoped to be able to grab some of these Production databases for Dev a
nd QE testing.
It'd be more convenient to grab them from our DR environment (the log-shippe
d environment)
because it's already on our corporate network. But, I see that it's proving
to be more of
a challenge than we had hoped. ;-)
Out of curiosity, how would I configure Replication over log-shipping? Does
that mean I'd
set up a log-shipped DB as the Replication Publisher? I would have thought
that couldn't
be done on a read-only DB...
At this point, I'm kind of considering using DTS and the Transfer Database T
ask to
accomplish what I want. Some of the DBs are big, and I hate the thought of
essentially
BCPing everything out, but it *does* appear to work...
"Olu Adedeji" <OluAdedeji@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C91B47A6-F4D2-4599-819F-D87924CE42D7@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> Just for my benefit, what would be the purpose of backing up a database th
at
> does not change? I assume that the secondary DB of the pair resides in DR
and
> as a result the site will be protected (fire proof etc.) secondly the
> Database in the prod environment is being backed up and the backups are se
nt
> off site.
> - You might want to consider Replication over logshipping of you really mu
st
> backup the secondary DB .
> "John Peterson" wrote:
>|||Well, *shoot*! As it turns out, the DTS "Transfer Databases Task" will brin
g a DB out of
RECOVERY mode. <sigh> So that's a no go. :-(
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eCi9jeCkEHA.2652@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello Olu!
> We had hoped to be able to grab some of these Production databases for Dev
and QE
> testing. It'd be more convenient to grab them from our DR environment (the
log-shipped
> environment) because it's already on our corporate network. But, I see th
at it's
> proving to be more of a challenge than we had hoped. ;-)
> Out of curiosity, how would I configure Replication over log-shipping? Do
es that mean
> I'd set up a log-shipped DB as the Replication Publisher? I would have th
ought that
> couldn't be done on a read-only DB...
> At this point, I'm kind of considering using DTS and the Transfer Database
Task to
> accomplish what I want. Some of the DBs are big, and I hate the thought o
f essentially
> BCPing everything out, but it *does* appear to work...
>
> "Olu Adedeji" <OluAdedeji@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:C91B47A6-F4D2-4599-819F-D87924CE42D7@.microsoft.com...
>
Hello all!
I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-shipped pair. Whe
never I try
and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message that the database i
s in a
READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and make a database backup
of a
log-shipped database?
Thanks!Hi,
Just for my benefit, what would be the purpose of backing up a database that
does not change? I assume that the secondary DB of the pair resides in DR an
d
as a result the site will be protected (fire proof etc.) secondly the
Database in the prod environment is being backed up and the backups are sent
off site.
- You might want to consider Replication over logshipping of you really must
backup the secondary DB .
"John Peterson" wrote:
> (SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
> Hello all!
> I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-shipped pair. W
henever I try
> and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message that the database
is in a
> READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
> Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and make a database back
up of a
> log-shipped database?
> Thanks!
>
>|||Hello Olu!
We had hoped to be able to grab some of these Production databases for Dev a
nd QE testing.
It'd be more convenient to grab them from our DR environment (the log-shippe
d environment)
because it's already on our corporate network. But, I see that it's proving
to be more of
a challenge than we had hoped. ;-)
Out of curiosity, how would I configure Replication over log-shipping? Does
that mean I'd
set up a log-shipped DB as the Replication Publisher? I would have thought
that couldn't
be done on a read-only DB...
At this point, I'm kind of considering using DTS and the Transfer Database T
ask to
accomplish what I want. Some of the DBs are big, and I hate the thought of
essentially
BCPing everything out, but it *does* appear to work...
"Olu Adedeji" <OluAdedeji@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C91B47A6-F4D2-4599-819F-D87924CE42D7@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> Just for my benefit, what would be the purpose of backing up a database th
at
> does not change? I assume that the secondary DB of the pair resides in DR
and
> as a result the site will be protected (fire proof etc.) secondly the
> Database in the prod environment is being backed up and the backups are se
nt
> off site.
> - You might want to consider Replication over logshipping of you really mu
st
> backup the secondary DB .
> "John Peterson" wrote:
>|||Well, *shoot*! As it turns out, the DTS "Transfer Databases Task" will brin
g a DB out of
RECOVERY mode. <sigh> So that's a no go. :-(
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eCi9jeCkEHA.2652@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello Olu!
> We had hoped to be able to grab some of these Production databases for Dev
and QE
> testing. It'd be more convenient to grab them from our DR environment (the
log-shipped
> environment) because it's already on our corporate network. But, I see th
at it's
> proving to be more of a challenge than we had hoped. ;-)
> Out of curiosity, how would I configure Replication over log-shipping? Do
es that mean
> I'd set up a log-shipped DB as the Replication Publisher? I would have th
ought that
> couldn't be done on a read-only DB...
> At this point, I'm kind of considering using DTS and the Transfer Database
Task to
> accomplish what I want. Some of the DBs are big, and I hate the thought o
f essentially
> BCPing everything out, but it *does* appear to work...
>
> "Olu Adedeji" <OluAdedeji@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:C91B47A6-F4D2-4599-819F-D87924CE42D7@.microsoft.com...
>
How can I back up a log-shipped database?
(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
Hello all!
I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-shipped pair. Whenever I try
and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message that the database is in a
READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and make a database backup of a
log-shipped database?
Thanks!
Thanks DeeJay!
What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
* Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
transaction logs.
* Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
recommendation).
* Back up the database.
* Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
* Re-enable the Job.
I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
"DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
> with regular backups.
> As a work around, you have to restore the database and
> then back it up.
> Here is something you could use:
> USE MASTER
> RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
> WITH RECOVERY
> This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
> you can back it up.
> The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
> next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
> it setup.
> hth
> DeeJay
> shipped pair. Whenever I try
> that the database is in a
> make a database backup of a
|||Hi John,
> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server aren't written to handle this scenario, quite simply. Any
way you can grab the log backups already on the fallback machine?
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Thanks DeeJay!
> What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
> * Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
> transaction logs.
> * Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
> recommendation).
> * Back up the database.
> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
> * Re-enable the Job.
> I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
> Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
> Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
>
> "DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main database backup available from the
fallback machine.
Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
STANDBY mode? ;-)
Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production databases log-shipped into our
corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped databases, we won't have to pay
the network price to copy from production again.
Thanks for any additional help you might be able to provide! :-)
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi John,
>
> No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server aren't written to handle this
> scenario, quite simply. Any
> way you can grab the log backups already on the fallback machine?
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
|||You might want to test this out in dev first.
I am not sure if this is supported by MS or if your log
shipping will work properly again.
You might have to re-configure log-shipping.
DeeJay
>--Original Message--
>Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main
database backup available from the
>fallback machine.
>Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system
table to toggle the DB back in
>STANDBY mode? ;-)
>Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production
databases log-shipped into our
>corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped
databases, we won't have to pay
>the network price to copy from production again.
>Thanks for any additional help you might be able to
provide! :-)
>
>"Tibor Karaszi"
<tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
in message[vbcol=seagreen]
>news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
(dunno how to do this yet).[vbcol=seagreen]
aren't written to handle this[vbcol=seagreen]
fallback machine?[vbcol=seagreen]
processing the log-shipped[vbcol=seagreen]
STANDBY mode (as per your[vbcol=seagreen]
(dunno how to do this yet).[vbcol=seagreen]
instance, what does the Log-Shipping[vbcol=seagreen]
proposed elements above?[vbcol=seagreen]
mode[vbcol=seagreen]
and[vbcol=seagreen]
then[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
have[vbcol=seagreen]
a log-[vbcol=seagreen]
message
>
>.
>
|||> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
> STANDBY mode? ;-)
Nope, none that I know of. Just think about it. When you bring a db out of standby mode, you get the recovery
work persisted. Stuff has been rolled forward and rolled back. Period. How would you be able to apply a later
log backup onto this, as the log records in that log backup are totally out-of sync with the database you have
performed a permanent recovery on?
For this to work, MS would need to do some changes in how the recovery process work or give us some other
option for recovery (NO_RECOVERY, RECOVERY, STANDBY, QUASI_PERMANENT_RECOVERY).
Or MS would need to change SQL Server so it allow us to do a backup of a database in STANDBY mode. (And here
I'm too tired right now to consider what ramifications that would have on log record sequencing and recovery
;-) ).
I know this question has been on the table before, so you might want to check the archives to see if someone
came up with anything. I have a feeling that you are out of luck, though...
Perhaps you should opt for a home-grown log shipping solution, to give you better control of handling of the
backup files?
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message news:%23UXfE54jEHA.2412@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main database backup available from the
> fallback machine.
> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
> STANDBY mode? ;-)
> Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production databases log-shipped into our
> corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped databases, we won't have to pay
> the network price to copy from production again.
