Differnce between SqlServer 2000 and 2005

Hi,

I want to know major functionalites differences between Sql server 2000 and 20005..Am expection ans as soon as possible

With Best Regards

C.Rajesh

Read the Books On Line as soon as possible.

Books On Line 2000:http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=a6f79cb1-a420-445f-8a4b-bd77a7da194b&displaylang=en

Books On Line 2005:http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books.mspx

Questions like this will not solicit any replies unless you have specific questions or ask more politely rather than demand.

Differences in varchar size usage, declaring the maximum available of 8000 characters

Hi, I actually found a thread on this subject and post a follow-up question to it, but it seems that nobody is viewing the thread, probably because it is marked as answer, as such, I post a new thread for my question.

http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=87635&SiteID=1

My question is mainly on the differences between using a varchar(500) compared to varchar(8000), in the event when the stored string is less than 500 characters.

From the explanations that I see from the thread, can I say that to declare a column with a size of 8000 will not have any difference in storage/performance when compared to a column declared with a size of 500, when the stored string in the column is of 100 characters? The drawback of having a larger size declaration is that the probability that a string of 8000 characters might be stored in it in the future (either accidentally or breaking a non desire rule)? So the problem is not a technical one but rather on the soft side where we left a loose control whereby we leave a chance that it might cause a technical issue in the future (worst case)?

Apart from stored data in table, how about a declaration of varchar(8000) in a stored procedure variable or parameter?

Thanks

Eugene

The storage of varchar is always the same. We store the length of the actual data, and the data itself. The length in the table definition is used to validate that the varchar is not longer than the declared length, but does not take up any storage.

The same argument is valid when you use variables as well.

My suggestion would be that you define the size of the variable or column to what makes sense to your application. If you never need more than 500 chars, I don't see the need to define a table as varchar(8000).

Thanks,

Marcel van der Holst
[MSFT]|||

Hi Marcel,

Thanks for the answer, will help me much in designing table. So, about the variables, from your answer, you mean the system would not allocate enough space in memory according to the declared size? What I mean is, the storage space in memory will keep growing as the string length changes, or maybe it is actually creating a new string altogether in a new memory space; rather than allocating a large enough space earlier?

In this case, if the memory space is kept enlarging, or allocating a new space, due to some string intensive operation in the defined procedure/function, would it affect the performance, as the developer can't get to define the maximum probable size, which he knows/can assume?

thanks a million

Eugene

|||

SQL Server does not really allocate space based on the datatype definition in your table. It allocates enough space to hold the data (so if you have 10 chars, it only allocates space for 10 chars). After the data is in memory, one of the checks we do is check the length of the data against the defined length. If the size of the data is bigger, we raise an error. Internally, SQL Server uses several algorithms to avoid too many memory allocations (sometimes it allocates more than needed if it finds out that a lot of string concatenation is being done). The defined size of a variable does not really play a big role here.

Are you using SQL Server 2000 or SQL Server 2005?

If you use SQL Server 2005, you can use the varchar(max) datatype, which will hold data up to 2GB, and you never really have to worry about the size. SQL Server will do the right thing for you. Only when your data gets bigger than 8K, you might get a small perf hit when using varchar(max) as it won't fit on a single page anymore, but if you have a lot of data that is smaller than 8K, you might as well use varchar(max) as internally in the engine varchar(N) and varchar(max) are treated very simular as long as the data is less than 8K.

Hope this helps,

Marcel van der Holst

[MSFT]

|||

Cool work there, I got you. For the table, I think it's pretty straightforward where it is only storing the exact string (length) with some overhead. So for variable/parameter in memory, the memory space is actually a dynamic one (where it can grow or something else), but SQL Server is smart enough to allocate a size that should optimize the situation.

I guess my understanding should be correct, right?

I use both SQL Server 2000 and SQL Server 2005.

Thanks, it helps.

Eugene

|||Yes, your understanding is correct.

Thanks,

Marcel van der Holst
[MSFT]

Differences in varchar size usage, declaring the maximum available of 8000 characters

Hi, I actually found a thread on this subject and post a follow-up question to it, but it seems that nobody is viewing the thread, probably because it is marked as answer, as such, I post a new thread for my question.

http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=87635&SiteID=1

My question is mainly on the differences between using a varchar(500) compared to varchar(8000), in the event when the stored string is less than 500 characters.

