Instance name

I have two machines install SQL Server 2000.
One has the same name as my machine name, eg. alan.
Another machine has the name as 'Local'.
Why is that the case ?Alan
> Another machine has the name as 'Local'.
> Why is that the case ?
A person, who installed SQL Server specified LOCAL as name of the SQL Server
If you want to change the name ,just delete the registration from EM and
create a new one with name of the machine
"Alan T" <alanpltseNOSPAM@.yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:OUKgcJ1nGHA.3700@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I have two machines install SQL Server 2000.
> One has the same name as my machine name, eg. alan.
> Another machine has the name as 'Local'.
> Why is that the case ?
>|||How do I create a new one with name of the machine when setup ?
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:%23AYAhS1nGHA.4340@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Alan
> A person, who installed SQL Server specified LOCAL as name of the SQL
> Server
> If you want to change the name ,just delete the registration from EM and
> create a new one with name of the machine
>
> "Alan T" <alanpltseNOSPAM@.yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:OUKgcJ1nGHA.3700@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>|||Hi,
I really don't understand why I installed SQL Server 2000 on 2 machines, one
in my office, one at home, why one has the machine name, eg. "alan", at my
office. But on my home machine, the server instance is called "LOCAL"?
"Alan T" <alanpltseNOSPAM@.yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:eixndxxoGHA.1600@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> How do I create a new one with name of the machine when setup ?
> "Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
> news:%23AYAhS1nGHA.4340@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>

Instance name

I have two machines install SQL Server 2000.
One has the same name as my machine name, eg. alan.
Another machine has the name as 'Local'.
Why is that the case ?Alan
> Another machine has the name as 'Local'.
> Why is that the case ?
A person, who installed SQL Server specified LOCAL as name of the SQL Server
If you want to change the name ,just delete the registration from EM and
create a new one with name of the machine
"Alan T" <alanpltseNOSPAM@.yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:OUKgcJ1nGHA.3700@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I have two machines install SQL Server 2000.
> One has the same name as my machine name, eg. alan.
> Another machine has the name as 'Local'.
> Why is that the case ?
>|||How do I create a new one with name of the machine when setup ?
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:%23AYAhS1nGHA.4340@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Alan
>> Another machine has the name as 'Local'.
>> Why is that the case ?
> A person, who installed SQL Server specified LOCAL as name of the SQL
> Server
> If you want to change the name ,just delete the registration from EM and
> create a new one with name of the machine
>
> "Alan T" <alanpltseNOSPAM@.yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:OUKgcJ1nGHA.3700@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>I have two machines install SQL Server 2000.
>> One has the same name as my machine name, eg. alan.
>> Another machine has the name as 'Local'.
>> Why is that the case ?
>|||Hi,
I really don't understand why I installed SQL Server 2000 on 2 machines, one
in my office, one at home, why one has the machine name, eg. "alan", at my
office. But on my home machine, the server instance is called "LOCAL"?
"Alan T" <alanpltseNOSPAM@.yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:eixndxxoGHA.1600@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> How do I create a new one with name of the machine when setup ?
> "Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
> news:%23AYAhS1nGHA.4340@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Alan
>> Another machine has the name as 'Local'.
>> Why is that the case ?
>> A person, who installed SQL Server specified LOCAL as name of the SQL
>> Server
>> If you want to change the name ,just delete the registration from EM and
>> create a new one with name of the machine
>>
>> "Alan T" <alanpltseNOSPAM@.yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:OUKgcJ1nGHA.3700@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>I have two machines install SQL Server 2000.
>> One has the same name as my machine name, eg. alan.
>> Another machine has the name as 'Local'.
>> Why is that the case ?
>>
>

Installing SQL Server on a SAN - any special requirements?

