Installtion

I was trying to install SQLSERVER 2000 on WINOWS 2000 Advanced server,i am
getting an error "A previous program installation created pending file
operations on the installation machine.you must restart the computer before
running setup".I did restart the computer again i am getting same error.
I am wondering how to resolve this issue.Pls help me ..
Advance Thanks,
Sriram.
See if this helps:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...95&Product=sql
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
"Ram" <Ram@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3DF5F779-AAB6-484B-9F22-AA44CBD23F70@.microsoft.com...
> I was trying to install SQLSERVER 2000 on WINOWS 2000 Advanced server,i am
> getting an error "A previous program installation created pending file
> operations on the installation machine.you must restart the computer
before
> running setup".I did restart the computer again i am getting same error.
> I am wondering how to resolve this issue.Pls help me ..
> Advance Thanks,
> Sriram.

Installting sqlserver 2005 on the client machine for windows application

Hi
I developed a windows application in Visual studio 2005 and the database is sqlexpress.
I wanted my application to run on another system.For that i have installed sqlexpress 2005 on that machine.But that machine doesn't show me any enterprise manager or query manager for sqlserver.
Is there any solution for this.

Thanks

hi,

yes... you have to separately download and install SQL Server Management Studio Express... http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=C243A5AE-4BD1-4E3D-94B8-5A0F62BF7796&displaylang=en

regards

|||SQL Server Express does not come with EM or Query Analyzer. These two components have been merged into the SQL Server Managment Studio. The SQL Server Management Studio Express (which actually is a stripped of SQL Server Managment Studio (aka SSMS)) can be downloaded separately from Microsoft or is already included in the Express Advanced Edition (which actually includes some other cool features like Reporting Services for SQL Server Express).

http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/sql/download/

HTH, Jens K. Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.desql

Installting SQL Server 2k5

I have SQL Server 2000 on Windows XP professional OS.
I want to install SQLServer 2K5?
Do I need to to uninstall SQLServer2K before installing SQLServer 2k5 ?
What steps should be taken before and after SQL Server 2K5 installation?
Thanks,Hi,
You should be able to install SQL Server 2005 and SQL Server 2000 side
by side.
I think you may need SP2 of XP Pro.
One important thing to watch out for is any old components left behind
by past builds of SQL Server 2005 or Visual Studio 2005. If they are
present you need to uninstall CAREFULLY and in the right order or you
can expect to hit problems.
Andrew Watt
MVP - InfoPath
On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:01:02 -0700, "UA" <usha.anumolu@.eds.com> wrote:

>I have SQL Server 2000 on Windows XP professional OS.
>I want to install SQLServer 2K5?
>Do I need to to uninstall SQLServer2K before installing SQLServer 2k5 ?
>What steps should be taken before and after SQL Server 2K5 installation?
>
>Thanks,

Installting SQL Server 2k5

I have SQL Server 2000 on Windows XP professional OS.
I want to install SQLServer 2K5?
Do I need to to uninstall SQLServer2K before installing SQLServer 2k5 ?
What steps should be taken before and after SQL Server 2K5 installation?
Thanks,
Hi,
You should be able to install SQL Server 2005 and SQL Server 2000 side
by side.
I think you may need SP2 of XP Pro.
One important thing to watch out for is any old components left behind
by past builds of SQL Server 2005 or Visual Studio 2005. If they are
present you need to uninstall CAREFULLY and in the right order or you
can expect to hit problems.
Andrew Watt
MVP - InfoPath
On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:01:02 -0700, "UA" <usha.anumolu@.eds.com> wrote:

>I have SQL Server 2000 on Windows XP professional OS.
>I want to install SQLServer 2K5?
>Do I need to to uninstall SQLServer2K before installing SQLServer 2k5 ?
>What steps should be taken before and after SQL Server 2K5 installation?
>
>Thanks,

Installting SQL Server 2k5

I have SQL Server 2000 on Windows XP professional OS.
I want to install SQLServer 2K5?
Do I need to to uninstall SQLServer2K before installing SQLServer 2k5 ?
What steps should be taken before and after SQL Server 2K5 installation?
Thanks,Hi,
You should be able to install SQL Server 2005 and SQL Server 2000 side
by side.
I think you may need SP2 of XP Pro.
One important thing to watch out for is any old components left behind
by past builds of SQL Server 2005 or Visual Studio 2005. If they are
present you need to uninstall CAREFULLY and in the right order or you
can expect to hit problems.
Andrew Watt
MVP - InfoPath
On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 12:01:02 -0700, "UA" <usha.anumolu@.eds.com> wrote:
>I have SQL Server 2000 on Windows XP professional OS.
>I want to install SQLServer 2K5?
>Do I need to to uninstall SQLServer2K before installing SQLServer 2k5 ?
>What steps should be taken before and after SQL Server 2K5 installation?
>
>Thanks,