> Thanks for any additional help you might be able to provide! :-)
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thanks Tibor! It's clear I don't understand the whole RECOVERY business.
I had *hoped* that, by temporarily suspending the log file processing, I could somehow get
the DB in a state where it was backup-able. But, if I'm understanding you correctly, it
sounds as if, by virtue of performing a backup on the DB, I'd be "marking" the transaction
log in such a way as to be incompatible with the normal log files when they're later
resumed.
Could I, then, do a detach and copy the underlying .MDF/.LDF files? Or would that break
the whole log-shipping "linkage"?
Thanks again!
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:%23tykrd5jEHA.3896@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Nope, none that I know of. Just think about it. When you bring a db out of standby mode,
> you get the recovery
> work persisted. Stuff has been rolled forward and rolled back. Period. How would you be
> able to apply a later
> log backup onto this, as the log records in that log backup are totally out-of sync with
> the database you have
> performed a permanent recovery on?
> For this to work, MS would need to do some changes in how the recovery process work or
> give us some other
> option for recovery (NO_RECOVERY, RECOVERY, STANDBY, QUASI_PERMANENT_RECOVERY).
> Or MS would need to change SQL Server so it allow us to do a backup of a database in
> STANDBY mode. (And here
> I'm too tired right now to consider what ramifications that would have on log record
> sequencing and recovery
> ;-) ).
> I know this question has been on the table before, so you might want to check the
> archives to see if someone
> came up with anything. I have a feeling that you are out of luck, though...
> Perhaps you should opt for a home-grown log shipping solution, to give you better
> control of handling of the
> backup files?
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:%23UXfE54jEHA.2412@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
|||Hi,
Just for my benefit, what would be the purpose of backing up a database that
does not change? I assume that the secondary DB of the pair resides in DR and
as a result the site will be protected (fire proof etc.) secondly the
Database in the prod environment is being backed up and the backups are sent
off site.
- You might want to consider Replication over logshipping of you really must
backup the secondary DB .
"John Peterson" wrote:
> (SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
> Hello all!
> I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-shipped pair. Whenever I try
> and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message that the database is in a
> READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
> Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and make a database backup of a
> log-shipped database?
> Thanks!
>
>
|||I think that when you do recovery, log records are either removed or added (possibly both) to the
transaction log. This means that a later log backup from the production database will not just be
able to add the log records to the log-shipped database, because the transaction log has been
changed. The LSN (log sequence numbers) doesn't match anymore.
I haven't tested whether you can detach and attach a database a database in STANDBY mode. Give it a
try. If not, you might consider stopping SQL server and just grabbing the files. Not supported and
not guaranteed that you can attach such files, though.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message news:O991LI6jEHA.1348@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Tibor! It's clear I don't understand the whole RECOVERY business.
> I had *hoped* that, by temporarily suspending the log file processing, I could somehow get
> the DB in a state where it was backup-able. But, if I'm understanding you correctly, it
> sounds as if, by virtue of performing a backup on the DB, I'd be "marking" the transaction
> log in such a way as to be incompatible with the normal log files when they're later
> resumed.
> Could I, then, do a detach and copy the underlying .MDF/.LDF files? Or would that break
> the whole log-shipping "linkage"?
> Thanks again!
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23tykrd5jEHA.3896@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
|||Hello Olu!
We had hoped to be able to grab some of these Production databases for Dev and QE testing.
It'd be more convenient to grab them from our DR environment (the log-shipped environment)
because it's already on our corporate network. But, I see that it's proving to be more of
a challenge than we had hoped. ;-)
Out of curiosity, how would I configure Replication over log-shipping? Does that mean I'd
set up a log-shipped DB as the Replication Publisher? I would have thought that couldn't
be done on a read-only DB...
At this point, I'm kind of considering using DTS and the Transfer Database Task to
accomplish what I want. Some of the DBs are big, and I hate the thought of essentially
BCPing everything out, but it *does* appear to work...
"Olu Adedeji" <OluAdedeji@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C91B47A6-F4D2-4599-819F-D87924CE42D7@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> Just for my benefit, what would be the purpose of backing up a database that
> does not change? I assume that the secondary DB of the pair resides in DR and
> as a result the site will be protected (fire proof etc.) secondly the
> Database in the prod environment is being backed up and the backups are sent
> off site.
> - You might want to consider Replication over logshipping of you really must
> backup the secondary DB .
> "John Peterson" wrote:
Hello all!
I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-shipped pair. Whenever I try
and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message that the database is in a
READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and make a database backup of a
log-shipped database?
Thanks!
Thanks DeeJay!
What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
* Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
transaction logs.
* Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
recommendation).
* Back up the database.
* Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
* Re-enable the Job.
I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
"DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
> with regular backups.
> As a work around, you have to restore the database and
> then back it up.
> Here is something you could use:
> USE MASTER
> RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
> WITH RECOVERY
> This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
> you can back it up.
> The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
> next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
> it setup.
> hth
> DeeJay
> shipped pair. Whenever I try
> that the database is in a
> make a database backup of a
|||Hi John,
> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server aren't written to handle this scenario, quite simply. Any
way you can grab the log backups already on the fallback machine?
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Thanks DeeJay!
> What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
> * Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
> transaction logs.
> * Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
> recommendation).
> * Back up the database.
> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
> * Re-enable the Job.
> I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
> Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
> Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
>
> "DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main database backup available from the
fallback machine.
Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
STANDBY mode? ;-)
Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production databases log-shipped into our
corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped databases, we won't have to pay
the network price to copy from production again.
Thanks for any additional help you might be able to provide! :-)
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi John,
>
> No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server aren't written to handle this
> scenario, quite simply. Any
> way you can grab the log backups already on the fallback machine?
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
|||You might want to test this out in dev first.
I am not sure if this is supported by MS or if your log
shipping will work properly again.
You might have to re-configure log-shipping.
DeeJay
>--Original Message--
>Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main
database backup available from the
>fallback machine.
>Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system
table to toggle the DB back in
>STANDBY mode? ;-)
>Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production
databases log-shipped into our
>corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped
databases, we won't have to pay
>the network price to copy from production again.
>Thanks for any additional help you might be able to
provide! :-)
>
>"Tibor Karaszi"
<tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
in message[vbcol=seagreen]
>news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
(dunno how to do this yet).[vbcol=seagreen]
aren't written to handle this[vbcol=seagreen]
fallback machine?[vbcol=seagreen]
processing the log-shipped[vbcol=seagreen]
STANDBY mode (as per your[vbcol=seagreen]
(dunno how to do this yet).[vbcol=seagreen]
instance, what does the Log-Shipping[vbcol=seagreen]
proposed elements above?[vbcol=seagreen]
mode[vbcol=seagreen]
and[vbcol=seagreen]
then[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
have[vbcol=seagreen]
a log-[vbcol=seagreen]
message
>
>.
>
|||> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
> STANDBY mode? ;-)
Nope, none that I know of. Just think about it. When you bring a db out of standby mode, you get the recovery
work persisted. Stuff has been rolled forward and rolled back. Period. How would you be able to apply a later
log backup onto this, as the log records in that log backup are totally out-of sync with the database you have
performed a permanent recovery on?
For this to work, MS would need to do some changes in how the recovery process work or give us some other
option for recovery (NO_RECOVERY, RECOVERY, STANDBY, QUASI_PERMANENT_RECOVERY).
Or MS would need to change SQL Server so it allow us to do a backup of a database in STANDBY mode. (And here
I'm too tired right now to consider what ramifications that would have on log record sequencing and recovery
;-) ).
I know this question has been on the table before, so you might want to check the archives to see if someone
came up with anything. I have a feeling that you are out of luck, though...
Perhaps you should opt for a home-grown log shipping solution, to give you better control of handling of the
backup files?
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message news:%23UXfE54jEHA.2412@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main database backup available from the
> fallback machine.
> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
> STANDBY mode? ;-)
> Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production databases log-shipped into our
> corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped databases, we won't have to pay
> the network price to copy from production again.
> Thanks for any additional help you might be able to provide! :-)
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thanks Tibor! It's clear I don't understand the whole RECOVERY business.
I had *hoped* that, by temporarily suspending the log file processing, I could somehow get
the DB in a state where it was backup-able. But, if I'm understanding you correctly, it
sounds as if, by virtue of performing a backup on the DB, I'd be "marking" the transaction
log in such a way as to be incompatible with the normal log files when they're later
resumed.
Could I, then, do a detach and copy the underlying .MDF/.LDF files? Or would that break
the whole log-shipping "linkage"?
Thanks again!
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:%23tykrd5jEHA.3896@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Nope, none that I know of. Just think about it. When you bring a db out of standby mode,
> you get the recovery
> work persisted. Stuff has been rolled forward and rolled back. Period. How would you be
> able to apply a later
> log backup onto this, as the log records in that log backup are totally out-of sync with
> the database you have
> performed a permanent recovery on?