Once the SAN is setup and the server can see the SAN drives as local drives,
there is nothing else that you need to do from SQL Server point of view. The
installation is the same.
--
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
SQL Server Articles and Code Samples @. http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
"dondiego" <erite@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:FC5149EF-716A-4BA4-BBC5-B89E3B59EE67@.microsoft.com...
Hello,
I'll be installing SQL Server on a SAN at a customer site for the 1st time
and would like to know if the installation is any different from a standard
SQL Server installation?
Thanks in advance
Don DiegoThanks for that!
"Narayana Vyas Kondreddi" wrote:

> Once the SAN is setup and the server can see the SAN drives as local drive
s,
> there is nothing else that you need to do from SQL Server point of view. T
he
> installation is the same.
> --
> HTH,
> Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
> SQL Server Articles and Code Samples @. http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
>
> "dondiego" <erite@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:FC5149EF-716A-4BA4-BBC5-B89E3B59EE67@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> I'll be installing SQL Server on a SAN at a customer site for the 1st time
> and would like to know if the installation is any different from a standar
d
> SQL Server installation?
> Thanks in advance
> Don Diego
>
>|||SAN attached disks are never as fast as locally attached disks. So if
you have the option put your transaction logs on local disks. If not
make sure that your transaction logs are on their own SAN disk.
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***|||Hello,
I'll be installing SQL Server on a SAN at a customer site for the 1st time
and would like to know if the installation is any different from a standard
SQL Server installation?
Thanks in advance
Don Diego|||Once the SAN is setup and the server can see the SAN drives as local drives,
there is nothing else that you need to do from SQL Server point of view. The
installation is the same.
--
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
SQL Server Articles and Code Samples @. http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
"dondiego" <erite@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:FC5149EF-716A-4BA4-BBC5-B89E3B59EE67@.microsoft.com...
Hello,
I'll be installing SQL Server on a SAN at a customer site for the 1st time
and would like to know if the installation is any different from a standard
SQL Server installation?
Thanks in advance
Don Diego|||Thanks for that!
"Narayana Vyas Kondreddi" wrote:

> Once the SAN is setup and the server can see the SAN drives as local drive
s,
> there is nothing else that you need to do from SQL Server point of view. T
he
> installation is the same.
> --
> HTH,
> Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
> SQL Server Articles and Code Samples @. http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
>
> "dondiego" <erite@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:FC5149EF-716A-4BA4-BBC5-B89E3B59EE67@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> I'll be installing SQL Server on a SAN at a customer site for the 1st time
> and would like to know if the installation is any different from a standar
d
> SQL Server installation?
> Thanks in advance
> Don Diego
>
>|||SAN attached disks are never as fast as locally attached disks. So if
you have the option put your transaction logs on local disks. If not
make sure that your transaction logs are on their own SAN disk.
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***|||> SAN attached disks are never as fast as locally attached disks.
This is too broad a statement to be generally true. It all depends on the
configuration. I supposed, for a given SAN disk, you could in theory
configure a locally attached disk (e.g. with sufficient number of spindles)
to outperform it. But the other way is also true. For some workloads, it is
almost impossible to configure a locally attached disk to outperform a SAN
disk because you may not be able to find as large amount of cache on a local
controller as you may find on a SAN.
Linchi
"Kevin Hayward" wrote:

> SAN attached disks are never as fast as locally attached disks. So if
> you have the option put your transaction logs on local disks. If not
> make sure that your transaction logs are on their own SAN disk.
>
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
>|||> SAN attached disks are never as fast as locally attached disks.
This is too broad a statement to be generally true. It all depends on the
configuration. I supposed, for a given SAN disk, you could in theory
configure a locally attached disk (e.g. with sufficient number of spindles)
to outperform it. But the other way is also true. For some workloads, it is
almost impossible to configure a locally attached disk to outperform a SAN
disk because you may not be able to find as large amount of cache on a local
controller as you may find on a SAN.
Linchi
"Kevin Hayward" wrote:

> SAN attached disks are never as fast as locally attached disks. So if
> you have the option put your transaction logs on local disks. If not
> make sure that your transaction logs are on their own SAN disk.
>
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
>|||"dondiego" <erite@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:FC5149EF-716A-4BA4-BBC5-B89E3B59EE67@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> I'll be installing SQL Server on a SAN at a customer site for the 1st time
> and would like to know if the installation is any different from a
> standard
> SQL Server installation?
> Thanks in advance
> Don Diego
SQL installation is no different. There are some things you can do to get
the most out of the SAN:
For best performance, after attaching the disks to the server, you should
create your SAN partition using diskpart.
Run this command to create it:
create partition primary align=64
Changing the partition alignment setting prevents I/O operations from being
split across multiple sectors, which causes unnecessary overhead. The
recommended setting varies from vendor to vendor, but 64 is good.
Also, you should have separate physical disks for the data and log files.
When you format the data partition, set the cluster size to 64K.

Integrated Security with local SQL & IIS

I have SQL RS running on a Win 2K (dev only) machine with IIS on the same local machine. I am trying to access the reports from another computer, but am getting an error

An error has occurred during report processing. (rsProcessingAborted) Get Online Help

Cannot create a connection to data source '<Shared Data Source Name>'. (rsErrorOpeningConnection) Get Online Help

Login failed for user '<DOMAINNAME>\Guest'.

IIS and the Datasource are setup for integrated security and the Datasource is aimed at the local SQL DB. Anonymous access is turned off in IIS and it prompts for the login info when trying to access it via the web. My understanding is that this should work without problems due to IIS & SQL being on the same machine, but I can't seem to get it to work. Is there a doc somewhere or anything that goes thru the settings so I can see what I'm missing? Or does anyone have any ideas?

Thanks.

Does it work if you access the reports locally? How about using stored windows credentials for hte data source instead of integrated security?|||

Yes, the reports work fine locally. I just can't access them from another machine. I need to use integrated security due to needing the windows login to lookup the correct info in the report and to know the type of user (admin, basic, etc).

Thanks for your help.

|||

Probably a kerberos configuration issue. Try forcing NTLM. See the workaround in http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;871179

Integrated AND Basic authentication?!

Trying to set up a site with both integrated and basic authentication
enabled (anonymous disabled of course).
When working on local network I want integrated auth. to act, and it does,
no problem.
Accessing site from outside of local network Basic auth. should kick in, and
it does, no problem. But Basic auth. does not listen to default domain. It
takes the local machinename as auth. domain.
Am I doing something wrong or is this the behaviour to expect?
Any help would be very appreciated!
Kjellsorry wrong group, posting this to the right group...
Sorry!!
Kjell
"Kjell Brandes" <kjell@.brandes.tv> wrote in message
news:%232VKlMAlEHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Trying to set up a site with both integrated and basic authentication
> enabled (anonymous disabled of course).
> When working on local network I want integrated auth. to act, and it does,
> no problem.
> Accessing site from outside of local network Basic auth. should kick in,
and
> it does, no problem. But Basic auth. does not listen to default domain. It
> takes the local machinename as auth. domain.
> Am I doing something wrong or is this the behaviour to expect?
> Any help would be very appreciated!
> Kjell
>|||Are you typing domain\username for the user name in the security dialog? If
not specified, it will default to the local machine account.
--
Brian Welcker
Group Program Manager
SQL Server Reporting Services
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Kjell Brandes" <kjell@.brandes.tv> wrote in message
news:eafkcXAlEHA.2764@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> sorry wrong group, posting this to the right group...
> Sorry!!
> Kjell
>
> "Kjell Brandes" <kjell@.brandes.tv> wrote in message
> news:%232VKlMAlEHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>> Trying to set up a site with both integrated and basic authentication
>> enabled (anonymous disabled of course).
>> When working on local network I want integrated auth. to act, and it
>> does,
>> no problem.
>> Accessing site from outside of local network Basic auth. should kick in,
> and
>> it does, no problem. But Basic auth. does not listen to default domain.
>> It
>> takes the local machinename as auth. domain.
>> Am I doing something wrong or is this the behaviour to expect?
>> Any help would be very appreciated!
>> Kjell
>>
>|||the default domain used for basic authenication is controlled by an IIS
property. Use the IIS snap in. Open Properties for the WWW server. Select
the Directory Security Tab. (on IIS 5)
you will see next to the Basic authentication check box the Phrase:
SELECT A DOMAIN and a button labeled EDIT
Click the EDIT button and type in the domain name you want to use for the
default.
the alternative, of course, as Brian pointed out, is to explicitly type the
domain in the username dialog box during basic authentication.
Hope this helps.
dlr
"Brian Welcker [MSFT]" <bwelcker@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:eUXUJSFlEHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Are you typing domain\username for the user name in the security dialog?
If
> not specified, it will default to the local machine account.
> --
> Brian Welcker
> Group Program Manager
> SQL Server Reporting Services
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
> "Kjell Brandes" <kjell@.brandes.tv> wrote in message
> news:eafkcXAlEHA.2764@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > sorry wrong group, posting this to the right group...
> >
> > Sorry!!
> >
> > Kjell
> >
> >
> > "Kjell Brandes" <kjell@.brandes.tv> wrote in message
> > news:%232VKlMAlEHA.3520@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> >> Trying to set up a site with both integrated and basic authentication
> >> enabled (anonymous disabled of course).
> >> When working on local network I want integrated auth. to act, and it
> >> does,
> >> no problem.
> >> Accessing site from outside of local network Basic auth. should kick
in,
> > and
> >> it does, no problem. But Basic auth. does not listen to default domain.
> >> It
> >> takes the local machinename as auth. domain.
> >> Am I doing something wrong or is this the behaviour to expect?
> >>
> >> Any help would be very appreciated!
> >>
> >> Kjell
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>