Installing SQLServer in a raw volume

Hi All
I would like to know whether SQLServer can be installed in a raw volume or not..... Is there best practice guide for this. .
Regards,
VijayI think its not possible, until SQL 6.5 version they are supported and not from Version 7 onwards.|||Hi Satya
thanks for your reply.
what about having database files in a raw volume? is it supported ?
regards
Vijay Ram

Installing SQLSERVER Express

After installing Visual Studio 2005 everything has installed fine EXCEPT SQLSERVER 2005. I remember having had the same problem some moths ago, but can't remember now how to fix it. I deinstalled VS2005 and installed back again, but the result was the same. SQLSERVER failed to install

thanks

Can you post the error message you are getting? Can you also search your install directory for the text string "value 3" and paste the 10-15 lines above it?

Thanks,
Sam Lester (MSFT)

|||thanks. Where the install directory is supposed to be?|||%WINDIR%\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\90\Setup Bootstrap\LOG\sql

Installing SQLServer EE for full text searching

Hi there,
Does anyone know how I go about upgrading from SQL2000 standard edition to
SQL2000 enterprise edition (I need to install full-text searching). Is it as
easy as slamming in the enterprise edition CD and upgrading, or are there any
known issues?
Thanks
Cammie.
It is as easy as that. You should install SQL 2000 standard before adding
SQL 2000 Enterprise.
Hilary
"Cammie" <Cammie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7ED562E7-97C4-447C-ADB6-23782072E195@.microsoft.com...
> Hi there,
> Does anyone know how I go about upgrading from SQL2000 standard edition to
> SQL2000 enterprise edition (I need to install full-text searching). Is it
> as
> easy as slamming in the enterprise edition CD and upgrading, or are there
> any
> known issues?
> Thanks
> Cammie.
|||Cammie,
You can upgrade from Standard Edition to Enterprise Edition (see SQL 2000
BOL titles "Upgrading an Existing Installation of SQL Server" and "Editions
of SQL Server 2000" for details), but you don't need to install the
Enterprise Edition just to get Full-Text Search (FTS) as FTS is installed by
default with the Standard Edition.
If you have a need for both Editions, you can install Standard as the
default installation and Enterprise Edition as a named instance and both
will have FTS capabilities as long as you install both on Win2K/Win2003 OS
Advance or Enterprise server editions.
Regards,
John
"Cammie" <Cammie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7ED562E7-97C4-447C-ADB6-23782072E195@.microsoft.com...
> Hi there,
> Does anyone know how I go about upgrading from SQL2000 standard edition to
> SQL2000 enterprise edition (I need to install full-text searching). Is it
as
> easy as slamming in the enterprise edition CD and upgrading, or are there
any
> known issues?
> Thanks
> Cammie.

Installing SQL Server 2005, then upgrading to Windows 2003 from 20

We have plans to upgrade all our current SQL Server 2000 SP4 servers to SQL
Server 2005. Most of those servers are running on Windows 2000 with plans
to also upgrade to Windows 2003. Are there any risks to upgrading the SQL
Server, then upgrading the OS to 2003 at a later time? Or is it recommended
to upgrade the OS, then SQL Server for better results? In other words,
should these upgrades be tied together or does really not make a difference?
I haven't tried this sequence, but here is what I have learned fro upgrades
in the past. I prefer to upgrade in release sequence. Therefore, upgrade
to Windows 2003 then upgrade SQL 2000 to SQL 2005. Personally, I don't like
upgrading in place. I try to rebuild servers from scratch when I get a
chance. I use home-grown log shipping scripts to handle the cutover and can
generally keep the downtime to just a few minutes. Of course, this requires
a bit of spare hardware and some decent prep time but I really like having a
clean build. You also have the existing server as a fail-back for however
long you choose.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"SandiDBA" <SandiDBA@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D594190B-9FA1-4E80-BE41-E7C1680768F2@.microsoft.com...
> We have plans to upgrade all our current SQL Server 2000 SP4 servers to
> SQL
> Server 2005. Most of those servers are running on Windows 2000 with
> plans
> to also upgrade to Windows 2003. Are there any risks to upgrading the
> SQL
> Server, then upgrading the OS to 2003 at a later time? Or is it
> recommended
> to upgrade the OS, then SQL Server for better results? In other words,
> should these upgrades be tied together or does really not make a
> difference?
|||Hi
I would concur with Geoff, as Windows 2003 is an environmental change is
should have less impact and less likely to require any application changes
(although configuration changes may be necessary!) and therefore I would do
it first. An upgrade to SQL 2005 is more likely to require code changes and
so require more time for preparation and testing.
John
"SandiDBA" <SandiDBA@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D594190B-9FA1-4E80-BE41-E7C1680768F2@.microsoft.com...
> We have plans to upgrade all our current SQL Server 2000 SP4 servers to
> SQL
> Server 2005. Most of those servers are running on Windows 2000 with
> plans
> to also upgrade to Windows 2003. Are there any risks to upgrading the
> SQL
> Server, then upgrading the OS to 2003 at a later time? Or is it
> recommended
> to upgrade the OS, then SQL Server for better results? In other words,
> should these upgrades be tied together or does really not make a
> difference?