> For this to work, MS would need to do some changes in how the recovery process work or
> give us some other
> option for recovery (NO_RECOVERY, RECOVERY, STANDBY, QUASI_PERMANENT_RECOVERY).
> Or MS would need to change SQL Server so it allow us to do a backup of a database in
> STANDBY mode. (And here
> I'm too tired right now to consider what ramifications that would have on log record
> sequencing and recovery
> ;-) ).
> I know this question has been on the table before, so you might want to check the
> archives to see if someone
> came up with anything. I have a feeling that you are out of luck, though...
> Perhaps you should opt for a home-grown log shipping solution, to give you better
> control of handling of the
> backup files?
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:%23UXfE54jEHA.2412@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
|||Hi,
Just for my benefit, what would be the purpose of backing up a database that
does not change? I assume that the secondary DB of the pair resides in DR and
as a result the site will be protected (fire proof etc.) secondly the
Database in the prod environment is being backed up and the backups are sent
off site.
- You might want to consider Replication over logshipping of you really must
backup the secondary DB .
"John Peterson" wrote:
> (SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
> Hello all!
> I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-shipped pair. Whenever I try
> and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message that the database is in a
> READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
> Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and make a database backup of a
> log-shipped database?
> Thanks!
>
>
|||I think that when you do recovery, log records are either removed or added (possibly both) to the
transaction log. This means that a later log backup from the production database will not just be
able to add the log records to the log-shipped database, because the transaction log has been
changed. The LSN (log sequence numbers) doesn't match anymore.
I haven't tested whether you can detach and attach a database a database in STANDBY mode. Give it a
try. If not, you might consider stopping SQL server and just grabbing the files. Not supported and
not guaranteed that you can attach such files, though.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message news:O991LI6jEHA.1348@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Tibor! It's clear I don't understand the whole RECOVERY business.
> I had *hoped* that, by temporarily suspending the log file processing, I could somehow get
> the DB in a state where it was backup-able. But, if I'm understanding you correctly, it
> sounds as if, by virtue of performing a backup on the DB, I'd be "marking" the transaction
> log in such a way as to be incompatible with the normal log files when they're later
> resumed.
> Could I, then, do a detach and copy the underlying .MDF/.LDF files? Or would that break
> the whole log-shipping "linkage"?
> Thanks again!
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23tykrd5jEHA.3896@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
|||Hello Olu!
We had hoped to be able to grab some of these Production databases for Dev and QE testing.
It'd be more convenient to grab them from our DR environment (the log-shipped environment)
because it's already on our corporate network. But, I see that it's proving to be more of
a challenge than we had hoped. ;-)
Out of curiosity, how would I configure Replication over log-shipping? Does that mean I'd
set up a log-shipped DB as the Replication Publisher? I would have thought that couldn't
be done on a read-only DB...
At this point, I'm kind of considering using DTS and the Transfer Database Task to
accomplish what I want. Some of the DBs are big, and I hate the thought of essentially
BCPing everything out, but it *does* appear to work...
"Olu Adedeji" <OluAdedeji@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C91B47A6-F4D2-4599-819F-D87924CE42D7@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> Just for my benefit, what would be the purpose of backing up a database that
> does not change? I assume that the secondary DB of the pair resides in DR and
> as a result the site will be protected (fire proof etc.) secondly the
> Database in the prod environment is being backed up and the backups are sent
> off site.
> - You might want to consider Replication over logshipping of you really must
> backup the secondary DB .
> "John Peterson" wrote:
How can I back up a log-shipped database?
(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
Hello all!
I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-shipped pair. Whenever I try
and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message that the database is in a
READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and make a database backup of a
log-shipped database?
Thanks!Hi,
You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
with regular backups.
As a work around, you have to restore the database and
then back it up.
Here is something you could use:
USE MASTER
RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
WITH RECOVERY
This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
you can back it up.
The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
it setup.
hth
DeeJay
>--Original Message--
>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
>Hello all!
>I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-
shipped pair. Whenever I try
>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message
that the database is in a
>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
make a database backup of a
>log-shipped database?
>Thanks!
>
>.
>|||Thanks DeeJay!
What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
* Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
transaction logs.
* Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
recommendation).
* Back up the database.
* Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
* Re-enable the Job.
I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
"DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
> with regular backups.
> As a work around, you have to restore the database and
> then back it up.
> Here is something you could use:
> USE MASTER
> RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
> WITH RECOVERY
> This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
> you can back it up.
> The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
> next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
> it setup.
> hth
> DeeJay
>>--Original Message--
>>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
>>Hello all!
>>I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-
> shipped pair. Whenever I try
>>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message
> that the database is in a
>>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
>>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
> make a database backup of a
>>log-shipped database?
>>Thanks!
>>
>>.|||Hi John,
> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server aren't written to handle this scenario, quite simply. Any
way you can grab the log backups already on the fallback machine?
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Thanks DeeJay!
> What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
> * Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
> transaction logs.
> * Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
> recommendation).
> * Back up the database.
> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
> * Re-enable the Job.
> I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
> Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
> Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
>
> "DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> > Hi,
> >
> > You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
> > with regular backups.
> >
> > As a work around, you have to restore the database and
> > then back it up.
> >
> > Here is something you could use:
> >
> > USE MASTER
> > RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
> > WITH RECOVERY
> >
> > This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
> > you can back it up.
> >
> > The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
> > next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
> > it setup.
> >
> > hth
> >
> > DeeJay
> >>--Original Message--
> >>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
> >>
> >>Hello all!
> >>
> >>I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-
> > shipped pair. Whenever I try
> >>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message
> > that the database is in a
> >>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
> >>
> >>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
> > make a database backup of a
> >>log-shipped database?
> >>
> >>Thanks!
> >>
> >>
> >>.
> >>
>|||Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main database backup available from the
fallback machine.
Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
STANDBY mode? ;-)
Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production databases log-shipped into our
corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped databases, we won't have to pay
the network price to copy from production again.
Thanks for any additional help you might be able to provide! :-)
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi John,
>> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
> No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server aren't written to handle this
> scenario, quite simply. Any
> way you can grab the log backups already on the fallback machine?
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> Thanks DeeJay!
>> What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
>> * Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
>> transaction logs.
>> * Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
>> recommendation).
>> * Back up the database.
>> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
>> * Re-enable the Job.
>> I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
>> Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
>> Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
>>
>> "DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
>> > with regular backups.
>> >
>> > As a work around, you have to restore the database and
>> > then back it up.
>> >
>> > Here is something you could use:
>> >
>> > USE MASTER
>> > RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
>> > WITH RECOVERY
>> >
>> > This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
>> > you can back it up.
>> >
>> > The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
>> > next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
>> > it setup.
>> >
>> > hth
>> >
>> > DeeJay
>> >>--Original Message--
>> >>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
>> >>
>> >>Hello all!
>> >>
>> >>I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-
>> > shipped pair. Whenever I try
>> >>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message
>> > that the database is in a
>> >>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
>> >>
>> >>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
>> > make a database backup of a
>> >>log-shipped database?
>> >>
>> >>Thanks!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>.
>> >>
>>
>|||You might want to test this out in dev first.
I am not sure if this is supported by MS or if your log
shipping will work properly again.
You might have to re-configure log-shipping.
DeeJay
>--Original Message--
>Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main
database backup available from the
>fallback machine.
>Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system
table to toggle the DB back in
>STANDBY mode? ;-)
>Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production
databases log-shipped into our
>corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped
databases, we won't have to pay
>the network price to copy from production again.
>Thanks for any additional help you might be able to
provide! :-)
>
>"Tibor Karaszi"
<tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
in message
>news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> Hi John,
>> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY
(dunno how to do this yet).
>> No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server
aren't written to handle this
>> scenario, quite simply. Any
>> way you can grab the log backups already on the
fallback machine?
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>>
>> "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> Thanks DeeJay!
>> What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
>> * Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for
processing the log-shipped
>> transaction logs.
>> * Change the status of the database to get it out of
STANDBY mode (as per your
>> recommendation).
>> * Back up the database.
>> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY
(dunno how to do this yet).
>> * Re-enable the Job.
>> I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For
instance, what does the Log-Shipping
>> Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the
proposed elements above?
>> Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
>>
>> "DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > You can not backup a database or log that is standby
mode
>> > with regular backups.
>> >
>> > As a work around, you have to restore the database
and
>> > then back it up.
>> >
>> > Here is something you could use:
>> >
>> > USE MASTER
>> > RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
>> > WITH RECOVERY
>> >
>> > This changes the standby status to normal db use and
then
>> > you can back it up.
>> >
>> > The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at
the
>> > next log shipped/restored because it depends how you
have
>> > it setup.
>> >
>> > hth
>> >
>> > DeeJay
>> >>--Original Message--
>> >>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
>> >>
>> >>Hello all!
