Is there a SP that will logout users from a database?

Hi,
I looked everywhere in System Stored Procedure docs for MSDE 2005 and I cant find a stored procedure that will force logout users from a database.
Is there such a thing? If not, is there another way?
Thanks,Depending on what you mean by "force logout" check either KILL (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa933230(SQL.80).aspx) OR ALTER DATABASE ... WITH ROLLBACK IMMEDIATE (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa275464(SQL.80).aspx).

-PatP|||Are you sa on the box?

ALTER DATABASE <dbname> SET SINGLE_USER WITH ROLLBACK IMMEDIATE|||hmm... what you see here is what i get from the sp_who command followed by the sp_lock command. I "looks" like I can figure out a way to identify process 52 and then KILL it, but its not going to be simple. thanks guys.

(processes 1-50 are system processes)
51 0 sleeping
QOR\williams
QOR
master
AWAITING COMMAND 0
52 0 runnable
QOR\williams
QOR
master
SELECT 0

(21 rows affected)
1> exec sp_lock
2> go
spid dbid ObjId IndId Type Resource Mode Status
-- -- ---- -- -- ---------- --- --
52 1 1115151018 0 TAB IS GRANT|||I discoverd that sp_who2 is way better than sp_who.

Ok, excuse the totally invalid SQL language below, but what I REALLY REALLY need is something like this:

KILL spid of processes where exec sp_lock.DBName = "aaa"

Is this possible with a osql command? Am I overlooking an easy way to do this or do I need to do it a hard way?|||I've got an "old friend" that I haven't used in a long time, but I recreated from memory. It might help you, but I'll leave the decision of whether to use it or not up to you!IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM dbo.sysobjects AS o WHERE 'p_KillCulprits' = name) DROP PROCEDURE p_KillCulprits
GO
-- ptp 20071003 Kill spids that are blocking others, but not blocked

CREATE PROCEDURE p_KillCulprits
AS

DECLARE @.cCmd VARCHAR(40)

DECLARE zCulprits CURSOR FOR
SELECT 'KILL ' + CAST(c.spid AS VARCHAR(6))
FROM master.dbo.sysprocesses AS c -- Culprit
WHERE 0 = c.blocked -- Is not blocked
AND EXISTS (SELECT * -- and blocks at least one spid
FROM master.dbo.sysprocesses AS v
WHERE v.blocked = c.spid
AND v.blocked != v.spid) -- Watch for sp2 "feature" !

OPEN zCulprits
FETCH zCulprits INTO @.cCmd

WHILE 0 = @.@.fetch_status
BEGIN
EXECUTE (@.cCmd)
FETCH zCulprits INTO @.cCmd
END

CLOSE zCulprits
DEALLOCATE zCulprits

RETURN
GO-PatP|||We had a huge problem here with blocking locks on a sh*tty system called Advisorware, the nolock hint cleared that problem right up.sql

Is there a limit to # of databases I can run on MSDE?

Hi,
We want to host several web sites that use MSDE as backend. I have two
questions:
1. Is there a limit to # of databases we can have in one instance of MSDE?
2. The # of simultaneous connections limit applies to an instance of MSDE
not a database in it. Is this correct?
Some web hosters provide MSDE as standard DB option. Do they run one MSDE on
the server and have multiple databases in it or do they run multiple
instances of MSDE?
We will run a full blown SQL Server but in phase 1, we want to start w/ MSDE
for obvious reasons -- cost.
Thanks,
Sam
SQL Server and MSDE have a limit of 32767 databases per server instance.
There is no limit on the number of connections to MSDE, but there is a
governor on the number of simultaneous batch threads. You'll run out of
physical memory resources long before you reach these limits.
Jim
"Sam" <sam@.globalwebcentral.com> wrote in message
news:%23XsTl5vAFHA.3616@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> We want to host several web sites that use MSDE as backend. I have two
> questions:
> 1. Is there a limit to # of databases we can have in one instance of MSDE?
> 2. The # of simultaneous connections limit applies to an instance of MSDE
> not a database in it. Is this correct?
> Some web hosters provide MSDE as standard DB option. Do they run one MSDE
> on the server and have multiple databases in it or do they run multiple
> instances of MSDE?
> We will run a full blown SQL Server but in phase 1, we want to start w/
> MSDE for obvious reasons -- cost.
> Thanks,
> Sam
>
|||hi Sam,
Sam wrote:
> Hi,
> We want to host several web sites that use MSDE as backend. I have two
> questions:
> 1. Is there a limit to # of databases we can have in one instance of
> MSDE?
MSDE, as long as SQL Server, has a limit 32767 of databases per
instance...

> 2. The # of simultaneous connections limit applies to an instance of
> MSDE not a database in it. Is this correct?
there's no connections limits directly related to MSDE, as it shares the
same max value as SQL Server, 32767 connections (but this value is
symbolic, as each connection requires some memory and, counting the 2gb of
RAM limitation of MSDE, you will get memory troubles long before that; but a
built-in Workloads Governor will kick in at 8 concurrent defined batches
(you can inspect them and have an idea about it at
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/?u...asp?frame=true )
...
the Workloads Governor is per instance and not per database..

> Some web hosters provide MSDE as standard DB option. Do they run one
> MSDE on the server and have multiple databases in it or do they run
> multiple instances of MSDE?
you have to ask them for that answer..
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.10.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.56.0
(my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
interface)
-- remove DMO to reply
|||Jim,
Thanks for your response. I'm a little confused so I'd appreciate further
clarification. You tell me that I'll run out of memory long before I reach
these limits.
If I have one instance of MSDE running on our web application server that
will host 27 ASP.NET applications which will require 27 databases in MSDE,
wouldn't I run into issues if I have moderate traffic on these sites.
Obviously, moderate traffic is a pretty subjective term. But everything
these applications do require a database read and/or write.
So if I understand you correctly, the limitation is not for the number of
connections but number of batch threads. From the other post, I understand
that the number is actually 8 batch threads. In simplistic terms, wouldn't
that mean, 8 simultaneous users who require database read/write? In our
case, I know that everytime the user hits the site, it triggers multiple
database lookups. So that number could even be less than 8 simultaneous
users.
I know about caching and everything else. But I'm trying to keep it at a
basic level which is number of simulatenous database read/writes.
I'd appreciate your feedback. Thanks.
Sam
"Jim Young" <thorium48@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:O964HTwAFHA.1188@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> SQL Server and MSDE have a limit of 32767 databases per server instance.
> There is no limit on the number of connections to MSDE, but there is a
> governor on the number of simultaneous batch threads. You'll run out of
> physical memory resources long before you reach these limits.
> Jim
> "Sam" <sam@.globalwebcentral.com> wrote in message
> news:%23XsTl5vAFHA.3616@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>
|||On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:50:57 -0500, Sam wrote:

>Jim,
>Thanks for your response. I'm a little confused so I'd appreciate further
>clarification. You tell me that I'll run out of memory long before I reach
>these limits.
>If I have one instance of MSDE running on our web application server that
>will host 27 ASP.NET applications which will require 27 databases in MSDE,
>wouldn't I run into issues if I have moderate traffic on these sites.
Hi Sam,
That depends. What is the running time of a typical query? What is the
typical running time of a "long" running query and how often will these
queries be carried out? Is access to the various databases spread over the
day, or do you have notable peaks?
As an example: let's say that typical database use consists of simple,
fast running queries, taking 0.2 seconds to execute on average. If each of
the 27 databases gets to execute 1500 of these queries per hour, the total
execution time needed is 1500 * 27 * 0.2 seconds = 8100 seconds. Since
there are 3600 seconds per hour, the average number of workloads (active
connections) will be 2.25. This is within the limits of MSDE - but only if
all queries are spread evenly over the day. If all your customers decide
that right after lunch is the perfect moment to catch up with a whole
day's worth of business, you'll have no workloads from 2PM to 1PM the next
day, and 27 workloads on average from 1PM to 2PM - now, you'll see the
workload governor kicking in.
Let's take it one step further. Suppose each database also has some
reporting procedure that runs 4 minutes, and is executed once per hour.
The total processing time for 27 of these reports is 27 * 4 = 108 minutes,
causing (if spread evenly over the day) an average number of 1.8
workloads. Add those to the 2.25 workloads for regular use and we're at a
total of 4 workloads constantly active - very near the workload governor
threshold. Every time a few customer happen to submit the reporting
procedure at the same time, that activity plus the regular short-running
queries will surpass the limit. The workload governor will kick in,
causing things to slow down. The procedures will start to take longer (6
minutes - 8 minutes - maybe even 12) and since they are active longer,
there's a good chance that yet more customers will sybmit the reporting
procedure before the others are finished, causing the number of workloads
to exceed the limit even more, so that the workload governor will throttle
performance even further. And you'll see the whole thing coming spiralling
down.
In short: try to get good estimates about running times of queries, the
number of times queries are executed and make sure that you know when to
expect peaks and how high these peaks get. Base your calculation on the
workload during peaks. If you're not sure that MSDE can handle the load,
better get the full product. I know it's not cheap - but in the long run,
losing business as a result of workload governor induced delays will cost
you more.

>Obviously, moderate traffic is a pretty subjective term. But everything
>these applications do require a database read and/or write.
>So if I understand you correctly, the limitation is not for the number of
>connections but number of batch threads. From the other post, I understand
>that the number is actually 8 batch threads.
The correct term is "workloads". The maximum number of workloads allowed
before the workload governor interferes is 8, but you'll often see the
number 5 as well. That's because MSDE requires a total of three workloads
for it's housekeeping - these are always active, completely beyond your
control. This reduces the total of 8 workloads to 5 that are actuially
available for you to use.

> In simplistic terms, wouldn't
>that mean, 8 simultaneous users who require database read/write?
No. It's not that simple (as you can see above). The typical user of a
database spends much of his/her time reading information from the screen
or typing information onto the screen. The connection to the database
usually remains active, but the connection is in a sleeping mode - this is
not a workload. It becomes a workload from the moment the user clicks
"Save", "Search" or "Show" - until the moment the found rows are listed,
the changes have been committed or the details are displayed.

> In our
>case, I know that everytime the user hits the site, it triggers multiple
>database lookups. So that number could even be less than 8 simultaneous
>users.
Does your ASP.NET application use asynchronous execution to submit several
queries at the same time? If so, then you are right, that one user's
action can cause more than one simlutaneous workload. On the other hand,
if execution is synchronous, than 1 user will not cause more than 1
workload.

>I know about caching and everything else. But I'm trying to keep it at a
>basic level which is number of simulatenous database read/writes.
Caching is irrelevant here. The only effect of caching is to speed up
queries. And since MSDE automatically manages it's cache, you don't need
to worry about this.
Best, Hugo
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)
|||Hugo,
Thank you very much for your explanation. I really appreciate people like
yourself who are thorough in everything they do. That's a wonderful quality.
Again, thank you very much for your help.
Sam
"Hugo Kornelis" <hugo@.pe_NO_rFact.in_SPAM_fo> wrote in message
news:nchdv09g2gfu5hiqd9ev8miraqpeacc11f@.4ax.com...
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:50:57 -0500, Sam wrote:
>
> Hi Sam,
> That depends. What is the running time of a typical query? What is the
> typical running time of a "long" running query and how often will these
> queries be carried out? Is access to the various databases spread over the
> day, or do you have notable peaks?
> As an example: let's say that typical database use consists of simple,
> fast running queries, taking 0.2 seconds to execute on average. If each of
> the 27 databases gets to execute 1500 of these queries per hour, the total
> execution time needed is 1500 * 27 * 0.2 seconds = 8100 seconds. Since
> there are 3600 seconds per hour, the average number of workloads (active
> connections) will be 2.25. This is within the limits of MSDE - but only if
> all queries are spread evenly over the day. If all your customers decide
> that right after lunch is the perfect moment to catch up with a whole
> day's worth of business, you'll have no workloads from 2PM to 1PM the next
> day, and 27 workloads on average from 1PM to 2PM - now, you'll see the
> workload governor kicking in.
> Let's take it one step further. Suppose each database also has some
> reporting procedure that runs 4 minutes, and is executed once per hour.
> The total processing time for 27 of these reports is 27 * 4 = 108 minutes,
> causing (if spread evenly over the day) an average number of 1.8
> workloads. Add those to the 2.25 workloads for regular use and we're at a
> total of 4 workloads constantly active - very near the workload governor
> threshold. Every time a few customer happen to submit the reporting
> procedure at the same time, that activity plus the regular short-running
> queries will surpass the limit. The workload governor will kick in,
> causing things to slow down. The procedures will start to take longer (6
> minutes - 8 minutes - maybe even 12) and since they are active longer,
> there's a good chance that yet more customers will sybmit the reporting
> procedure before the others are finished, causing the number of workloads
> to exceed the limit even more, so that the workload governor will throttle
> performance even further. And you'll see the whole thing coming spiralling
> down.
> In short: try to get good estimates about running times of queries, the
> number of times queries are executed and make sure that you know when to
> expect peaks and how high these peaks get. Base your calculation on the
> workload during peaks. If you're not sure that MSDE can handle the load,
> better get the full product. I know it's not cheap - but in the long run,
> losing business as a result of workload governor induced delays will cost
> you more.
>
> The correct term is "workloads". The maximum number of workloads allowed
> before the workload governor interferes is 8, but you'll often see the
> number 5 as well. That's because MSDE requires a total of three workloads
> for it's housekeeping - these are always active, completely beyond your
> control. This reduces the total of 8 workloads to 5 that are actuially
> available for you to use.
>
> No. It's not that simple (as you can see above). The typical user of a
> database spends much of his/her time reading information from the screen
> or typing information onto the screen. The connection to the database
> usually remains active, but the connection is in a sleeping mode - this is
> not a workload. It becomes a workload from the moment the user clicks
> "Save", "Search" or "Show" - until the moment the found rows are listed,
> the changes have been committed or the details are displayed.
>
> Does your ASP.NET application use asynchronous execution to submit several
> queries at the same time? If so, then you are right, that one user's
> action can cause more than one simlutaneous workload. On the other hand,
> if execution is synchronous, than 1 user will not cause more than 1
> workload.
>
> Caching is irrelevant here. The only effect of caching is to speed up
> queries. And since MSDE automatically manages it's cache, you don't need
> to worry about this.
> Best, Hugo
> --
> (Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)

Is there a free Graphical User Interface for MSDE?