Installing SQL Server 2005, then upgrading to Windows 2003 from 20

We have plans to upgrade all our current SQL Server 2000 SP4 servers to SQL
Server 2005. Most of those servers are running on Windows 2000 with plan
s
to also upgrade to Windows 2003. Are there any risks to upgrading the SQ
L
Server, then upgrading the OS to 2003 at a later time? Or is it recommende
d
to upgrade the OS, then SQL Server for better results? In other words,
should these upgrades be tied together or does really not make a difference?I haven't tried this sequence, but here is what I have learned fro upgrades
in the past. I prefer to upgrade in release sequence. Therefore, upgrade
to Windows 2003 then upgrade SQL 2000 to SQL 2005. Personally, I don't like
upgrading in place. I try to rebuild servers from scratch when I get a
chance. I use home-grown log shipping scripts to handle the cutover and can
generally keep the downtime to just a few minutes. Of course, this requires
a bit of spare hardware and some decent prep time but I really like having a
clean build. You also have the existing server as a fail-back for however
long you choose.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"SandiDBA" <SandiDBA@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D594190B-9FA1-4E80-BE41-E7C1680768F2@.microsoft.com...
> We have plans to upgrade all our current SQL Server 2000 SP4 servers to
> SQL
> Server 2005. Most of those servers are running on Windows 2000 with
> plans
> to also upgrade to Windows 2003. Are there any risks to upgrading the
> SQL
> Server, then upgrading the OS to 2003 at a later time? Or is it
> recommended
> to upgrade the OS, then SQL Server for better results? In other words,
> should these upgrades be tied together or does really not make a
> difference?|||Hi
I would concur with Geoff, as Windows 2003 is an environmental change is
should have less impact and less likely to require any application changes
(although configuration changes may be necessary!) and therefore I would do
it first. An upgrade to SQL 2005 is more likely to require code changes and
so require more time for preparation and testing.
John
"SandiDBA" <SandiDBA@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D594190B-9FA1-4E80-BE41-E7C1680768F2@.microsoft.com...
> We have plans to upgrade all our current SQL Server 2000 SP4 servers to
> SQL
> Server 2005. Most of those servers are running on Windows 2000 with
> plans
> to also upgrade to Windows 2003. Are there any risks to upgrading the
> SQL
> Server, then upgrading the OS to 2003 at a later time? Or is it
> recommended
> to upgrade the OS, then SQL Server for better results? In other words,
> should these upgrades be tied together or does really not make a
> difference?