>> >>
>> >>I've got a database that is the secondary server in
a log-
>> > shipped pair. Whenever I try
>> >>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error
message
>> > that the database is in a
>> >>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
>> >>
>> >>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
>> > make a database backup of a
>> >>log-shipped database?
>> >>
>> >>Thanks!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>.
>> >>
>>
>>
>
>.
>|||> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
> STANDBY mode? ;-)
Nope, none that I know of. Just think about it. When you bring a db out of standby mode, you get the recovery
work persisted. Stuff has been rolled forward and rolled back. Period. How would you be able to apply a later
log backup onto this, as the log records in that log backup are totally out-of sync with the database you have
performed a permanent recovery on?
For this to work, MS would need to do some changes in how the recovery process work or give us some other
option for recovery (NO_RECOVERY, RECOVERY, STANDBY, QUASI_PERMANENT_RECOVERY).
Or MS would need to change SQL Server so it allow us to do a backup of a database in STANDBY mode. (And here
I'm too tired right now to consider what ramifications that would have on log record sequencing and recovery
;-) ).
I know this question has been on the table before, so you might want to check the archives to see if someone
came up with anything. I have a feeling that you are out of luck, though...
Perhaps you should opt for a home-grown log shipping solution, to give you better control of handling of the
backup files?
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message news:%23UXfE54jEHA.2412@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main database backup available from the
> fallback machine.
> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
> STANDBY mode? ;-)
> Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production databases log-shipped into our
> corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped databases, we won't have to pay
> the network price to copy from production again.
> Thanks for any additional help you might be able to provide! :-)
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > Hi John,
> >
> >> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
> >
> > No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server aren't written to handle this
> > scenario, quite simply. Any
> > way you can grab the log backups already on the fallback machine?
> >
> > --
> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >
> >
> > "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> >> Thanks DeeJay!
> >>
> >> What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
> >>
> >> * Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
> >> transaction logs.
> >> * Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
> >> recommendation).
> >> * Back up the database.
> >> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
> >> * Re-enable the Job.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
> >> Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
> >>
> >> Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
> >>
> >>
> >> "DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
> >> > with regular backups.
> >> >
> >> > As a work around, you have to restore the database and
> >> > then back it up.
> >> >
> >> > Here is something you could use:
> >> >
> >> > USE MASTER
> >> > RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
> >> > WITH RECOVERY
> >> >
> >> > This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
> >> > you can back it up.
> >> >
> >> > The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
> >> > next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
> >> > it setup.
> >> >
> >> > hth
> >> >
> >> > DeeJay
> >> >>--Original Message--
> >> >>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
> >> >>
> >> >>Hello all!
> >> >>
> >> >>I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-
> >> > shipped pair. Whenever I try
> >> >>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message
> >> > that the database is in a
> >> >>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
> >> >>
> >> >>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
> >> > make a database backup of a
> >> >>log-shipped database?
> >> >>
> >> >>Thanks!
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>.
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>|||Thanks Tibor! It's clear I don't understand the whole RECOVERY business.
I had *hoped* that, by temporarily suspending the log file processing, I could somehow get
the DB in a state where it was backup-able. But, if I'm understanding you correctly, it
sounds as if, by virtue of performing a backup on the DB, I'd be "marking" the transaction
log in such a way as to be incompatible with the normal log files when they're later
resumed.
Could I, then, do a detach and copy the underlying .MDF/.LDF files? Or would that break
the whole log-shipping "linkage"?
Thanks again!
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:%23tykrd5jEHA.3896@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
>> STANDBY mode? ;-)
> Nope, none that I know of. Just think about it. When you bring a db out of standby mode,
> you get the recovery
> work persisted. Stuff has been rolled forward and rolled back. Period. How would you be
> able to apply a later
> log backup onto this, as the log records in that log backup are totally out-of sync with
> the database you have
> performed a permanent recovery on?
> For this to work, MS would need to do some changes in how the recovery process work or
> give us some other
> option for recovery (NO_RECOVERY, RECOVERY, STANDBY, QUASI_PERMANENT_RECOVERY).
> Or MS would need to change SQL Server so it allow us to do a backup of a database in
> STANDBY mode. (And here
> I'm too tired right now to consider what ramifications that would have on log record
> sequencing and recovery
> ;-) ).
> I know this question has been on the table before, so you might want to check the
> archives to see if someone
> came up with anything. I have a feeling that you are out of luck, though...
> Perhaps you should opt for a home-grown log shipping solution, to give you better
> control of handling of the
> backup files?
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:%23UXfE54jEHA.2412@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main database backup available from the
>> fallback machine.
>> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
>> STANDBY mode? ;-)
>> Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production databases log-shipped into our
>> corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped databases, we won't have to
>> pay
>> the network price to copy from production again.
>> Thanks for any additional help you might be able to provide! :-)
>>
>> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
>> news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> > Hi John,
>> >
>> >> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
>> >
>> > No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server aren't written to handle this
>> > scenario, quite simply. Any
>> > way you can grab the log backups already on the fallback machine?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>> >
>> >
>> > "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
>> > news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> >> Thanks DeeJay!
>> >>
>> >> What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
>> >>
>> >> * Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
>> >> transaction logs.
>> >> * Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
>> >> recommendation).
>> >> * Back up the database.
>> >> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
>> >> * Re-enable the Job.
>> >>
>> >> I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
>> >> Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
>> >> > with regular backups.
>> >> >
>> >> > As a work around, you have to restore the database and
>> >> > then back it up.
>> >> >
>> >> > Here is something you could use:
>> >> >
>> >> > USE MASTER
>> >> > RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
>> >> > WITH RECOVERY
>> >> >
>> >> > This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
>> >> > you can back it up.
>> >> >
>> >> > The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
>> >> > next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
>> >> > it setup.
>> >> >
>> >> > hth
>> >> >
>> >> > DeeJay
>> >> >>--Original Message--
>> >> >>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Hello all!
>> >> >>
>> >> >>I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-
>> >> > shipped pair. Whenever I try
>> >> >>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message
>> >> > that the database is in a
>> >> >>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
>> >> > make a database backup of a
>> >> >>log-shipped database?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Thanks!
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>.
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>|||I think that when you do recovery, log records are either removed or added (possibly both) to the
transaction log. This means that a later log backup from the production database will not just be
able to add the log records to the log-shipped database, because the transaction log has been
changed. The LSN (log sequence numbers) doesn't match anymore.
I haven't tested whether you can detach and attach a database a database in STANDBY mode. Give it a
try. If not, you might consider stopping SQL server and just grabbing the files. Not supported and
not guaranteed that you can attach such files, though.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message news:O991LI6jEHA.1348@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Tibor! It's clear I don't understand the whole RECOVERY business.
> I had *hoped* that, by temporarily suspending the log file processing, I could somehow get
> the DB in a state where it was backup-able. But, if I'm understanding you correctly, it
> sounds as if, by virtue of performing a backup on the DB, I'd be "marking" the transaction
> log in such a way as to be incompatible with the normal log files when they're later
> resumed.
> Could I, then, do a detach and copy the underlying .MDF/.LDF files? Or would that break
> the whole log-shipping "linkage"?
> Thanks again!
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23tykrd5jEHA.3896@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> >> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
> >> STANDBY mode? ;-)
> >
> > Nope, none that I know of. Just think about it. When you bring a db out of standby mode,
> > you get the recovery
> > work persisted. Stuff has been rolled forward and rolled back. Period. How would you be
> > able to apply a later
> > log backup onto this, as the log records in that log backup are totally out-of sync with
> > the database you have
> > performed a permanent recovery on?
> > For this to work, MS would need to do some changes in how the recovery process work or
> > give us some other
> > option for recovery (NO_RECOVERY, RECOVERY, STANDBY, QUASI_PERMANENT_RECOVERY).
> >
> > Or MS would need to change SQL Server so it allow us to do a backup of a database in
> > STANDBY mode. (And here
> > I'm too tired right now to consider what ramifications that would have on log record
> > sequencing and recovery
> > ;-) ).
> >
> > I know this question has been on the table before, so you might want to check the
> > archives to see if someone
> > came up with anything. I have a feeling that you are out of luck, though...
> >
> > Perhaps you should opt for a home-grown log shipping solution, to give you better
> > control of handling of the
> > backup files?
> > --
> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >
> >
> > "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:%23UXfE54jEHA.2412@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> >> Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main database backup available from the
> >> fallback machine.
> >>
> >> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
> >> STANDBY mode? ;-)
> >>
> >> Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production databases log-shipped into our
> >> corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped databases, we won't have to
> >> pay
> >> the network price to copy from production again.
> >>
> >> Thanks for any additional help you might be able to provide! :-)
> >>
> >>
> >> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> >> > Hi John,
> >> >
> >> >> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
> >> >
> >> > No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server aren't written to handle this
> >> > scenario, quite simply. Any
> >> > way you can grab the log backups already on the fallback machine?