I asked a similar question moments ago. I wanted to clarify because I didn't use the correct terms..
I have a purchased product that contains a MSDE database. I was hopin
to access the database with a MSDE front-end, however I don't have
separate licensed copy of SQL Server. Is there a way I can obtain a fre
copy of the user interface for a MSDE DB?
Thank you
AFGTry this:
http://www.whitebearconsulting.com/Utilities.htm
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"AFG" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:198C89E8-A24F-4935-A347-6D2AA5C2786E@.microsoft.com...
> I asked a similar question moments ago. I wanted to clarify because I
didn't use the correct terms...
> I have a purchased product that contains a MSDE database. I was hoping
> to access the database with a MSDE front-end, however I don't have a
> separate licensed copy of SQL Server. Is there a way I can obtain a free
> copy of the user interface for a MSDE DB?
> Thank you,
> AFG|||No, you can't get SQL Server client tools for free. Several alternatives,
however: http://www.aspfaq.com/2442
--
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/
"AFG" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:198C89E8-A24F-4935-A347-6D2AA5C2786E@.microsoft.com...
>I asked a similar question moments ago. I wanted to clarify because I
>didn't use the correct terms...
> I have a purchased product that contains a MSDE database. I was hoping
> to access the database with a MSDE front-end, however I don't have a
> separate licensed copy of SQL Server. Is there a way I can obtain a free
> copy of the user interface for a MSDE DB?
> Thank you,
> AFG

Is there a free Graphical User Interface for MSDE?

I asked a similar question moments ago. I wanted to clarify because I didn't use the correct terms...
I have a purchased product that contains a MSDE database. I was hoping
to access the database with a MSDE front-end, however I don't have a
separate licensed copy of SQL Server. Is there a way I can obtain a free
copy of the user interface for a MSDE DB?
Thank you,
AFG
Try this:
http://www.whitebearconsulting.com/Utilities.htm
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"AFG" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:198C89E8-A24F-4935-A347-6D2AA5C2786E@.microsoft.com...
> I asked a similar question moments ago. I wanted to clarify because I
didn't use the correct terms...
> I have a purchased product that contains a MSDE database. I was hoping
> to access the database with a MSDE front-end, however I don't have a
> separate licensed copy of SQL Server. Is there a way I can obtain a free
> copy of the user interface for a MSDE DB?
> Thank you,
> AFG
|||No, you can't get SQL Server client tools for free. Several alternatives,
however: http://www.aspfaq.com/2442
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/
"AFG" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:198C89E8-A24F-4935-A347-6D2AA5C2786E@.microsoft.com...
>I asked a similar question moments ago. I wanted to clarify because I
>didn't use the correct terms...
> I have a purchased product that contains a MSDE database. I was hoping
> to access the database with a MSDE front-end, however I don't have a
> separate licensed copy of SQL Server. Is there a way I can obtain a free
> copy of the user interface for a MSDE DB?
> Thank you,
> AFG

Is there a free Graphical User Interface for MSDE?

I asked a similar question moments ago. I wanted to clarify because I didn't
use the correct terms...
I have a purchased product that contains a MSDE database. I was hoping
to access the database with a MSDE front-end, however I don't have a
separate licensed copy of SQL Server. Is there a way I can obtain a free
copy of the user interface for a MSDE DB?
Thank you,
AFGTry this:
http://www.whitebearconsulting.com/Utilities.htm
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"AFG" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:198C89E8-A24F-4935-A347-6D2AA5C2786E@.microsoft.com...
> I asked a similar question moments ago. I wanted to clarify because I
didn't use the correct terms...
> I have a purchased product that contains a MSDE database. I was hoping
> to access the database with a MSDE front-end, however I don't have a
> separate licensed copy of SQL Server. Is there a way I can obtain a free
> copy of the user interface for a MSDE DB?
> Thank you,
> AFG|||No, you can't get SQL Server client tools for free. Several alternatives,
however: http://www.aspfaq.com/2442
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/
"AFG" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:198C89E8-A24F-4935-A347-6D2AA5C2786E@.microsoft.com...
>I asked a similar question moments ago. I wanted to clarify because I
>didn't use the correct terms...
> I have a purchased product that contains a MSDE database. I was hoping
> to access the database with a MSDE front-end, however I don't have a
> separate licensed copy of SQL Server. Is there a way I can obtain a free
> copy of the user interface for a MSDE DB?
> Thank you,
> AFG

Is the SP3a the most recent MSDE distribution

I ask this question because the sp3a version I have contains a merge module -
atl.msm - which is dated (modified date) 5/14/03 and is 76KB in size whereas
the "atl.msm" that is issued with VB6 SP6 contains the same merge module but
is dated Mar 14, 2004 and is 87KB in size.
Is this simply because VB6 has issued a more recent atl? If so, when will
the MSDE be brought up to date? Or better yet, since I am distributing the
atl.msm with my setup package, can I safely replace the one in the MSDE with
the more recent version?
Regards,
Jamie
hi,
thejamie wrote:
> I ask this question because the sp3a version I have contains a merge
> module - atl.msm - which is dated (modified date) 5/14/03 and is 76KB
> in size whereas the "atl.msm" that is issued with VB6 SP6 contains
> the same merge module but is dated Mar 14, 2004 and is 87KB in size.
> Is this simply because VB6 has issued a more recent atl? If so, when
> will the MSDE be brought up to date? Or better yet, since I am
> distributing the atl.msm with my setup package, can I safely replace
> the one in the MSDE with the more recent version?
MSDERelA is based on the service pack 3a of SQL Server, which is the most
recent complete distribution...
we have to wait until sp4 is available for newer versions..
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.11.1 - DbaMgr ver 0.57.0
(my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
interface)
-- remove DMO to reply
|||Is there any word that an sp4 is imminent? Is it waiting for the SQL Server
2005 to come out of beta?
"Andrea Montanari" <andrea.sqlDMO@.virgilio.it> wrote in message
news:3c4hfeF6johu1U1@.individual.net...
> hi,
> thejamie wrote:
> MSDERelA is based on the service pack 3a of SQL Server, which is the most
> recent complete distribution...
> we have to wait until sp4 is available for newer versions..
> --
> Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
> http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
> DbaMgr2k ver 0.11.1 - DbaMgr ver 0.57.0
> (my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
> interface)
> -- remove DMO to reply
>
|||Dont think so , SP4 is announced for this or next month.
HTH, Jens Smeyer
http://www.sqlserver2005.de
"jamie" <anonymous@.nospam.somewhere.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:enT%23QkTQFHA.2132@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Is there any word that an sp4 is imminent? Is it waiting for the SQL
> Server 2005 to come out of beta?
> "Andrea Montanari" <andrea.sqlDMO@.virgilio.it> wrote in message
> news:3c4hfeF6johu1U1@.individual.net...
>
|||Look like it is out as of 5/6/05
"jamie" <anonymous@.nospam.somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:enT%23QkTQFHA.2132@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Is there any word that an sp4 is imminent? Is it waiting for the SQL
> Server 2005 to come out of beta?
> "Andrea Montanari" <andrea.sqlDMO@.virgilio.it> wrote in message
> news:3c4hfeF6johu1U1@.individual.net...
>
|||SP4 just shipped. See http://www.microsoft.com/sql/downloads/2000/sp4.asp
for details on MSDE.
joe.
"jamie" <anonymous@.nospam.somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:%23YovRe$UFHA.1148@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Look like it is out as of 5/6/05
> "jamie" <anonymous@.nospam.somewhere.com> wrote in message
> news:enT%23QkTQFHA.2132@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
sql

Is the connection string for SQL Server and MSDE the same?