Integrated Security across machines

I have two machines called MA and MB. MA is hosting IIS and MB is hosting SQL
Server. I'd like to use integrated security to access SQL Server in my
application hosted in IIS. How should I configure the SQL Server so that it
can recognize the Network Service account in another machine?
Thanks.
Daniel
Hello Daniel,
I understand that you'd like to web application could access SQL Server by
using Network service account. If I'm off-base, please let me know.
Usually it is suggested that you use a domain account under the situation
in the application pool of IIS, and configure "impersonate" to false in
web.config of ASP.net application.
The other opiton is configure "impersonate" to true, and grant each client
domain user proper permission on remote SQL Server. Please note under this
situation, IIS has to be use Kerberos authentication and it shall be
enabled to "delegate" the user credential to remote SQL server.
891031Common security issues when you access remote resources from ASP.NET
applications
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;891031
Building Secure ASP.NET Applications: Authentication, Authorization, and
Secure Communication
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa302387.aspx
How to configure an ASP.NET application for a delegation scenario
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;810572
It is not recommended to use Network Service account under the situation.
Since Network service account actually use machine account to access remote
server, you may try to add the "domain\server$" to SQL Server login and
grant it some permission. However, this may not work as expected and may
bring security hole.
If you have any comments or feedback, please feel free to let me know.
Thank you.
Best Regards,
Peter Yang
MCSE2000/2003, MCSA, MCDBA
Microsoft Online Community Support
==================================================
Get notification to my posts through email? Please refer to
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/managednewsgroups/default.aspx#notif
ications
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/managednewsgroups/default.aspx>.
Note: The MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues
where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support
Engineer within 1 business day is acceptable. Please note that each follow
up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support
professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the
most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations
that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions or complex
project analysis and dump analysis issues. Issues of this nature are best
handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer by contacting
Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/support/default.aspx>.
==================================================
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|||Using a domain account is a nice way I think. But we have one problem that is
the company IT policy states that each AD account must bind to an actual
human user. So up to now, we can't create AD accounts for our system. And AD
account for user has a policy of changing password every 45 days. I think
there must be a good reason for the company to establish this policy, may be
for the sake of SOX. Do you know the reason for such policy? How do other
people work around such problems?
Thanks.
Daniel
|||Many companies will also have policies for service accounts
with service accounts being in a different OU from user
accounts. They should have some requirements for service
accounts and what accounts services will use.
-Sue
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 01:13:13 -0800, Daniel
<daniel.shen@.newsgroup.nospam> wrote:

>Using a domain account is a nice way I think. But we have one problem that is
>the company IT policy states that each AD account must bind to an actual
>human user. So up to now, we can't create AD accounts for our system. And AD
>account for user has a policy of changing password every 45 days. I think
>there must be a good reason for the company to establish this policy, may be
>for the sake of SOX. Do you know the reason for such policy? How do other
>people work around such problems?
>Thanks.
>Daniel
|||Hello Daniel,
I agree that this policy is for security purpose. However, as Sue
mentioned, it makes sense to have different policy to have service
accounts. Or you have to change the password of service account accordingly
and restart services when necessary. This could be done by a script or
manually.
Please let's know if you have further questions or concerns, please feel
free to let's know. Thank you.
Best Regards,
Peter Yang
MCSE2000/2003, MCSA, MCDBA
Microsoft Online Partner Support
================================================== ===
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
================================================== ====
|||Hello Daniel,
Just want to check in if you have further questions on the issue. Please
feel free to post back if you need any help.
Thanks & Regards,
Peter Yang
MCSE2000/2003, MCSA, MCDBA
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.

Integrated Security across machines

I have two machines called MA and MB. MA is hosting IIS and MB is hosting SQ
L
Server. I'd like to use integrated security to access SQL Server in my
application hosted in IIS. How should I configure the SQL Server so that it
can recognize the Network Service account in another machine?
Thanks.
DanielHello Daniel,
I understand that you'd like to web application could access SQL Server by
using Network service account. If I'm off-base, please let me know.
Usually it is suggested that you use a domain account under the situation
in the application pool of IIS, and configure "impersonate" to false in
web.config of ASP.net application.
The other opiton is configure "impersonate" to true, and grant each client
domain user proper permission on remote SQL Server. Please note under this
situation, IIS has to be use Kerberos authentication and it shall be
enabled to "delegate" the user credential to remote SQL server.
891031 Common security issues when you access remote resources from ASP.NET
applications
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;EN-US;891031
Building Secure ASP.NET Applications: Authentication, Authorization, and
Secure Communication
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa302387.aspx
How to configure an ASP.NET application for a delegation scenario
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;EN-US;810572
It is not recommended to use Network Service account under the situation.
Since Network service account actually use machine account to access remote
server, you may try to add the "domain\server$" to SQL Server login and
grant it some permission. However, this may not work as expected and may
bring security hole.
If you have any comments or feedback, please feel free to let me know.
Thank you.
Best Regards,
Peter Yang
MCSE2000/2003, MCSA, MCDBA
Microsoft Online Community Support
========================================
==========
Get notification to my posts through email? Please refer to
http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscript...ault.aspx#notif
ications
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscript...ps/default.aspx>.
Note: The MSDN Managed Newsgroup support offering is for non-urgent issues
where an initial response from the community or a Microsoft Support
Engineer within 1 business day is acceptable. Please note that each follow
up response may take approximately 2 business days as the support
professional working with you may need further investigation to reach the
most efficient resolution. The offering is not appropriate for situations
that require urgent, real-time or phone-based interactions or complex
project analysis and dump analysis issues. Issues of this nature are best
handled working with a dedicated Microsoft Support Engineer by contacting
Microsoft Customer Support Services (CSS) at
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/subscript...rt/default.aspx>.
========================================
==========
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.|||Using a domain account is a nice way I think. But we have one problem that i
s
the company IT policy states that each AD account must bind to an actual
human user. So up to now, we can't create AD accounts for our system. And AD
account for user has a policy of changing password every 45 days. I think
there must be a good reason for the company to establish this policy, may be
for the sake of SOX. Do you know the reason for such policy? How do other
people work around such problems?
Thanks.
Daniel|||Many companies will also have policies for service accounts
with service accounts being in a different OU from user
accounts. They should have some requirements for service
accounts and what accounts services will use.
-Sue
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 01:13:13 -0800, Daniel
<daniel.shen@.newsgroup.nospam> wrote:

>Using a domain account is a nice way I think. But we have one problem that
is
>the company IT policy states that each AD account must bind to an actual
>human user. So up to now, we can't create AD accounts for our system. And A
D
>account for user has a policy of changing password every 45 days. I think
>there must be a good reason for the company to establish this policy, may b
e
>for the sake of SOX. Do you know the reason for such policy? How do other
>people work around such problems?
>Thanks.
>Daniel|||Hello Daniel,
I agree that this policy is for security purpose. However, as Sue
mentioned, it makes sense to have different policy to have service
accounts. Or you have to change the password of service account accordingly
and restart services when necessary. This could be done by a script or
manually.
Please let's know if you have further questions or concerns, please feel
free to let's know. Thank you.
Best Regards,
Peter Yang
MCSE2000/2003, MCSA, MCDBA
Microsoft Online Partner Support
========================================
=============
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
========================================
==============|||Hello Daniel,
Just want to check in if you have further questions on the issue. Please
feel free to post back if you need any help.
Thanks & Regards,
Peter Yang
MCSE2000/2003, MCSA, MCDBA
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.

Integrate my app

I wish sqlserver can send me a mail automatically after completing one job,there are alerts and notifications in job properties,which can perform my need? Previously,i defined database mail,but failed

who can tell me which is appropriate way?

TIA

I saw your different threads in the groups, did you manage to setup database mail, this should be the first point where we should start.

HTH, Jens K. Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de

Installing SQL Desktop Engine

Is there any particular way that Desktop Engine should be installed? I have
both SQLServer 2000 Developer and Desktop Enigine. I was told to install Dev
eloper before Destop. When I did this I got an error message stating "The na
med instance is invalid."
IS Develooper to be installed before or after Desktop? Also, do the server n
eed to be named differently?I have found that with installing multiple SQL Servers to a computer that
explicitly naming each instance, even the first one, works best. That has
even worked for Yukon aside 2000 on machines I've seen. But I've never
installed desktop engine so sorry I don't have that exact piece of info.
hth
Eric
Mary Moon wrote:
> Is there any particular way that Desktop Engine should be installed?
> I have both SQLServer 2000 Developer and Desktop Enigine. I was told
> to install Developer before Destop. When I did this I got an error
> message stating "The named instance is invalid." IS Develooper to be
> installed before or after Desktop? Also, do the server need to be
> named differently?

Installing SQL Desktop Engine

Is there any particular way that Desktop Engine should be installed? I have both SQLServer 2000 Developer and Desktop Enigine. I was told to install Developer before Destop. When I did this I got an error message stating "The named instance is invalid."
IS Develooper to be installed before or after Desktop? Also, do the server need to be named differently?
I have found that with installing multiple SQL Servers to a computer that
explicitly naming each instance, even the first one, works best. That has
even worked for Yukon aside 2000 on machines I've seen. But I've never
installed desktop engine so sorry I don't have that exact piece of info.
hth
Eric
Mary Moon wrote:
> Is there any particular way that Desktop Engine should be installed?
> I have both SQLServer 2000 Developer and Desktop Enigine. I was told
> to install Developer before Destop. When I did this I got an error
> message stating "The named instance is invalid." IS Develooper to be
> installed before or after Desktop? Also, do the server need to be
> named differently?

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?