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> >> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> >> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> >> > news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> >> >> Thanks DeeJay!
> >> >>
> >> >> What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
> >> >>
> >> >> * Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
> >> >> transaction logs.
> >> >> * Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
> >> >> recommendation).
> >> >> * Back up the database.
> >> >> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
> >> >> * Re-enable the Job.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
> >> >> Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> >> >> > Hi,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
> >> >> > with regular backups.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > As a work around, you have to restore the database and
> >> >> > then back it up.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Here is something you could use:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > USE MASTER
> >> >> > RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
> >> >> > WITH RECOVERY
> >> >> >
> >> >> > This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
> >> >> > you can back it up.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
> >> >> > next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
> >> >> > it setup.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > hth
> >> >> >
> >> >> > DeeJay
> >> >> >>--Original Message--
> >> >> >>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Hello all!
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-
> >> >> > shipped pair. Whenever I try
> >> >> >>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message
> >> >> > that the database is in a
> >> >> >>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
> >> >> > make a database backup of a
> >> >> >>log-shipped database?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Thanks!
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>.
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>|||Hello Olu!
We had hoped to be able to grab some of these Production databases for Dev and QE testing.
It'd be more convenient to grab them from our DR environment (the log-shipped environment)
because it's already on our corporate network. But, I see that it's proving to be more of
a challenge than we had hoped. ;-)
Out of curiosity, how would I configure Replication over log-shipping? Does that mean I'd
set up a log-shipped DB as the Replication Publisher? I would have thought that couldn't
be done on a read-only DB...
At this point, I'm kind of considering using DTS and the Transfer Database Task to
accomplish what I want. Some of the DBs are big, and I hate the thought of essentially
BCPing everything out, but it *does* appear to work...
"Olu Adedeji" <OluAdedeji@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C91B47A6-F4D2-4599-819F-D87924CE42D7@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> Just for my benefit, what would be the purpose of backing up a database that
> does not change? I assume that the secondary DB of the pair resides in DR and
> as a result the site will be protected (fire proof etc.) secondly the
> Database in the prod environment is being backed up and the backups are sent
> off site.
> - You might want to consider Replication over logshipping of you really must
> backup the secondary DB .
> "John Peterson" wrote:
>> (SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
>> Hello all!
>> I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-shipped pair. Whenever I try
>> and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message that the database is in a
>> READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
>> Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and make a database backup of a
>> log-shipped database?
>> Thanks!
>>|||Well, *shoot*! As it turns out, the DTS "Transfer Databases Task" will bring a DB out of
RECOVERY mode. <sigh> So that's a no go. :-(
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eCi9jeCkEHA.2652@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello Olu!
> We had hoped to be able to grab some of these Production databases for Dev and QE
> testing. It'd be more convenient to grab them from our DR environment (the log-shipped
> environment) because it's already on our corporate network. But, I see that it's
> proving to be more of a challenge than we had hoped. ;-)
> Out of curiosity, how would I configure Replication over log-shipping? Does that mean
> I'd set up a log-shipped DB as the Replication Publisher? I would have thought that
> couldn't be done on a read-only DB...
> At this point, I'm kind of considering using DTS and the Transfer Database Task to
> accomplish what I want. Some of the DBs are big, and I hate the thought of essentially
> BCPing everything out, but it *does* appear to work...
>
> "Olu Adedeji" <OluAdedeji@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:C91B47A6-F4D2-4599-819F-D87924CE42D7@.microsoft.com...
>> Hi,
>> Just for my benefit, what would be the purpose of backing up a database that
>> does not change? I assume that the secondary DB of the pair resides in DR and
>> as a result the site will be protected (fire proof etc.) secondly the
>> Database in the prod environment is being backed up and the backups are sent
>> off site.
>> - You might want to consider Replication over logshipping of you really must
>> backup the secondary DB .
>> "John Peterson" wrote:
>> (SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
>> Hello all!
>> I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-shipped pair. Whenever I
>> try
>> and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message that the database is in a
>> READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
>> Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and make a database backup of a
>> log-shipped database?
>> Thanks!
>>
>
Hello all!
I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-shipped pair. Whenever I try
and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message that the database is in a
READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and make a database backup of a
log-shipped database?
Thanks!Hi,
You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
with regular backups.
As a work around, you have to restore the database and
then back it up.
Here is something you could use:
USE MASTER
RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
WITH RECOVERY
This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
you can back it up.
The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
it setup.
hth
DeeJay
>--Original Message--
>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
>Hello all!
>I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-
shipped pair. Whenever I try
>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message
that the database is in a
>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
make a database backup of a
>log-shipped database?
>Thanks!
>
>.
>|||Thanks DeeJay!
What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
* Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
transaction logs.
* Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
recommendation).
* Back up the database.
* Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
* Re-enable the Job.
I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
"DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
> with regular backups.
> As a work around, you have to restore the database and
> then back it up.
> Here is something you could use:
> USE MASTER
> RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
> WITH RECOVERY
> This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
> you can back it up.
> The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
> next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
> it setup.
> hth
> DeeJay
>>--Original Message--
>>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
>>Hello all!
>>I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-
> shipped pair. Whenever I try
>>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message
> that the database is in a
>>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
>>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
> make a database backup of a
>>log-shipped database?
>>Thanks!
>>
>>.|||Hi John,
> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server aren't written to handle this scenario, quite simply. Any
way you can grab the log backups already on the fallback machine?
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Thanks DeeJay!
> What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
> * Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
> transaction logs.
> * Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
> recommendation).
> * Back up the database.
> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
> * Re-enable the Job.
> I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
> Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
> Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
>
> "DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> > Hi,
> >
> > You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
> > with regular backups.
> >
> > As a work around, you have to restore the database and
> > then back it up.
> >
> > Here is something you could use:
> >
> > USE MASTER
> > RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
> > WITH RECOVERY
> >
> > This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
> > you can back it up.
> >
> > The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
> > next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
> > it setup.
> >
> > hth
> >
> > DeeJay
> >>--Original Message--
> >>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
> >>
> >>Hello all!
> >>
> >>I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-
> > shipped pair. Whenever I try
> >>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message
> > that the database is in a
> >>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
> >>
> >>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
> > make a database backup of a
> >>log-shipped database?
> >>
> >>Thanks!
> >>
> >>
> >>.
> >>
>|||Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main database backup available from the
fallback machine.
Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
STANDBY mode? ;-)
Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production databases log-shipped into our
corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped databases, we won't have to pay
the network price to copy from production again.
Thanks for any additional help you might be able to provide! :-)
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi John,
>> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
> No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server aren't written to handle this
> scenario, quite simply. Any
> way you can grab the log backups already on the fallback machine?
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> Thanks DeeJay!
>> What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
>> * Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
>> transaction logs.
>> * Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
>> recommendation).
>> * Back up the database.
>> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
>> * Re-enable the Job.
>> I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
>> Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
>> Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
>>
>> "DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
>> > with regular backups.
>> >
>> > As a work around, you have to restore the database and
>> > then back it up.
>> >
>> > Here is something you could use:
>> >
>> > USE MASTER
>> > RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
>> > WITH RECOVERY
>> >
>> > This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
>> > you can back it up.
>> >
>> > The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
>> > next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
>> > it setup.
>> >
>> > hth
>> >
>> > DeeJay
>> >>--Original Message--
>> >>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
>> >>
>> >>Hello all!
>> >>
>> >>I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-
>> > shipped pair. Whenever I try
>> >>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message
>> > that the database is in a
>> >>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
>> >>
>> >>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
>> > make a database backup of a
>> >>log-shipped database?
>> >>
>> >>Thanks!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>.
>> >>
>>
>|||You might want to test this out in dev first.
I am not sure if this is supported by MS or if your log
shipping will work properly again.
You might have to re-configure log-shipping.
DeeJay
>--Original Message--
>Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main
database backup available from the
>fallback machine.
>Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system
table to toggle the DB back in
>STANDBY mode? ;-)
>Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production
databases log-shipped into our
>corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped
databases, we won't have to pay
>the network price to copy from production again.
>Thanks for any additional help you might be able to
provide! :-)
>
>"Tibor Karaszi"
<tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
in message
>news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> Hi John,
>> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY
(dunno how to do this yet).
>> No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server
aren't written to handle this
>> scenario, quite simply. Any
>> way you can grab the log backups already on the
fallback machine?
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>>
>> "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> Thanks DeeJay!
>> What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
>> * Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for
processing the log-shipped
>> transaction logs.
>> * Change the status of the database to get it out of
STANDBY mode (as per your
>> recommendation).
>> * Back up the database.
>> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY
(dunno how to do this yet).
>> * Re-enable the Job.
>> I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For
instance, what does the Log-Shipping
>> Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the
proposed elements above?
>> Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
>>
>> "DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > You can not backup a database or log that is standby
mode
>> > with regular backups.
>> >
>> > As a work around, you have to restore the database
and
>> > then back it up.
>> >
>> > Here is something you could use:
>> >
>> > USE MASTER
>> > RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
>> > WITH RECOVERY
>> >
>> > This changes the standby status to normal db use and
then
>> > you can back it up.
>> >
>> > The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at
the
>> > next log shipped/restored because it depends how you
have
>> > it setup.
>> >
>> > hth
>> >
>> > DeeJay
>> >>--Original Message--
>> >>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
>> >>
>> >>Hello all!
>> >>
>> >>I've got a database that is the secondary server in
a log-
>> > shipped pair. Whenever I try
>> >>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error
message
>> > that the database is in a
>> >>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
>> >>
>> >>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
>> > make a database backup of a
>> >>log-shipped database?
>> >>
>> >>Thanks!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>.
>> >>
>>
>>
>
>.
>|||> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
> STANDBY mode? ;-)
Nope, none that I know of. Just think about it. When you bring a db out of standby mode, you get the recovery
work persisted. Stuff has been rolled forward and rolled back. Period. How would you be able to apply a later
log backup onto this, as the log records in that log backup are totally out-of sync with the database you have
performed a permanent recovery on?
For this to work, MS would need to do some changes in how the recovery process work or give us some other
option for recovery (NO_RECOVERY, RECOVERY, STANDBY, QUASI_PERMANENT_RECOVERY).
Or MS would need to change SQL Server so it allow us to do a backup of a database in STANDBY mode. (And here
I'm too tired right now to consider what ramifications that would have on log record sequencing and recovery
;-) ).
I know this question has been on the table before, so you might want to check the archives to see if someone
came up with anything. I have a feeling that you are out of luck, though...
Perhaps you should opt for a home-grown log shipping solution, to give you better control of handling of the
backup files?
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message news:%23UXfE54jEHA.2412@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main database backup available from the
> fallback machine.
> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
> STANDBY mode? ;-)
> Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production databases log-shipped into our
> corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped databases, we won't have to pay
> the network price to copy from production again.
> Thanks for any additional help you might be able to provide! :-)
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > Hi John,
> >
> >> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
> >
> > No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server aren't written to handle this
> > scenario, quite simply. Any
> > way you can grab the log backups already on the fallback machine?
> >
> > --
> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >
> >
> > "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> >> Thanks DeeJay!
> >>
> >> What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
> >>
> >> * Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
> >> transaction logs.
> >> * Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
> >> recommendation).
> >> * Back up the database.
> >> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
> >> * Re-enable the Job.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
> >> Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
> >>
> >> Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
> >>
> >>
> >> "DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
> >> > with regular backups.
> >> >
> >> > As a work around, you have to restore the database and
> >> > then back it up.
> >> >
> >> > Here is something you could use:
> >> >
> >> > USE MASTER
> >> > RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
> >> > WITH RECOVERY
> >> >
> >> > This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
> >> > you can back it up.
> >> >
> >> > The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
> >> > next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
> >> > it setup.
> >> >
> >> > hth
> >> >
> >> > DeeJay
> >> >>--Original Message--
> >> >>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
> >> >>
> >> >>Hello all!
> >> >>
> >> >>I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-
> >> > shipped pair. Whenever I try
> >> >>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message
> >> > that the database is in a
> >> >>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
> >> >>
> >> >>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
> >> > make a database backup of a
> >> >>log-shipped database?
> >> >>
> >> >>Thanks!
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>.
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>|||Thanks Tibor! It's clear I don't understand the whole RECOVERY business.
I had *hoped* that, by temporarily suspending the log file processing, I could somehow get
the DB in a state where it was backup-able. But, if I'm understanding you correctly, it
sounds as if, by virtue of performing a backup on the DB, I'd be "marking" the transaction
log in such a way as to be incompatible with the normal log files when they're later
resumed.
Could I, then, do a detach and copy the underlying .MDF/.LDF files? Or would that break
the whole log-shipping "linkage"?
Thanks again!
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:%23tykrd5jEHA.3896@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
>> STANDBY mode? ;-)
> Nope, none that I know of. Just think about it. When you bring a db out of standby mode,
> you get the recovery
> work persisted. Stuff has been rolled forward and rolled back. Period. How would you be
> able to apply a later
> log backup onto this, as the log records in that log backup are totally out-of sync with
> the database you have
> performed a permanent recovery on?
> For this to work, MS would need to do some changes in how the recovery process work or
> give us some other
> option for recovery (NO_RECOVERY, RECOVERY, STANDBY, QUASI_PERMANENT_RECOVERY).
> Or MS would need to change SQL Server so it allow us to do a backup of a database in
> STANDBY mode. (And here
> I'm too tired right now to consider what ramifications that would have on log record
> sequencing and recovery
> ;-) ).
> I know this question has been on the table before, so you might want to check the
> archives to see if someone
> came up with anything. I have a feeling that you are out of luck, though...
> Perhaps you should opt for a home-grown log shipping solution, to give you better
> control of handling of the
> backup files?
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:%23UXfE54jEHA.2412@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main database backup available from the
>> fallback machine.
>> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
>> STANDBY mode? ;-)
>> Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production databases log-shipped into our
>> corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped databases, we won't have to
>> pay
>> the network price to copy from production again.
>> Thanks for any additional help you might be able to provide! :-)
>>
>> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
>> news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> > Hi John,
>> >
>> >> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
>> >
>> > No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server aren't written to handle this
>> > scenario, quite simply. Any
>> > way you can grab the log backups already on the fallback machine?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>> >
>> >
>> > "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
>> > news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> >> Thanks DeeJay!
>> >>
>> >> What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
>> >>
>> >> * Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
>> >> transaction logs.
>> >> * Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
>> >> recommendation).
>> >> * Back up the database.
>> >> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
>> >> * Re-enable the Job.
>> >>
>> >> I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
>> >> Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
>> >> > with regular backups.
>> >> >
>> >> > As a work around, you have to restore the database and
>> >> > then back it up.
>> >> >
>> >> > Here is something you could use:
>> >> >
>> >> > USE MASTER
>> >> > RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
>> >> > WITH RECOVERY
>> >> >
>> >> > This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
>> >> > you can back it up.
>> >> >
>> >> > The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
>> >> > next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
>> >> > it setup.
>> >> >
>> >> > hth
>> >> >
>> >> > DeeJay
>> >> >>--Original Message--
>> >> >>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Hello all!
>> >> >>
>> >> >>I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-
>> >> > shipped pair. Whenever I try
>> >> >>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message
>> >> > that the database is in a
>> >> >>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
>> >> > make a database backup of a
>> >> >>log-shipped database?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Thanks!
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>.
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>|||I think that when you do recovery, log records are either removed or added (possibly both) to the
transaction log. This means that a later log backup from the production database will not just be
able to add the log records to the log-shipped database, because the transaction log has been
changed. The LSN (log sequence numbers) doesn't match anymore.
I haven't tested whether you can detach and attach a database a database in STANDBY mode. Give it a
try. If not, you might consider stopping SQL server and just grabbing the files. Not supported and
not guaranteed that you can attach such files, though.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message news:O991LI6jEHA.1348@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Thanks Tibor! It's clear I don't understand the whole RECOVERY business.
> I had *hoped* that, by temporarily suspending the log file processing, I could somehow get
> the DB in a state where it was backup-able. But, if I'm understanding you correctly, it
> sounds as if, by virtue of performing a backup on the DB, I'd be "marking" the transaction
> log in such a way as to be incompatible with the normal log files when they're later
> resumed.
> Could I, then, do a detach and copy the underlying .MDF/.LDF files? Or would that break
> the whole log-shipping "linkage"?
> Thanks again!
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23tykrd5jEHA.3896@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> >> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
> >> STANDBY mode? ;-)
> >
> > Nope, none that I know of. Just think about it. When you bring a db out of standby mode,
> > you get the recovery
> > work persisted. Stuff has been rolled forward and rolled back. Period. How would you be
> > able to apply a later
> > log backup onto this, as the log records in that log backup are totally out-of sync with
> > the database you have
> > performed a permanent recovery on?
> > For this to work, MS would need to do some changes in how the recovery process work or
> > give us some other
> > option for recovery (NO_RECOVERY, RECOVERY, STANDBY, QUASI_PERMANENT_RECOVERY).
> >
> > Or MS would need to change SQL Server so it allow us to do a backup of a database in
> > STANDBY mode. (And here
> > I'm too tired right now to consider what ramifications that would have on log record
> > sequencing and recovery
> > ;-) ).
> >
> > I know this question has been on the table before, so you might want to check the
> > archives to see if someone
> > came up with anything. I have a feeling that you are out of luck, though...