The connection string I'm currently using for SQL Server is Provider=SQLOLEDB;Server=SERVER\VSDOTNET;Database= CCDDbase;Integrated Security=SSPI

would this be the same query string for MSDE database? I'm quite new in MSDE but I know that except for the tools that comes with SQL Server and its size, they are practically the same...You'll obviously have to change the variable parts of your connection string like the server and database names, but other than that you are "good to go" using the same connection string.

-PatP|||Here's a nice little URL for your favorites:

http://www.connectionstrings.com/

Is storing images in sql really that bad now?

Hello,
I have seen a lot of articles and comments trying to disuade people
from storing photos images in sql2k and msde. My question is why?
Microsoft's sharepoint technology stores all .doc, .xls, .pdf, .jpg, etc.
into sql2k or msde depending on what backend you are using. Here is the
issue we are running into and would appreciate suggestions. We have an
application that is running on a windows 2000 tablet pc. Currently the app
(coded in vb.net) takes data from the access database (that resides on the
tablet pc) and moves it to our Sql Server in the office via the internet as
some staff are in different states. The application also transfers .jpg and
..tif files between the server and the client(currently stored as files). We
are having issues with scalability due to the amount of growth we have been
experiencing. Two years ago there was about 15 users running this
application, now there are over 60, with growth expected to continue. My
question is can MSDE help solve this problem. I was thinking that if I use
MSDE on the client and tweak the application to store the .jpg and .tif
files into the MSDE then I could have SQL manage the replication. I know
there is a limitation of 2 gigs on MSDE and we would make a temp db that the
clients would replicate to and move the data up to the live database thus
hopefully eliminating that issue. So basically with the amount of data we
are transferring can MSDE accomplish this with Sql Server at the office,
thus eliminating our vb.net application? The average size for a .tif or .jpg
is between 200k and 3mb. Thanks in advance
There are always pro's and con's to this issue and it is never a generic yes
or no answer. It is certainly feasible to store the images in the database
and it sounds like off the top you are already set up to do this. Storing
them in the db does solve some issues such as having to give the user access
to the files themselves etc. MSDE sounds like a good alternative to what
you are doing now and with Yukon and SQL Express the limit goes to 4GB.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Jake" <rondican@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23JUmcV$mEHA.952@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I have seen a lot of articles and comments trying to disuade people
> from storing photos images in sql2k and msde. My question is why?
> Microsoft's sharepoint technology stores all .doc, .xls, .pdf, .jpg, etc.
> into sql2k or msde depending on what backend you are using. Here is the
> issue we are running into and would appreciate suggestions. We have an
> application that is running on a windows 2000 tablet pc. Currently the app
> (coded in vb.net) takes data from the access database (that resides on the
> tablet pc) and moves it to our Sql Server in the office via the internet
as
> some staff are in different states. The application also transfers .jpg
and
> .tif files between the server and the client(currently stored as files).
We
> are having issues with scalability due to the amount of growth we have
been
> experiencing. Two years ago there was about 15 users running this
> application, now there are over 60, with growth expected to continue. My
> question is can MSDE help solve this problem. I was thinking that if I use
> MSDE on the client and tweak the application to store the .jpg and .tif
> files into the MSDE then I could have SQL manage the replication. I know
> there is a limitation of 2 gigs on MSDE and we would make a temp db that
the
> clients would replicate to and move the data up to the live database thus
> hopefully eliminating that issue. So basically with the amount of data we
> are transferring can MSDE accomplish this with Sql Server at the office,
> thus eliminating our vb.net application? The average size for a .tif or
..jpg
> is between 200k and 3mb. Thanks in advance
>
|||The only issues I can see are MSDE works great with a couple of
connections but is deliberately set to degrade with more than 5-8 users.
Replication may be an issue, transactional replication between SQL
Server and MSDE is not a problem but I'm not sure the other way. Merge
replication does no work with MSDE.
Adrian
Jake wrote:

> Hello,
> I have seen a lot of articles and comments trying to disuade people
> from storing photos images in sql2k and msde. My question is why?
> Microsoft's sharepoint technology stores all .doc, .xls, .pdf, .jpg, etc.
> into sql2k or msde depending on what backend you are using. Here is the
> issue we are running into and would appreciate suggestions. We have an
> application that is running on a windows 2000 tablet pc. Currently the app
> (coded in vb.net) takes data from the access database (that resides on the
> tablet pc) and moves it to our Sql Server in the office via the internet as
> some staff are in different states. The application also transfers .jpg and
> .tif files between the server and the client(currently stored as files). We
> are having issues with scalability due to the amount of growth we have been
> experiencing. Two years ago there was about 15 users running this
> application, now there are over 60, with growth expected to continue. My
> question is can MSDE help solve this problem. I was thinking that if I use
> MSDE on the client and tweak the application to store the .jpg and .tif
> files into the MSDE then I could have SQL manage the replication. I know
> there is a limitation of 2 gigs on MSDE and we would make a temp db that the
> clients would replicate to and move the data up to the live database thus
> hopefully eliminating that issue. So basically with the amount of data we
> are transferring can MSDE accomplish this with Sql Server at the office,
> thus eliminating our vb.net application? The average size for a .tif or .jpg
> is between 200k and 3mb. Thanks in advance
>
|||Adrian,
Will the new msde 2005 be able to handle merge replication? I tested
Merge (granted it was justa couple of rows of data) between MSDE and sql2k
and it worked. I don't want to spend a lot of time testing this if someone
knows for sure that merge replication will not work.
Jake
"Adrian Edwards" <a.n.other@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cieqt7$edm$1@.sparta.btinternet.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> The only issues I can see are MSDE works great with a couple of
> connections but is deliberately set to degrade with more than 5-8 users.
> Replication may be an issue, transactional replication between SQL
> Server and MSDE is not a problem but I'm not sure the other way. Merge
> replication does no work with MSDE.
> Adrian
> Jake wrote:
people[vbcol=seagreen]
etc.[vbcol=seagreen]
app[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
as[vbcol=seagreen]
and[vbcol=seagreen]
We[vbcol=seagreen]
been[vbcol=seagreen]
use[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
thus[vbcol=seagreen]
we[vbcol=seagreen]
..jpg[vbcol=seagreen]
|||I could be wrong but I don't think so. Merge Replication is available in
Enterprise SQL but other versions, e.g. its a licensing not technical
issue, MSDE is free!
Adrian
Jake wrote:

> Adrian,
> Will the new msde 2005 be able to handle merge replication? I tested
> Merge (granted it was justa couple of rows of data) between MSDE and sql2k
> and it worked. I don't want to spend a lot of time testing this if someone
> knows for sure that merge replication will not work.
> Jake
> "Adrian Edwards" <a.n.other@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:cieqt7$edm$1@.sparta.btinternet.com...
>
> people
>
> etc.
>
> app
>
> the
>
> as
>
> and
>
> We
>
> been
>
> use
>
> the
>
> thus
>
> we
>
> .jpg
>
>

Is storing images in sql really that bad now?

