Hope fully there is someone who has done a similar stupid thing! We have got
ourselves into a bit of trouble when MDAC 2.7 was accidentally (?) installed
onto our Windows NT Cluster wich still runs SQL 7.0.
The result was that the SQL Agent stopped working. However the 2
applications that access the database running on the same cluster are all
working 100% and all client application accessing the database are working
correctly.
The solution offered by Microsoft in KB 820754 is that we should either:
- uncluster SQL
- re-install the sytem from scratch
- Install SQL 2000
Neither of these options are very appealing at this point as the system is
due for a major upgrade to Windows 2003/SQL 2000 in the near future (2-6
month)
Has anyone had a similar problem and how was the problem solved ? What risk
would we have if we continued to run like this and just removed the SQL Agent
resource. Currently we use the SQL Agent to schedule a few database
maintenace tasks which could easily be done manually.
Andrew
You could try to use the MDAC rollback functionality to recover the 2.5
installation. You could also try to reinstall 2.5. Otherwise, you are
pretty much as how the KC describes it, leave it alone and do without or do
some sort of rebuild.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Andrew Caldwell" <AndrewCaldwell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:D721101F-CEDB-4E01-9AF3-1F79882AD1F2@.microsoft.com...
Hope fully there is someone who has done a similar stupid thing! We have
got
ourselves into a bit of trouble when MDAC 2.7 was accidentally (?) installed
onto our Windows NT Cluster wich still runs SQL 7.0.
The result was that the SQL Agent stopped working. However the 2
applications that access the database running on the same cluster are all
working 100% and all client application accessing the database are working
correctly.
The solution offered by Microsoft in KB 820754 is that we should either:
- uncluster SQL
- re-install the sytem from scratch
- Install SQL 2000
Neither of these options are very appealing at this point as the system is
due for a major upgrade to Windows 2003/SQL 2000 in the near future (2-6
month)
Has anyone had a similar problem and how was the problem solved ? What risk
would we have if we continued to run like this and just removed the SQL
Agent
resource. Currently we use the SQL Agent to schedule a few database
maintenace tasks which could easily be done manually.
Andrew
|||Thanks
We found a way to rollback the MDAC to 2.5 which seems to have worked.
Andrew
Andrew
"Anthony Thomas" wrote:
> You could try to use the MDAC rollback functionality to recover the 2.5
> installation. You could also try to reinstall 2.5. Otherwise, you are
> pretty much as how the KC describes it, leave it alone and do without or do
> some sort of rebuild.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> --
> "Andrew Caldwell" <AndrewCaldwell@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:D721101F-CEDB-4E01-9AF3-1F79882AD1F2@.microsoft.com...
> Hope fully there is someone who has done a similar stupid thing! We have
> got
> ourselves into a bit of trouble when MDAC 2.7 was accidentally (?) installed
> onto our Windows NT Cluster wich still runs SQL 7.0.
> The result was that the SQL Agent stopped working. However the 2
> applications that access the database running on the same cluster are all
> working 100% and all client application accessing the database are working
> correctly.
> The solution offered by Microsoft in KB 820754 is that we should either:
> - uncluster SQL
> - re-install the sytem from scratch
> - Install SQL 2000
> Neither of these options are very appealing at this point as the system is
> due for a major upgrade to Windows 2003/SQL 2000 in the near future (2-6
> month)
> Has anyone had a similar problem and how was the problem solved ? What risk
> would we have if we continued to run like this and just removed the SQL
> Agent
> resource. Currently we use the SQL Agent to schedule a few database
> maintenace tasks which could easily be done manually.
> --
> Andrew
>
>
Showing posts with label similar. Show all posts
Showing posts with label similar. Show all posts
Monday, March 26, 2012
Friday, March 23, 2012
MCP Exam Study Query
Your question is not very clear.
You can join on any two columns with similar datatypes.
There does not have to be an explicit Parent-Child (PK-FK) relationship.
However, without a relationship, the question is: would the data provide any
useful information? And the answer is: it depends.
If that helps, then I was lucky. If not, please ask again, offering some
information about what you are seeking.
Regards,
--
Arnie Rowland, YACE*
"To be successful, your heart must accompany your knowledge."
*Yet Another certification Exam
"Simon Harris" <too-much-spam@.makes-you-fat.com> wrote in message
news:%23t9mnTWlGHA.4268@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Hi All,
> I'm currently studying for MCP exam 70-229. I'm on the database logical
> modeling section, and have come up with this question:
> In a non-identifying relationship, how would a join work, or is the
> term used to describe a situation where a relationship is at fault?