Installing SQL Server 2005

Hello,
I have SQL Server 2000 on my machine and just installed SQL Server 2005 but
my registered server on my local machine still reads MyServer (SQL Server
8.0.760- MyServer\drake). Can I have two registrations on my local machine
using Windows Authentication. One for the old version and one for 2005? If
not, how do I upgrade the registered server to SQL Server 2005? Also, can I
uninstall SQL Server 2000?
Thanks in advance,
sck10"Can I have two registrations on my local machine
using Windows Authentication. "
This is independent from any authentication mode. Yes you can, if yo
mean with registration instances --> YOu can create multiple instances
on the machine.
One for the old version and one for 2005?
-Sure, side by side is possible.
If not, how do I upgrade the registered server to SQL Server 2005?
-Upgrade is possible: More information within the "SQL Server 2005
Upgrade advisor" ,
52D1568C30A&displaylang=en" target="_blank">http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...&displaylang=en
Also, can I uninstall SQL Server 2000?
Sure use the Add/remove programs in your Control Panel.
HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.|||I have the same problem. Both versions are running on my machine, but Visual
Studio 2005 only sees the default "SQL Server 2000", and SQL Server express.
How do I get a project to use SQL Server 2005 ?
Thanks
John
"Jens" <Jens@.sqlserver2005.de> wrote in message
news:1139325038.293705.169180@.g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> "Can I have two registrations on my local machine
> using Windows Authentication. "
> This is independent from any authentication mode. Yes you can, if yo
> mean with registration instances --> YOu can create multiple instances
> on the machine.
> One for the old version and one for 2005?
> -Sure, side by side is possible.
> If not, how do I upgrade the registered server to SQL Server 2005?
> -Upgrade is possible: More information within the "SQL Server 2005
> Upgrade advisor" ,
> -B52D1568C30A&displaylang=en" target="_blank">http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...&displaylang=en
> Also, can I uninstall SQL Server 2000?
> Sure use the Add/remove programs in your Control Panel.
>
> HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.
>|||Hi sck10,
Welcome to use the MSDN Managed Newsgroup Support!
To resove this issue, please do the following steps:
1. In Registered Servers, right-click any node in the Registered Servers
tree, and then click Update Local Server Registration. Did you see the SQL
Server 2005 instance?
2. If you create a new registered server of your SQL Server 2005 Instance,
does any error occur?
To create a new registered server, please follow the SQL Server 2005 Books
online:
How to: Create a New Registered Server (SQL Server Management Studio)
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190733.aspx
Hope this will be helpful!
Sincerely yours,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
========================================
=============
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
========================================
=============
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.|||Hi Beppe,
Just checking in to see if the suggestions were helpful. Please let us
know if you would like further assistance.
Have a great day!
Sincerely yours,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Partner Support
========================================
==============
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
========================================
=============
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Installing SQL Server 2005