Hello,
I have seen a lot of articles and comments trying to disuade people
from storing photos images in sql2k and msde. My question is why?
Microsoft's sharepoint technology stores all .doc, .xls, .pdf, .jpg, etc.
into sql2k or msde depending on what backend you are using. Here is the
issue we are running into and would appreciate suggestions. We have an
application that is running on a windows 2000 tablet pc. Currently the app
(coded in vb.net) takes data from the access database (that resides on the
tablet pc) and moves it to our Sql Server in the office via the internet as
some staff are in different states. The application also transfers .jpg and
.tif files between the server and the client(currently stored as files). We
are having issues with scalability due to the amount of growth we have been
experiencing. Two years ago there was about 15 users running this
application, now there are over 60, with growth expected to continue. My
question is can MSDE help solve this problem. I was thinking that if I use
MSDE on the client and tweak the application to store the .jpg and .tif
files into the MSDE then I could have SQL manage the replication. I know
there is a limitation of 2 gigs on MSDE and we would make a temp db that the
clients would replicate to and move the data up to the live database thus
hopefully eliminating that issue. So basically with the amount of data we
are transferring can MSDE accomplish this with Sql Server at the office,
thus eliminating our vb.net application? The average size for a .tif or .jpg
is between 200k and 3mb. Thanks in advanceThere are always pro's and con's to this issue and it is never a generic yes
or no answer. It is certainly feasible to store the images in the database
and it sounds like off the top you are already set up to do this. Storing
them in the db does solve some issues such as having to give the user access
to the files themselves etc. MSDE sounds like a good alternative to what
you are doing now and with Yukon and SQL Express the limit goes to 4GB.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Jake" <rondican@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23JUmcV$mEHA.952@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I have seen a lot of articles and comments trying to disuade people
> from storing photos images in sql2k and msde. My question is why?
> Microsoft's sharepoint technology stores all .doc, .xls, .pdf, .jpg, etc.
> into sql2k or msde depending on what backend you are using. Here is the
> issue we are running into and would appreciate suggestions. We have an
> application that is running on a windows 2000 tablet pc. Currently the app
> (coded in vb.net) takes data from the access database (that resides on the
> tablet pc) and moves it to our Sql Server in the office via the internet
as
> some staff are in different states. The application also transfers .jpg
and
> .tif files between the server and the client(currently stored as files).
We
> are having issues with scalability due to the amount of growth we have
been
> experiencing. Two years ago there was about 15 users running this
> application, now there are over 60, with growth expected to continue. My
> question is can MSDE help solve this problem. I was thinking that if I use
> MSDE on the client and tweak the application to store the .jpg and .tif
> files into the MSDE then I could have SQL manage the replication. I know
> there is a limitation of 2 gigs on MSDE and we would make a temp db that
the
> clients would replicate to and move the data up to the live database thus
> hopefully eliminating that issue. So basically with the amount of data we
> are transferring can MSDE accomplish this with Sql Server at the office,
> thus eliminating our vb.net application? The average size for a .tif or
.jpg
> is between 200k and 3mb. Thanks in advance
>|||The only issues I can see are MSDE works great with a couple of
connections but is deliberately set to degrade with more than 5-8 users.
Replication may be an issue, transactional replication between SQL
Server and MSDE is not a problem but I'm not sure the other way. Merge
replication does no work with MSDE.
Adrian
Jake wrote:
> Hello,
> I have seen a lot of articles and comments trying to disuade people
> from storing photos images in sql2k and msde. My question is why?
> Microsoft's sharepoint technology stores all .doc, .xls, .pdf, .jpg, etc.
> into sql2k or msde depending on what backend you are using. Here is the
> issue we are running into and would appreciate suggestions. We have an
> application that is running on a windows 2000 tablet pc. Currently the app
> (coded in vb.net) takes data from the access database (that resides on the
> tablet pc) and moves it to our Sql Server in the office via the internet as
> some staff are in different states. The application also transfers .jpg and
> .tif files between the server and the client(currently stored as files). We
> are having issues with scalability due to the amount of growth we have been
> experiencing. Two years ago there was about 15 users running this
> application, now there are over 60, with growth expected to continue. My
> question is can MSDE help solve this problem. I was thinking that if I use
> MSDE on the client and tweak the application to store the .jpg and .tif
> files into the MSDE then I could have SQL manage the replication. I know
> there is a limitation of 2 gigs on MSDE and we would make a temp db that the
> clients would replicate to and move the data up to the live database thus
> hopefully eliminating that issue. So basically with the amount of data we
> are transferring can MSDE accomplish this with Sql Server at the office,
> thus eliminating our vb.net application? The average size for a .tif or .jpg
> is between 200k and 3mb. Thanks in advance
>|||Adrian,
Will the new msde 2005 be able to handle merge replication? I tested
Merge (granted it was justa couple of rows of data) between MSDE and sql2k
and it worked. I don't want to spend a lot of time testing this if someone
knows for sure that merge replication will not work.
Jake
"Adrian Edwards" <a.n.other@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cieqt7$edm$1@.sparta.btinternet.com...
> The only issues I can see are MSDE works great with a couple of
> connections but is deliberately set to degrade with more than 5-8 users.
> Replication may be an issue, transactional replication between SQL
> Server and MSDE is not a problem but I'm not sure the other way. Merge
> replication does no work with MSDE.
> Adrian
> Jake wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have seen a lot of articles and comments trying to disuade
people
> > from storing photos images in sql2k and msde. My question is why?
> > Microsoft's sharepoint technology stores all .doc, .xls, .pdf, .jpg,
etc.
> > into sql2k or msde depending on what backend you are using. Here is the
> > issue we are running into and would appreciate suggestions. We have an
> > application that is running on a windows 2000 tablet pc. Currently the
app
> > (coded in vb.net) takes data from the access database (that resides on
the
> > tablet pc) and moves it to our Sql Server in the office via the internet
as
> > some staff are in different states. The application also transfers .jpg
and
> > .tif files between the server and the client(currently stored as files).
We
> > are having issues with scalability due to the amount of growth we have
been
> > experiencing. Two years ago there was about 15 users running this
> > application, now there are over 60, with growth expected to continue. My
> > question is can MSDE help solve this problem. I was thinking that if I
use
> > MSDE on the client and tweak the application to store the .jpg and .tif
> > files into the MSDE then I could have SQL manage the replication. I know
> > there is a limitation of 2 gigs on MSDE and we would make a temp db that
the
> > clients would replicate to and move the data up to the live database
thus
> > hopefully eliminating that issue. So basically with the amount of data
we
> > are transferring can MSDE accomplish this with Sql Server at the office,
> > thus eliminating our vb.net application? The average size for a .tif or
.jpg
> > is between 200k and 3mb. Thanks in advance
> >
> >|||I could be wrong but I don't think so. Merge Replication is available in
Enterprise SQL but other versions, e.g. its a licensing not technical
issue, MSDE is free!
Adrian
Jake wrote:
> Adrian,
> Will the new msde 2005 be able to handle merge replication? I tested
> Merge (granted it was justa couple of rows of data) between MSDE and sql2k
> and it worked. I don't want to spend a lot of time testing this if someone
> knows for sure that merge replication will not work.
> Jake
> "Adrian Edwards" <a.n.other@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:cieqt7$edm$1@.sparta.btinternet.com...
>>The only issues I can see are MSDE works great with a couple of
>>connections but is deliberately set to degrade with more than 5-8 users.
>>Replication may be an issue, transactional replication between SQL
>>Server and MSDE is not a problem but I'm not sure the other way. Merge
>>replication does no work with MSDE.
>>Adrian
>>Jake wrote:
>>
>>Hello,
>> I have seen a lot of articles and comments trying to disuade
> people
>>from storing photos images in sql2k and msde. My question is why?
>>Microsoft's sharepoint technology stores all .doc, .xls, .pdf, .jpg,
> etc.
>>into sql2k or msde depending on what backend you are using. Here is the
>>issue we are running into and would appreciate suggestions. We have an
>>application that is running on a windows 2000 tablet pc. Currently the
> app
>>(coded in vb.net) takes data from the access database (that resides on
> the
>>tablet pc) and moves it to our Sql Server in the office via the internet
> as
>>some staff are in different states. The application also transfers .jpg
> and
>>.tif files between the server and the client(currently stored as files).
> We
>>are having issues with scalability due to the amount of growth we have
> been
>>experiencing. Two years ago there was about 15 users running this
>>application, now there are over 60, with growth expected to continue. My
>>question is can MSDE help solve this problem. I was thinking that if I
> use
>>MSDE on the client and tweak the application to store the .jpg and .tif
>>files into the MSDE then I could have SQL manage the replication. I know
>>there is a limitation of 2 gigs on MSDE and we would make a temp db that
> the
>>clients would replicate to and move the data up to the live database
> thus
>>hopefully eliminating that issue. So basically with the amount of data
> we
>>are transferring can MSDE accomplish this with Sql Server at the office,
>>thus eliminating our vb.net application? The average size for a .tif or
> .jpg
>>is between 200k and 3mb. Thanks in advance
>>
>
>