> Many Thanks,
> Simon.
>Hi Arnie,
Thanks for the post, I do understand that a relatioship can be either
explicit or implicit, but I'm not sure this is what the question refers to,
to bo honest, I'm not 100% sure what the question means myself!
Heres an excerpt from the book I'm working from:
"A relationship is said to be identifying if the primary key of a child
entity contains all the attributes of a foreign key. If the primary key of
the child entity does not contain all the attributes of a foreign key, the
the relationship is non-identifying"
The more I read that statement, the more confused I get! 8o)
Any ideas?
Simon.
"Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
news:uTMqldWlGHA.884@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Your question is not very clear.
> You can join on any two columns with similar datatypes.
> There does not have to be an explicit Parent-Child (PK-FK) relationship.
> However, without a relationship, the question is: would the data provide
> any useful information? And the answer is: it depends.
> If that helps, then I was lucky. If not, please ask again, offering some
> information about what you are seeking.
> Regards,
> --
> Arnie Rowland, YACE*
> "To be successful, your heart must accompany your knowledge."
> *Yet Another certification Exam
>
> "Simon Harris" <too-much-spam@.makes-you-fat.com> wrote in message
> news:%23t9mnTWlGHA.4268@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>|||Hi All,
I'm currently studying for MCP exam 70-229. I'm on the database logical
modeling section, and have come up with this question:
In a non-identifying relationship, how would a join work, or is the term
used to describe a situation where a relationship is at fault?
Many Thanks,
Simon.|||Your question is not very clear.
You can join on any two columns with similar datatypes.
There does not have to be an explicit Parent-Child (PK-FK) relationship.
However, without a relationship, the question is: would the data provide any
useful information? And the answer is: it depends.
If that helps, then I was lucky. If not, please ask again, offering some
information about what you are seeking.
Regards,
--
Arnie Rowland, YACE*
"To be successful, your heart must accompany your knowledge."
*Yet Another certification Exam
"Simon Harris" <too-much-spam@.makes-you-fat.com> wrote in message
news:%23t9mnTWlGHA.4268@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Hi All,
> I'm currently studying for MCP exam 70-229. I'm on the database logical
> modeling section, and have come up with this question:
> In a non-identifying relationship, how would a join work, or is the
> term used to describe a situation where a relationship is at fault?
> Many Thanks,
> Simon.
>|||Hi Arnie,
Thanks for the post, I do understand that a relatioship can be either
explicit or implicit, but I'm not sure this is what the question refers to,
to bo honest, I'm not 100% sure what the question means myself!
Heres an excerpt from the book I'm working from:
"A relationship is said to be identifying if the primary key of a child
entity contains all the attributes of a foreign key. If the primary key of
the child entity does not contain all the attributes of a foreign key, the
the relationship is non-identifying"
The more I read that statement, the more confused I get! 8o)
Any ideas?
Simon.
"Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
news:uTMqldWlGHA.884@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Your question is not very clear.
> You can join on any two columns with similar datatypes.
> There does not have to be an explicit Parent-Child (PK-FK) relationship.
> However, without a relationship, the question is: would the data provide
> any useful information? And the answer is: it depends.
> If that helps, then I was lucky. If not, please ask again, offering some
> information about what you are seeking.
> Regards,
> --
> Arnie Rowland, YACE*
> "To be successful, your heart must accompany your knowledge."
> *Yet Another certification Exam
>
> "Simon Harris" <too-much-spam@.makes-you-fat.com> wrote in message
> news:%23t9mnTWlGHA.4268@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
You can join on any two columns with similar datatypes.
There does not have to be an explicit Parent-Child (PK-FK) relationship.
However, without a relationship, the question is: would the data provide any
useful information? And the answer is: it depends.
If that helps, then I was lucky. If not, please ask again, offering some
information about what you are seeking.
Regards,
--
Arnie Rowland, YACE*
"To be successful, your heart must accompany your knowledge."
*Yet Another certification Exam
"Simon Harris" <too-much-spam@.makes-you-fat.com> wrote in message
news:%23t9mnTWlGHA.4268@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Hi All,
> I'm currently studying for MCP exam 70-229. I'm on the database logical
> modeling section, and have come up with this question:
> In a non-identifying relationship, how would a join work, or is the
> term used to describe a situation where a relationship is at fault?
> Many Thanks,
> Simon.
>Hi Arnie,
Thanks for the post, I do understand that a relatioship can be either
explicit or implicit, but I'm not sure this is what the question refers to,
to bo honest, I'm not 100% sure what the question means myself!