> >
> > Perhaps you should opt for a home-grown log shipping solution, to give you better
> > control of handling of the
> > backup files?
> > --
> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >
> >
> > "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:%23UXfE54jEHA.2412@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> >> Thanks Tibor. I don't think that we have the main database backup available from the
> >> fallback machine.
> >>
> >> Any way we can use an undocumented "flag" in some system table to toggle the DB back in
> >> STANDBY mode? ;-)
> >>
> >> Just to give you the heads up: we've got our production databases log-shipped into our
> >> corporate network. If we can leverage these log-shipped databases, we won't have to
> >> pay
> >> the network price to copy from production again.
> >>
> >> Thanks for any additional help you might be able to provide! :-)
> >>
> >>
> >> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:uDrJTt4jEHA.2908@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> >> > Hi John,
> >> >
> >> >> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
> >> >
> >> > No can do. The recovery procedures etc in SQL Server aren't written to handle this
> >> > scenario, quite simply. Any
> >> > way you can grab the log backups already on the fallback machine?
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> >> > http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> >> > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
> >> > news:uXJ9wm4jEHA.632@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> >> >> Thanks DeeJay!
> >> >>
> >> >> What we're thinking (if you'll humor us for a moment):
> >> >>
> >> >> * Temporarily disable the Job that's responsible for processing the log-shipped
> >> >> transaction logs.
> >> >> * Change the status of the database to get it out of STANDBY mode (as per your
> >> >> recommendation).
> >> >> * Back up the database.
> >> >> * Change the status of the database back to STANDBY (dunno how to do this yet).
> >> >> * Re-enable the Job.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm not sure if this is advisable, though. For instance, what does the Log-Shipping
> >> >> Monitor service do? Is it sensitive to any of the proposed elements above?
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks for any additional help you can provide! :-)
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "DeeJay Puar" <deejaypuar@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:3a6001c48f88$24958740$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> >> >> > Hi,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > You can not backup a database or log that is standby mode
> >> >> > with regular backups.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > As a work around, you have to restore the database and
> >> >> > then back it up.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Here is something you could use:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > USE MASTER
> >> >> > RESTORE DATABASE DB_NAME
> >> >> > WITH RECOVERY
> >> >> >
> >> >> > This changes the standby status to normal db use and then
> >> >> > you can back it up.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The only thing that I am not sure is what happens at the
> >> >> > next log shipped/restored because it depends how you have
> >> >> > it setup.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > hth
> >> >> >
> >> >> > DeeJay
> >> >> >>--Original Message--
> >> >> >>(SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Hello all!
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-
> >> >> > shipped pair. Whenever I try
> >> >> >>and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message
> >> >> > that the database is in a
> >> >> >>READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and
> >> >> > make a database backup of a
> >> >> >>log-shipped database?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Thanks!
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>.
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>|||Hello Olu!
We had hoped to be able to grab some of these Production databases for Dev and QE testing.
It'd be more convenient to grab them from our DR environment (the log-shipped environment)
because it's already on our corporate network. But, I see that it's proving to be more of
a challenge than we had hoped. ;-)
Out of curiosity, how would I configure Replication over log-shipping? Does that mean I'd
set up a log-shipped DB as the Replication Publisher? I would have thought that couldn't
be done on a read-only DB...
At this point, I'm kind of considering using DTS and the Transfer Database Task to
accomplish what I want. Some of the DBs are big, and I hate the thought of essentially
BCPing everything out, but it *does* appear to work...
"Olu Adedeji" <OluAdedeji@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C91B47A6-F4D2-4599-819F-D87924CE42D7@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> Just for my benefit, what would be the purpose of backing up a database that
> does not change? I assume that the secondary DB of the pair resides in DR and
> as a result the site will be protected (fire proof etc.) secondly the
> Database in the prod environment is being backed up and the backups are sent
> off site.
> - You might want to consider Replication over logshipping of you really must
> backup the secondary DB .
> "John Peterson" wrote:
>> (SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
>> Hello all!
>> I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-shipped pair. Whenever I try
>> and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message that the database is in a
>> READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
>> Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and make a database backup of a
>> log-shipped database?
>> Thanks!
>>|||Well, *shoot*! As it turns out, the DTS "Transfer Databases Task" will bring a DB out of
RECOVERY mode. <sigh> So that's a no go. :-(
"John Peterson" <j0hnp@.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eCi9jeCkEHA.2652@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello Olu!
> We had hoped to be able to grab some of these Production databases for Dev and QE
> testing. It'd be more convenient to grab them from our DR environment (the log-shipped
> environment) because it's already on our corporate network. But, I see that it's
> proving to be more of a challenge than we had hoped. ;-)
> Out of curiosity, how would I configure Replication over log-shipping? Does that mean
> I'd set up a log-shipped DB as the Replication Publisher? I would have thought that
> couldn't be done on a read-only DB...
> At this point, I'm kind of considering using DTS and the Transfer Database Task to
> accomplish what I want. Some of the DBs are big, and I hate the thought of essentially
> BCPing everything out, but it *does* appear to work...
>
> "Olu Adedeji" <OluAdedeji@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:C91B47A6-F4D2-4599-819F-D87924CE42D7@.microsoft.com...
>> Hi,
>> Just for my benefit, what would be the purpose of backing up a database that
>> does not change? I assume that the secondary DB of the pair resides in DR and
>> as a result the site will be protected (fire proof etc.) secondly the
>> Database in the prod environment is being backed up and the backups are sent
>> off site.
>> - You might want to consider Replication over logshipping of you really must
>> backup the secondary DB .
>> "John Peterson" wrote:
>> (SQL Server 2000, SP3a)
>> Hello all!
>> I've got a database that is the secondary server in a log-shipped pair. Whenever I
>> try
>> and do a BACKUP on this database, I get an error message that the database is in a
>> READ-ONLY STANDBY mode.
>> Is there any way to circumvent this, temporarily, and make a database backup of a
>> log-shipped database?
>> Thanks!
>>
>
Monday, February 27, 2012
Hotfix Question
Can anyone tell me if SQL server hotfixes are cumulative? Right now we apply
all necessary hotfixes since SP3a individually.
Thanks for your help
Oscar
Hi
Yes they are, unless the readme documentation indicates it.
0952 includes 0818, 0878 etc.
Regards
Mike
"Oscar" wrote:
> Can anyone tell me if SQL server hotfixes are cumulative? Right now we apply
> all necessary hotfixes since SP3a individually.
> Thanks for your help
> Oscar
>
all necessary hotfixes since SP3a individually.
Thanks for your help
Oscar
Hi
Yes they are, unless the readme documentation indicates it.
0952 includes 0818, 0878 etc.
Regards
Mike
"Oscar" wrote:
> Can anyone tell me if SQL server hotfixes are cumulative? Right now we apply
> all necessary hotfixes since SP3a individually.
> Thanks for your help
> Oscar
>
Hotfix Question
Can anyone tell me if SQL server hotfixes are cumulative? Right now we apply
all necessary hotfixes since SP3a individually.
Thanks for your help
OscarHi
Yes they are, unless the readme documentation indicates it.
0952 includes 0818, 0878 etc.
Regards
Mike
"Oscar" wrote:
> Can anyone tell me if SQL server hotfixes are cumulative? Right now we apply
> all necessary hotfixes since SP3a individually.
> Thanks for your help
> Oscar
>
all necessary hotfixes since SP3a individually.
Thanks for your help
OscarHi
Yes they are, unless the readme documentation indicates it.
0952 includes 0818, 0878 etc.
Regards
Mike
"Oscar" wrote:
> Can anyone tell me if SQL server hotfixes are cumulative? Right now we apply
> all necessary hotfixes since SP3a individually.
> Thanks for your help
> Oscar
>
Hotfix Question
Can anyone tell me if SQL server hotfixes are cumulative? Right now we appl
y
all necessary hotfixes since SP3a individually.
Thanks for your help
OscarHi
Yes they are, unless the readme documentation indicates it.
0952 includes 0818, 0878 etc.
Regards
Mike
"Oscar" wrote:
> Can anyone tell me if SQL server hotfixes are cumulative? Right now we ap
ply
> all necessary hotfixes since SP3a individually.
> Thanks for your help
> Oscar
>
y
all necessary hotfixes since SP3a individually.
Thanks for your help
OscarHi
Yes they are, unless the readme documentation indicates it.
0952 includes 0818, 0878 etc.
Regards
Mike
"Oscar" wrote:
> Can anyone tell me if SQL server hotfixes are cumulative? Right now we ap
ply
> all necessary hotfixes since SP3a individually.
> Thanks for your help
> Oscar
>
Hotfix from KB821334
What happened to the hotfix required by Reporting Services for SQL Server
2000 SP3a? It looks like you have to contact PSS to get any hotfixes
anymore. Does that mean anyone new to Reporting Services has to contact PSS
just to be able to install Reporting Services?Well, that's what we had to do.