Is Stored Procedure and 'in' broken in MSDE 2000/SQL 2000 SP4?

This is not the command that im running but demonstrates the problem just
fine, basically 'in' using statored procedures seems to be performing as 'in'
or 'is' where as sending a query direct (identical) only performs 'in' as
expected
Example
Use msdb
Select * From Sysalerts Where database_name in (Select
convert(sysname(128),null))
returns nothing
but put the select command in a stored proceedure and it will return all the
rows with database_name that is null
Am i not seeing/setting something?
Simon
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 08:36:05 -0700, "Tuner Fich" <Tuner
Fich@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>This is not the command that im running but demonstrates the problem just
>fine, basically 'in' using statored procedures seems to be performing as 'in'
>or 'is' where as sending a query direct (identical) only performs 'in' as
>expected
>Example
>Use msdb
>Select * From Sysalerts Where database_name in (Select
>convert(sysname(128),null))
>returns nothing
>but put the select command in a stored proceedure and it will return all the
>rows with database_name that is null
>Am i not seeing/setting something?
>Simon
Hi Simon,
I guess that you normally have the setting SET ANSI_NULLS ON (which is
fine, as it makes SQL Server treat NULLS as defined in the ANSI
standard, making your code more portable). However, when creating stored
procedure, someow the setting gets changed to SET ANSI_NULLS OFF (which
is definitely NOT fine, as it makes SQL Server treat NULLS in a
non-standard way that might appear logical at first glance but is not,
and that will make other database programmers fail to understand your
code).
With the ANSI standard ebhaviour for NULLS, logical expressions use
three-valued logic (True, False and Unknown) and all comparisons to NULL
will always return Unknown. The only valid way to copmpare a column or
variable to NULL is to use "WHERE column IS [NOT] NULL".
Also, stop using [NOT] IN with a subselect, as they are a source of
confusion with ANSI standard settings, and they can always be
transformed into a [NOT] EXISTS subquery that usually performs better as
well.
Best, Hugo
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)

Is SQL Server/MSDE a memory hog?

I installed MSDE, and now when my pc starts up, I get a little icon in the toolbar for the sql server administration. Note I did not purchase sql server, I just dowloaded and installed msde.

The problem is that I do not do database programming every day, and so I probably do not need sql server running every time my pc runs. And I have noticed that since I installed MSDE/sql server that their appears to be a lot of disk thrashing going on, and my system seems a lot slower than it use to be.

Has anyone had a similar problem? What do I need to do to shut it down if not in use? Is stopping the sqlsever.exe in task manager the proper way to shut it down?

I have 256 meg of Ram.

Thanks in advance, Amy DanoughWhat operating system are you using? For XP/2000/2003/NT, you can go into Control Panel/Administrative Tools/Services and chane the startup mode for the MSDE service (possibly still called SQL Server) to manual, and then it will start only when you manually start it.

Failing that, you can right click on the icon and then stop the MSDE when you do not need it (and right click to start it up again if need be).|||XP Professional,

Thanks for the help.
Amy|||Go to administrative tools->services and set the service's startup mode to manual. that way it won't start up with the OS. the downside is you'll have to start it manually when you need it. it'll probably be under "mssqlserver". you can start it the same way or at the command line with

net start mssqlserver

personally I've never found it to be an excessive memory hog (well, full SQL Server at least). I've run it on systems as low-grade as P233+/64Mb before now

j

Is SQL Server 2005 Express the new version of MSDE?

Hi,
Is SQL Server 2005 Express the new version of MSDE once it's final? I assume
it will have similar restrictions -- 10 connections, etc.
Thanks,
Sam
Yes, SQL Server 2005 is the successor to MSDE. It will still be free, it
will still be distributable, and licensing (so I hear) will be /much/
simpler.
No, there will not be a 10 connection restriction, and there never was in
MSDE, either. There was a workload governor that kicked in when you go over
8 simultaneous (5 user/3 system) *workloads*, which are not the same as
connections. Please read
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en...r_sa2_0ciq.asp
There is no such governor/throttle technology in SQL Server 2005 Express.
As for other differences between MSDE 2000 and SQL Server 2005 Express:
SQL Server 2005 Express will add a currently not available graphical
management tool, called Express Manager (its features will be a subset of
those found in Management Studio). Maximum database size has been increased
from 2 GB to 4 GB (and still does not count log space toward the limit).
SQL Server 2005 Express is now limited to 1 GB RAM and 1 CPU (MSDE allowed 2
GB RAM and 2 CPUs). SQL Server Agent and DTS runtime are no longer
included, and there is limited replication support. Currently, SQL Server
2005 Express is only supported on 2000, XP, and 2003. I don't believe the
consumer 9x line (95, 98, Me) will be supported.
If I missed anything, I'm sure someone will swoop in and clean up. You can
also see:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en...seoverview.asp
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)

> Is SQL Server 2005 Express the new version of MSDE once it's final? I
assume
> it will have similar restrictions -- 10 connections, etc.
|||Sam,
Bascially the answer is yes, but the restrictions are different. SQL Express
uses limitation of database size and number of processors used but does not
use the workload governor.
Ginny Caughey
..Net Compact Framework MVP
"Sam" <sam@.globalwebcentral.com> wrote in message
news:euGLloeiEHA.1040@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> Is SQL Server 2005 Express the new version of MSDE once it's final? I
assume
> it will have similar restrictions -- 10 connections, etc.
> Thanks,
> Sam
>