Hello,
I have SQL Server 2000 on my machine and just installed SQL Server 2005 but
my registered server on my local machine still reads MyServer (SQL Server
8.0.760- MyServer\drake). Can I have two registrations on my local machine
using Windows Authentication. One for the old version and one for 2005? If
not, how do I upgrade the registered server to SQL Server 2005? Also, can I
uninstall SQL Server 2000?
Thanks in advance,
sck10
"Can I have two registrations on my local machine
using Windows Authentication. "
This is independent from any authentication mode. Yes you can, if yo
mean with registration instances --> YOu can create multiple instances
on the machine.
One for the old version and one for 2005?
-Sure, side by side is possible.
If not, how do I upgrade the registered server to SQL Server 2005?
-Upgrade is possible: More information within the "SQL Server 2005
Upgrade advisor" ,
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en
Also, can I uninstall SQL Server 2000?
Sure use the Add/remove programs in your Control Panel.
HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.
|||I have the same problem. Both versions are running on my machine, but Visual
Studio 2005 only sees the default "SQL Server 2000", and SQL Server express.
How do I get a project to use SQL Server 2005 ?
Thanks
John
"Jens" <Jens@.sqlserver2005.de> wrote in message
news:1139325038.293705.169180@.g14g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> "Can I have two registrations on my local machine
> using Windows Authentication. "
> This is independent from any authentication mode. Yes you can, if yo
> mean with registration instances --> YOu can create multiple instances
> on the machine.
> One for the old version and one for 2005?
> -Sure, side by side is possible.
> If not, how do I upgrade the registered server to SQL Server 2005?
> -Upgrade is possible: More information within the "SQL Server 2005
> Upgrade advisor" ,
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en
> Also, can I uninstall SQL Server 2000?
> Sure use the Add/remove programs in your Control Panel.
>
> HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.
>
|||Hi sck10,
Welcome to use the MSDN Managed Newsgroup Support!
To resove this issue, please do the following steps:
1. In Registered Servers, right-click any node in the Registered Servers
tree, and then click Update Local Server Registration. Did you see the SQL
Server 2005 instance?
2. If you create a new registered server of your SQL Server 2005 Instance,
does any error occur?
To create a new registered server, please follow the SQL Server 2005 Books
online:
How to: Create a New Registered Server (SQL Server Management Studio)
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190733.aspx
Hope this will be helpful!
Sincerely yours,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
================================================== ===
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
================================================== ===
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|||Hi Beppe,
Just checking in to see if the suggestions were helpful. Please let us
know if you would like further assistance.
Have a great day!
Sincerely yours,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Partner Support
================================================== ====
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
================================================== ===
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Installing SQL Server 2005