--
Adrian M.
MCP
"Tim Paulsen" <Tim Paulsen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4B6D804D-435C-4810-A200-913E5A744322@.microsoft.com...
> What happened to the hotfix required by Reporting Services for SQL Server
> 2000 SP3a? It looks like you have to contact PSS to get any hotfixes
> anymore. Does that mean anyone new to Reporting Services has to contact
> PSS
> just to be able to install Reporting Services?|||Good question. Hotfix 859 is required if installing on Windows 2003 Server
(which means almost everybody needs it). I'll ask this in the SQL Server MVP
forum and see what is up and provide the answer on this thread.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"Tim Paulsen" <Tim Paulsen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4B6D804D-435C-4810-A200-913E5A744322@.microsoft.com...
> What happened to the hotfix required by Reporting Services for SQL Server
> 2000 SP3a? It looks like you have to contact PSS to get any hotfixes
> anymore. Does that mean anyone new to Reporting Services has to contact
PSS
> just to be able to install Reporting Services?|||My investigation (not official from MS) shows that most documentation has
been updated to refer to SP4 (which would have this hotfix rolled up in it).
So could be that SP4 will be soon and that would be what people would apply
instead of the hotfix. For now, contacting PSS seems to be the only route to
take.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"Tim Paulsen" <Tim Paulsen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4B6D804D-435C-4810-A200-913E5A744322@.microsoft.com...
> What happened to the hotfix required by Reporting Services for SQL Server
> 2000 SP3a? It looks like you have to contact PSS to get any hotfixes
> anymore. Does that mean anyone new to Reporting Services has to contact
> PSS
> just to be able to install Reporting Services?
2000 SP3a? It looks like you have to contact PSS to get any hotfixes
anymore. Does that mean anyone new to Reporting Services has to contact PSS
just to be able to install Reporting Services?Well, that's what we had to do.
--
Adrian M.
MCP
"Tim Paulsen" <Tim Paulsen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4B6D804D-435C-4810-A200-913E5A744322@.microsoft.com...
> What happened to the hotfix required by Reporting Services for SQL Server
> 2000 SP3a? It looks like you have to contact PSS to get any hotfixes
> anymore. Does that mean anyone new to Reporting Services has to contact
> PSS
> just to be able to install Reporting Services?|||Good question. Hotfix 859 is required if installing on Windows 2003 Server
(which means almost everybody needs it). I'll ask this in the SQL Server MVP
forum and see what is up and provide the answer on this thread.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"Tim Paulsen" <Tim Paulsen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4B6D804D-435C-4810-A200-913E5A744322@.microsoft.com...
> What happened to the hotfix required by Reporting Services for SQL Server
> 2000 SP3a? It looks like you have to contact PSS to get any hotfixes
> anymore. Does that mean anyone new to Reporting Services has to contact
PSS
> just to be able to install Reporting Services?|||My investigation (not official from MS) shows that most documentation has
been updated to refer to SP4 (which would have this hotfix rolled up in it).
So could be that SP4 will be soon and that would be what people would apply
instead of the hotfix. For now, contacting PSS seems to be the only route to
take.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"Tim Paulsen" <Tim Paulsen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4B6D804D-435C-4810-A200-913E5A744322@.microsoft.com...
> What happened to the hotfix required by Reporting Services for SQL Server
> 2000 SP3a? It looks like you have to contact PSS to get any hotfixes
> anymore. Does that mean anyone new to Reporting Services has to contact
> PSS
> just to be able to install Reporting Services?
Friday, February 24, 2012
Hotfix
Hi,
where can I get post sp3a hotfix ? I need a hotfix about read uncommitted
error (KB 815008)
Thanks
You need to call Microsoft Product Support Services to get that hotfix.
"Marcelo" <Marcelo@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C7132778-02D9-44D4-8F91-C6F7F7EFB53E@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> where can I get post sp3a hotfix ? I need a hotfix about read uncommitted
> error (KB 815008)
> Thanks
>
|||Like the article says, you need to contact Microsoft PSS if you want that
specific hotfix. I believe how it works is that if you can demonstrate that
you are affected by the bug and need the hotfix, they will provide it and
you will not be charged for the call.
You may want to scan through http://www.aspfaq.com/2160 ... there may be
hotfixes which can be downloaded versus making a phone call. However, you
apply these at your own risk: regression testing will be up to you.
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"Marcelo" <Marcelo@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C7132778-02D9-44D4-8F91-C6F7F7EFB53E@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> where can I get post sp3a hotfix ? I need a hotfix about read uncommitted
> error (KB 815008)
> Thanks
>
where can I get post sp3a hotfix ? I need a hotfix about read uncommitted
error (KB 815008)
Thanks
You need to call Microsoft Product Support Services to get that hotfix.
"Marcelo" <Marcelo@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C7132778-02D9-44D4-8F91-C6F7F7EFB53E@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> where can I get post sp3a hotfix ? I need a hotfix about read uncommitted
> error (KB 815008)
> Thanks
>
|||Like the article says, you need to contact Microsoft PSS if you want that
specific hotfix. I believe how it works is that if you can demonstrate that
you are affected by the bug and need the hotfix, they will provide it and
you will not be charged for the call.
You may want to scan through http://www.aspfaq.com/2160 ... there may be
hotfixes which can be downloaded versus making a phone call. However, you
apply these at your own risk: regression testing will be up to you.
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"Marcelo" <Marcelo@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C7132778-02D9-44D4-8F91-C6F7F7EFB53E@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> where can I get post sp3a hotfix ? I need a hotfix about read uncommitted
> error (KB 815008)
> Thanks
>
hot fixes
Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
should wait for sp4.
yes . . .roll up hotfix 826161 to bring minor version to 818/819
"SB138" wrote:
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.
|||Definitely.
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=821277
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"SB138" <SB138@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:257396DF-80D6-4DFF-9F9B-76D8D7D4A275@.microsoft.com...
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.
|||and u can sign up for sp4 beta if intrested :
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/290211
Andy.
"SB138" <SB138@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:257396DF-80D6-4DFF-9F9B-76D8D7D4A275@.microsoft.com...
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.
should wait for sp4.
yes . . .roll up hotfix 826161 to bring minor version to 818/819
"SB138" wrote:
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.
|||Definitely.
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=821277
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"SB138" <SB138@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:257396DF-80D6-4DFF-9F9B-76D8D7D4A275@.microsoft.com...
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.
|||and u can sign up for sp4 beta if intrested :
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/290211
Andy.
"SB138" <SB138@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:257396DF-80D6-4DFF-9F9B-76D8D7D4A275@.microsoft.com...
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.
hot fixes
Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
should wait for sp4.yes . . .roll up hotfix 826161 to bring minor version to 818/819
"SB138" wrote:
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.|||Definitely.
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=821277
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"SB138" <SB138@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:257396DF-80D6-4DFF-9F9B-76D8D7D4A275@.microsoft.com...
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.|||and u can sign up for sp4 beta if intrested :
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/290211
Andy.
"SB138" <SB138@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:257396DF-80D6-4DFF-9F9B-76D8D7D4A275@.microsoft.com...
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.
should wait for sp4.yes . . .roll up hotfix 826161 to bring minor version to 818/819
"SB138" wrote:
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.|||Definitely.
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=821277
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"SB138" <SB138@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:257396DF-80D6-4DFF-9F9B-76D8D7D4A275@.microsoft.com...
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.|||and u can sign up for sp4 beta if intrested :
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/290211
Andy.
"SB138" <SB138@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:257396DF-80D6-4DFF-9F9B-76D8D7D4A275@.microsoft.com...
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.
Sunday, February 19, 2012
hot fixes
Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
should wait for sp4.yes . . .roll up hotfix 826161 to bring minor version to 818/819
"SB138" wrote:
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.|||Definitely.
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=821277
--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"SB138" <SB138@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:257396DF-80D6-4DFF-9F9B-76D8D7D4A275@.microsoft.com...
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.|||and u can sign up for sp4 beta if intrested :
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/290211
Andy.
"SB138" <SB138@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:257396DF-80D6-4DFF-9F9B-76D8D7D4A275@.microsoft.com...
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.
should wait for sp4.yes . . .roll up hotfix 826161 to bring minor version to 818/819
"SB138" wrote:
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.|||Definitely.
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=821277
--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"SB138" <SB138@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:257396DF-80D6-4DFF-9F9B-76D8D7D4A275@.microsoft.com...
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.|||and u can sign up for sp4 beta if intrested :
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/290211
Andy.
"SB138" <SB138@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:257396DF-80D6-4DFF-9F9B-76D8D7D4A275@.microsoft.com...
> Are there any fixes that I need to apply after applying sp3 or sp3a or I
> should wait for sp4.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)