Is Replication Too Much

We are developing a system for a manufacturing operation. The planned
approach is to develop stand alone data capture applications using MSDE for
the database. The production data from these systems needs to be posted to a
central SQL database. All systems will be in the same building. We plan to
roll out this system to a number of facilities. The number of data capture
systems could range from 5 to 25. Data Transfer requirements include: 1)
Master data from the central system will need to be sent to the data capture
machines (updated 4 times a day). 2) Production order informtation will be
sent to 1 or more data capture machines (updated as orders are scheduled to
production lines). 3) Production data from the data capture machines will
need to be sent in a timely manner because 4) Summary Production data (totals
by production order and material) is needed by the data capture machines to
prevent overruns.
The current application we have uses a separate VB application to update the
stand alone and central database. Users are given a message when the central
database cannot be accesssed, however, the stand alone machines must continue
working.
Would replication be a good design for this scenario? or is it overkill? I
have heard the replication is a resource hog, we will have only the central
server to work with.
Other information:
Production data on the stand alones need only be kept for a few days, after
that it can be purged.
Production records (single table) can be created every 6 seconds, updates to
central database can be queued.
Master data consist of 6 tables that are used for look up purposes by the
application running on the stand alone systems.
There are 2 production tables (Header and detail). Application displays
summary production (for detail record) by current system and across all
systems.
Thanks in advance for you help
Who told you replication is a resource hog? Running on property sized
hardware and with a well designed topology (minimal use of filters, etc),
the performance impact should range around 10% or less. If you are running
this on Pentium III hardware naturally performance will not be optimal.
Running it on Pentium IV 2 GHz or more (or some of the modern AMD
processors) with ample RAM (2 Gigs or more) you should be fine.
I think you should use merge replication for this. You can't use
transactional as MSDE can't be a transactional publisher.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Ken Ptaszynski" <Ken Ptaszynski@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:FA9B3270-7928-4C1C-9446-3FB489B2015A@.microsoft.com...
> We are developing a system for a manufacturing operation. The planned
> approach is to develop stand alone data capture applications using MSDE
for
> the database. The production data from these systems needs to be posted to
a
> central SQL database. All systems will be in the same building. We plan
to
> roll out this system to a number of facilities. The number of data
capture
> systems could range from 5 to 25. Data Transfer requirements include: 1)
> Master data from the central system will need to be sent to the data
capture
> machines (updated 4 times a day). 2) Production order informtation will
be
> sent to 1 or more data capture machines (updated as orders are scheduled
to
> production lines). 3) Production data from the data capture machines
will
> need to be sent in a timely manner because 4) Summary Production data
(totals
> by production order and material) is needed by the data capture machines
to
> prevent overruns.
> The current application we have uses a separate VB application to update
the
> stand alone and central database. Users are given a message when the
central
> database cannot be accesssed, however, the stand alone machines must
continue
> working.
> Would replication be a good design for this scenario? or is it overkill?
I
> have heard the replication is a resource hog, we will have only the
central
> server to work with.
> Other information:
> Production data on the stand alones need only be kept for a few days,
after
> that it can be purged.
> Production records (single table) can be created every 6 seconds, updates
to
> central database can be queued.
> Master data consist of 6 tables that are used for look up purposes by the
> application running on the stand alone systems.
> There are 2 production tables (Header and detail). Application displays
> summary production (for detail record) by current system and across all
> systems.
> Thanks in advance for you help

Is osql standalone?

Hello all,
I want to know if I can start the osql utility from a computer without SQL
Server, MSDE, etc. Is this file standalone?
Thanks,
SorinYou must have installed sql connectivity, and Osql, but the server stuff is
not required.
--
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Sorin R" <Sorin R@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0C835563-3A84-4F9B-ABA6-B69131FD1C89@.microsoft.com...
> Hello all,
> I want to know if I can start the osql utility from a computer without SQL
> Server, MSDE, etc. Is this file standalone?
> Thanks,
> Sorin|||ok...thanks a lot
Sorin
"Wayne Snyder" wrote:
> You must have installed sql connectivity, and Osql, but the server stuff is
> not required.
> --
> Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
> Mariner, Charlotte, NC
> www.mariner-usa.com
> (Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
> I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
> community of SQL Server professionals.
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Sorin R" <Sorin R@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:0C835563-3A84-4F9B-ABA6-B69131FD1C89@.microsoft.com...
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I want to know if I can start the osql utility from a computer without SQL
> > Server, MSDE, etc. Is this file standalone?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Sorin
>
>

Is osql standalone?

Hello all,
I want to know if I can start the osql utility from a computer without SQL
Server, MSDE, etc. Is this file standalone?
Thanks,
Sorin
You must have installed sql connectivity, and Osql, but the server stuff is
not required.
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Sorin R" <Sorin R@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0C835563-3A84-4F9B-ABA6-B69131FD1C89@.microsoft.com...
> Hello all,
> I want to know if I can start the osql utility from a computer without SQL
> Server, MSDE, etc. Is this file standalone?
> Thanks,
> Sorin
|||ok...thanks a lot
Sorin
"Wayne Snyder" wrote:

> You must have installed sql connectivity, and Osql, but the server stuff is
> not required.
> --
> Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
> Mariner, Charlotte, NC
> www.mariner-usa.com
> (Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
> I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
> community of SQL Server professionals.
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Sorin R" <Sorin R@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:0C835563-3A84-4F9B-ABA6-B69131FD1C89@.microsoft.com...
>
>

Is osql standalone?

Hello all,
I want to know if I can start the osql utility from a computer without SQL
Server, MSDE, etc. Is this file standalone?
Thanks,
SorinYou must have installed sql connectivity, and Osql, but the server stuff is
not required.
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Sorin R" <Sorin R@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0C835563-3A84-4F9B-ABA6-B69131FD1C89@.microsoft.com...
> Hello all,
> I want to know if I can start the osql utility from a computer without SQL
> Server, MSDE, etc. Is this file standalone?
> Thanks,
> Sorin|||ok...thanks a lot
Sorin
"Wayne Snyder" wrote:

> You must have installed sql connectivity, and Osql, but the server stuff i
s
> not required.
> --
> Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
> Mariner, Charlotte, NC
> www.mariner-usa.com
> (Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
> I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
> community of SQL Server professionals.
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Sorin R" <Sorin R@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:0C835563-3A84-4F9B-ABA6-B69131FD1C89@.microsoft.com...
>
>

Is MSDE what I need?