Hello,
I have SQL Server 2000 on my machine and just installed SQL Server 2005 but
my registered server on my local machine still reads MyServer (SQL Server
8.0.760- MyServer\drake). Can I have two registrations on my local machine
using Windows Authentication. One for the old version and one for 2005? If
not, how do I upgrade the registered server to SQL Server 2005? Also, can I
uninstall SQL Server 2000?
--
Thanks in advance,
sck10"Can I have two registrations on my local machine
using Windows Authentication. "
This is independent from any authentication mode. Yes you can, if yo
mean with registration instances --> YOu can create multiple instances
on the machine.
One for the old version and one for 2005?
-Sure, side by side is possible.
If not, how do I upgrade the registered server to SQL Server 2005?
-Upgrade is possible: More information within the "SQL Server 2005
Upgrade advisor" ,
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=6107C27A-662C-4319-AFE7-B52D1568C30A&displaylang=en
Also, can I uninstall SQL Server 2000?
Sure use the Add/remove programs in your Control Panel.
HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.|||I have the same problem. Both versions are running on my machine, but Visual
Studio 2005 only sees the default "SQL Server 2000", and SQL Server express.
How do I get a project to use SQL Server 2005 ?
Thanks
John
"Jens" <Jens@.sqlserver2005.de> wrote in message
news:1139325038.293705.169180@.g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> "Can I have two registrations on my local machine
> using Windows Authentication. "
> This is independent from any authentication mode. Yes you can, if yo
> mean with registration instances --> YOu can create multiple instances
> on the machine.
> One for the old version and one for 2005?
> -Sure, side by side is possible.
> If not, how do I upgrade the registered server to SQL Server 2005?
> -Upgrade is possible: More information within the "SQL Server 2005
> Upgrade advisor" ,
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=6107C27A-662C-4319-AFE7-B52D1568C30A&displaylang=en
> Also, can I uninstall SQL Server 2000?
> Sure use the Add/remove programs in your Control Panel.
>
> HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.
>|||Hi sck10,
Welcome to use the MSDN Managed Newsgroup Support!
To resove this issue, please do the following steps:
1. In Registered Servers, right-click any node in the Registered Servers
tree, and then click Update Local Server Registration. Did you see the SQL
Server 2005 instance?
2. If you create a new registered server of your SQL Server 2005 Instance,
does any error occur?
To create a new registered server, please follow the SQL Server 2005 Books
online:
How to: Create a New Registered Server (SQL Server Management Studio)
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190733.aspx
Hope this will be helpful!
Sincerely yours,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
=====================================================When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
=====================================================This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.|||Hi Beppe,
Just checking in to see if the suggestions were helpful. Please let us
know if you would like further assistance.
Have a great day!
Sincerely yours,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Partner Support
======================================================When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
=====================================================This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Installing SQL 2000 On active/active cluster

I am trying to install SQL 2000 Ent on a Win2k3 cluster.
I have check both local and domain privlages and they are good.
I have performed MS work around so SQL sp2 and below can be installed on win2k3.
And I keep getting the following error during install...

An error occurred while creating virtual server resources for
clustering.Cluster specific registry entries couldn't be written.

Does anybody have any ideas?Check the privilages for the service account and the Account in which you logged in for Installation has folloing privilages .

Part of Local Admin
In Local Policy
1. Act as part of operating system
2. Log on as service
Make sure in the services :Remote registry service is up|||Privlages are good and remote registry service is running !|||Did you manage to resolve this issue? Did you get any USEFULL help from Microsoft support? Please post a few words of wisdom if so.

We have exactly the same problem and I've been struggling with it for a few weeks. Any help/advice is welcome.

I use SQL 2000 EE SP3 install (i.e with SP3 already included in installation) and still get the same error: "cluster-specific registry could not be written". All the simptoms are the same. I can install single-node virtual server, but if I try to install on both-nodes I've got mentioned message. The same happens if I try add second node to successfully installed single-node virtual server.|||My issue ended up being security on the cluster was to tight.
Once I loosened my security policies it started working fine.
Specifically the registry was being locked down by a Windows 2000 DC which does'nt have all the proper setting that Windows 2003 has.
I eventually upgraded the DC to 2003 to help with this matter.

INstalling SP4 for MS SQLServer 2000

I'm updating my local database installation using my netowrk login as
the id under which SQLServer is being update (Administrator on the
operating system and SA role on the database server itself).

Has anyone encountered any problems and what is the work-around?What error are you getting?

Regards
----------
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland

IM: mike@.epprecht.net

MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp

Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/

"byrocat" <bdealhoy@.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:1119981740.417309.35500@.o13g2000cwo.googlegro ups.com...
> I'm updating my local database installation using my netowrk login as
> the id under which SQLServer is being update (Administrator on the
> operating system and SA role on the database server itself).
> Has anyone encountered any problems and what is the work-around?