Heres an excerpt from the book I'm working from:
"A relationship is said to be identifying if the primary key of a child
entity contains all the attributes of a foreign key. If the primary key of
the child entity does not contain all the attributes of a foreign key, the
the relationship is non-identifying"
The more I read that statement, the more confused I get! 8o)
Any ideas?
Simon.
"Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
news:uTMqldWlGHA.884@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Your question is not very clear.
> You can join on any two columns with similar datatypes.
> There does not have to be an explicit Parent-Child (PK-FK) relationship.
> However, without a relationship, the question is: would the data provide
> any useful information? And the answer is: it depends.
> If that helps, then I was lucky. If not, please ask again, offering some
> information about what you are seeking.
> Regards,
> --
> Arnie Rowland, YACE*
> "To be successful, your heart must accompany your knowledge."
> *Yet Another certification Exam
>
> "Simon Harris" <too-much-spam@.makes-you-fat.com> wrote in message
> news:%23t9mnTWlGHA.4268@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>|||Hi All,
I'm currently studying for MCP exam 70-229. I'm on the database logical
modeling section, and have come up with this question:
In a non-identifying relationship, how would a join work, or is the term
used to describe a situation where a relationship is at fault?
Many Thanks,
Simon.|||Your question is not very clear.
You can join on any two columns with similar datatypes.
There does not have to be an explicit Parent-Child (PK-FK) relationship.
However, without a relationship, the question is: would the data provide any
useful information? And the answer is: it depends.
If that helps, then I was lucky. If not, please ask again, offering some
information about what you are seeking.
Regards,
--
Arnie Rowland, YACE*
"To be successful, your heart must accompany your knowledge."
*Yet Another certification Exam
"Simon Harris" <too-much-spam@.makes-you-fat.com> wrote in message
news:%23t9mnTWlGHA.4268@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Hi All,
> I'm currently studying for MCP exam 70-229. I'm on the database logical
> modeling section, and have come up with this question:
> In a non-identifying relationship, how would a join work, or is the
> term used to describe a situation where a relationship is at fault?
> Many Thanks,
> Simon.
>|||Hi Arnie,
Thanks for the post, I do understand that a relatioship can be either
explicit or implicit, but I'm not sure this is what the question refers to,
to bo honest, I'm not 100% sure what the question means myself!
Heres an excerpt from the book I'm working from:
"A relationship is said to be identifying if the primary key of a child
entity contains all the attributes of a foreign key. If the primary key of
the child entity does not contain all the attributes of a foreign key, the
the relationship is non-identifying"
The more I read that statement, the more confused I get! 8o)
Any ideas?
Simon.
"Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
news:uTMqldWlGHA.884@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Your question is not very clear.
> You can join on any two columns with similar datatypes.
> There does not have to be an explicit Parent-Child (PK-FK) relationship.
> However, without a relationship, the question is: would the data provide
> any useful information? And the answer is: it depends.
> If that helps, then I was lucky. If not, please ask again, offering some
> information about what you are seeking.
> Regards,
> --
> Arnie Rowland, YACE*
> "To be successful, your heart must accompany your knowledge."
> *Yet Another certification Exam
>
> "Simon Harris" <too-much-spam@.makes-you-fat.com> wrote in message
> news:%23t9mnTWlGHA.4268@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Maybe I'm asking for too much.
I’m using oracle but I’m sure this problem will have similar solution to SQL. I have a list of string in a table (aa, bb, cc, dd). I also have a list of numbers that are not in the database. What I’m looking for is an output like this.
Aa, 11
Aa, 22
Bb, 11
Bb, 22
Cc, 11
Cc, 22
Dd, 11
Dd, 22
Is this possible, without having to insert the numbers in a database table and with a simple query? (this could be done with temporary table)
? Sure... SELECT YourTable.YourStringColumn, N.Number FROM YourTable CROSS JOIN ( SELECT 11 UNION ALL SELECT 22 ) N (Number) -- Adam MachanicPro SQL Server 2005, available nowhttp://www..apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=457-- <ThE_lOtUs@.discussions..microsoft.com> wrote in message news:484c9f08-620e-46e9-bc35-83620c31d17d@.discussions.microsoft.com... I’m using oracle but I’m sure this problem will have similar solution to SQL. I have a list of string in a table (aa, bb, cc, dd). I also have a list of numbers that are not in the database. What I’m looking for is an output like this. Aa, 11 Aa, 22 Bb, 11 Bb, 22 Cc, 11 Cc, 22 Dd, 11 Dd, 22 Is this possible, without having to insert the numbers in a database table and with a simple query? (this could be done with temporary table)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)