We are developing a fairly simple database to be deployed on the
internet. It consists of an artist's works (approx 2600 of them) based
on references to books from which his ideas came. Relative fields will
be fairly few, data related to the books, a pic of his initial sketch,
and a pic of the final painting. Searches will be provided and probably
a feedback form. The plan is for this database to be used by students
when studying myths of the world (and other interested parties, of course).
i am in the beginning stages using Access 2002 and Jet. We just
purchased and installed Visual Studio .net (academic version), but i
haven't actually used it yet. The install mentions MSDE. However, even
after reading about MSDE on MS's site, i still can't determine my course.
For our web application, what should i use? MSDE or Jet? ADO or is DAO
(i am familiar with DAO but not ADO)?
i need a plan, a course of action to follow for this, as it is new
ground for me. i'm not asking for details, just general direction. i'm
basically self-taught and there is no one here who knows any more about
this.
Any guidance is appreciated.
--e
If you're creating an internet application using ASP.NET, the home
page would be a good place to start doing research --
http://www.asp.net/Default.aspx. Jet isn't generally recommended for
Internet applications, although it is being used for small
applications with few concurrent users.You'll be using ADO.NET for
data access, not DAO or ADO. You'll need to do some research to
determine the best fit for your budget and needs. You can get more
information on using MSDE for a web application at
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/?u...2000webapp.asp
and http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/default.asp.
--mary
On Wed, 05 May 2004 11:04:24 -0700, elizabeth baker
<baker_eliz@.yahoo.com> wrote:

>We are developing a fairly simple database to be deployed on the
>internet. It consists of an artist's works (approx 2600 of them) based
>on references to books from which his ideas came. Relative fields will
>be fairly few, data related to the books, a pic of his initial sketch,
>and a pic of the final painting. Searches will be provided and probably
>a feedback form. The plan is for this database to be used by students
>when studying myths of the world (and other interested parties, of course).
>i am in the beginning stages using Access 2002 and Jet. We just
>purchased and installed Visual Studio .net (academic version), but i
>haven't actually used it yet. The install mentions MSDE. However, even
>after reading about MSDE on MS's site, i still can't determine my course.
>For our web application, what should i use? MSDE or Jet? ADO or is DAO
>(i am familiar with DAO but not ADO)?
>i need a plan, a course of action to follow for this, as it is new
>ground for me. i'm not asking for details, just general direction. i'm
>basically self-taught and there is no one here who knows any more about
>this.
>Any guidance is appreciated.
>--e

Is MSDE supported by Microsoft SQL Server 2000 driver for JDBC?

I have J2EE web application, that uses Datasources, which works fine with SQL
Server 2000 Developer Edition running on Windows 2000 Server but I am having
issues with running the same code against MSDE version of SQL Server 2000
running locally on Windows XP Professional.
Is MSDE version of SQL server supported by Microsoft SQL Server 2000 driver
forJDBC?
The release notes says:
The following versions of SQL Server will be supported for use with the SQL
Server 2000 Driver for JDBC SP2:
? SQL Server 2000 Standard and Enterprise Editions*
? SQL Server 2000 Standard and Enterprise Editions with Service Pack 1 or
higher*
? SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (64-bit)*
MSDE should act the same as any other flavor of SQL 2000 with the exception
of a few well documented limitations. Likely, you have not enabled Network
protocals?
Also, the docs you reference below sound very old. SQL needs to be at SP3 or
3A. Any current download of MSDE will be at the 3A SP level.
-Andrew
"Kris" <Kris@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:AC61CEC6-2D96-418E-810B-E59F8B87356B@.microsoft.com...
> I have J2EE web application, that uses Datasources, which works fine with
SQL
> Server 2000 Developer Edition running on Windows 2000 Server but I am
having
> issues with running the same code against MSDE version of SQL Server 2000
> running locally on Windows XP Professional.
> Is MSDE version of SQL server supported by Microsoft SQL Server 2000
driver
> forJDBC?
> The release notes says:
> The following versions of SQL Server will be supported for use with the
SQL
> Server 2000 Driver for JDBC SP2:
> . SQL Server 2000 Standard and Enterprise Editions*
> . SQL Server 2000 Standard and Enterprise Editions with Service Pack 1 or
> higher*
> . SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (64-bit)*

Is MSDE supported by Microsoft SQL Server 2000 driver for JDBC

I have J2EE web application, that uses Datasources, which works fine with SQL
Server 2000 Developer Edition running on Windows 2000 Server but I am having
issues with the same code running locally on Windows XP Professional against
MSDE version of SQL Server 2000.
Is MSDE version of SQL server supported by Microsoft SQL Server 2000 driver
forJDBC?
The release notes says:
The following versions of SQL Server will be supported for use with the SQL
Server 2000 Driver for JDBC SP2:
? SQL Server 2000 Standard and Enterprise Editions*
? SQL Server 2000 Standard and Enterprise Editions with Service Pack 1 or
higher*
? SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (64-bit)*
Do you have specifics on the issues? For instance, could it be your Windows
Firewall? If it is on, it must be configured to allow traffic (locally) on
ports 1433 (TCP) and 1434 (UDP). I don't know any specifics about the JDBC
drivers, other than make sure that you have the same SQL Server SP
(preferably SP3/SP3a) and check your MDAC version against the other
machine's.
"Kris" <Kris@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A3942A4E-398A-48FA-B363-A4D392E2ECBB@.microsoft.com...
>I have J2EE web application, that uses Datasources, which works fine with
>SQL
> Server 2000 Developer Edition running on Windows 2000 Server but I am
> having
> issues with the same code running locally on Windows XP Professional
> against
> MSDE version of SQL Server 2000.
> Is MSDE version of SQL server supported by Microsoft SQL Server 2000
> driver
> forJDBC?
> The release notes says:
> The following versions of SQL Server will be supported for use with the
> SQL
> Server 2000 Driver for JDBC SP2:
> . SQL Server 2000 Standard and Enterprise Editions*
> . SQL Server 2000 Standard and Enterprise Editions with Service Pack 1 or
> higher*
> . SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (64-bit)*

Is MSDE supported by Microsoft SQL Server 2000 driver for JDBC

I have J2EE web application, that uses Datasources, which works fine with SQ
L
Server 2000 Developer Edition running on Windows 2000 Server but I am having
issues with the same code running locally on Windows XP Professional against
MSDE version of SQL Server 2000.
Is MSDE version of SQL server supported by Microsoft SQL Server 2000 driver
forJDBC?
The release notes says:
The following versions of SQL Server will be supported for use with the SQL
Server 2000 Driver for JDBC SP2:
? SQL Server 2000 Standard and Enterprise Editions*
? SQL Server 2000 Standard and Enterprise Editions with Service Pack 1 or
higher*
? SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (64-bit)*Do you have specifics on the issues? For instance, could it be your Windows
Firewall? If it is on, it must be configured to allow traffic (locally) on
ports 1433 (TCP) and 1434 (UDP). I don't know any specifics about the JDBC
drivers, other than make sure that you have the same SQL Server SP
(preferably SP3/SP3a) and check your MDAC version against the other
machine's.
"Kris" <Kris@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A3942A4E-398A-48FA-B363-A4D392E2ECBB@.microsoft.com...
>I have J2EE web application, that uses Datasources, which works fine with
>SQL
> Server 2000 Developer Edition running on Windows 2000 Server but I am
> having
> issues with the same code running locally on Windows XP Professional
> against
> MSDE version of SQL Server 2000.
> Is MSDE version of SQL server supported by Microsoft SQL Server 2000
> driver
> forJDBC?
> The release notes says:
> The following versions of SQL Server will be supported for use with the
> SQL
> Server 2000 Driver for JDBC SP2:
> . SQL Server 2000 Standard and Enterprise Editions*
> . SQL Server 2000 Standard and Enterprise Editions with Service Pack 1 or
> higher*
> . SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (64-bit)*