From the explanations that I see from the thread, can I say that to declare a column with a size of 8000 will not have any difference in storage/performance when compared to a column declared with a size of 500, when the stored string in the column is of 100 characters? The drawback of having a larger size declaration is that the probability that a string of 8000 characters might be stored in it in the future (either accidentally or breaking a non desire rule)? So the problem is not a technical one but rather on the soft side where we left a loose control whereby we leave a chance that it might cause a technical issue in the future (worst case)?

Apart from stored data in table, how about a declaration of varchar(8000) in a stored procedure variable or parameter?

Thanks

Eugene

The storage of varchar is always the same. We store the length of the actual data, and the data itself. The length in the table definition is used to validate that the varchar is not longer than the declared length, but does not take up any storage.

The same argument is valid when you use variables as well.

My suggestion would be that you define the size of the variable or column to what makes sense to your application. If you never need more than 500 chars, I don't see the need to define a table as varchar(8000).

Thanks,

Marcel van der Holst
[MSFT]|||

Hi Marcel,

Thanks for the answer, will help me much in designing table. So, about the variables, from your answer, you mean the system would not allocate enough space in memory according to the declared size? What I mean is, the storage space in memory will keep growing as the string length changes, or maybe it is actually creating a new string altogether in a new memory space; rather than allocating a large enough space earlier?

In this case, if the memory space is kept enlarging, or allocating a new space, due to some string intensive operation in the defined procedure/function, would it affect the performance, as the developer can't get to define the maximum probable size, which he knows/can assume?

thanks a million

Eugene

|||

SQL Server does not really allocate space based on the datatype definition in your table. It allocates enough space to hold the data (so if you have 10 chars, it only allocates space for 10 chars). After the data is in memory, one of the checks we do is check the length of the data against the defined length. If the size of the data is bigger, we raise an error. Internally, SQL Server uses several algorithms to avoid too many memory allocations (sometimes it allocates more than needed if it finds out that a lot of string concatenation is being done). The defined size of a variable does not really play a big role here.

Are you using SQL Server 2000 or SQL Server 2005?

If you use SQL Server 2005, you can use the varchar(max) datatype, which will hold data up to 2GB, and you never really have to worry about the size. SQL Server will do the right thing for you. Only when your data gets bigger than 8K, you might get a small perf hit when using varchar(max) as it won't fit on a single page anymore, but if you have a lot of data that is smaller than 8K, you might as well use varchar(max) as internally in the engine varchar(N) and varchar(max) are treated very simular as long as the data is less than 8K.

Hope this helps,

Marcel van der Holst

[MSFT]

|||

Cool work there, I got you. For the table, I think it's pretty straightforward where it is only storing the exact string (length) with some overhead. So for variable/parameter in memory, the memory space is actually a dynamic one (where it can grow or something else), but SQL Server is smart enough to allocate a size that should optimize the situation.

I guess my understanding should be correct, right?

I use both SQL Server 2000 and SQL Server 2005.

Thanks, it helps.

Eugene

|||Yes, your understanding is correct.

Thanks,

Marcel van der Holst
[MSFT]

Differences in these errors

I understand timeouts and SQL Server does not exist error messages, but I am
not too sure under what conditions do the following 2 messages occur and the
difference. We dont see it often, but at times our applications spits out
these messages and would like to know where to start investigating and what
they mean. Can you help me narrow it down?
[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][DBNETLIB]ConnectionRead (recv()). ~08S01
(11): [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][DBNETLIB]General network error.
Check your network documentation.
[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver]Communication link failure
ThanksMy guess is that they both lead to the same thing (an intermittent problem
with your network), and they are just raised at different points (e.g. the
first may be when it can't connect, and the second may be when it has
connected but then gets cut off).
"Hassan" <hassan@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uHDddtZ6HHA.5360@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I understand timeouts and SQL Server does not exist error messages, but I
>am not too sure under what conditions do the following 2 messages occur and
>the difference. We dont see it often, but at times our applications spits
>out these messages and would like to know where to start investigating and
>what they mean. Can you help me narrow it down?
> [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][DBNETLIB]ConnectionRead (recv()).
> ~08S01 (11): [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][DBNETLIB]General network
> error. Check your network documentation.
> [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver]Communication link failure
> Thanks
>|||So is it safe to conclude that its definitely network bound and not some SQL
Server error that inteprets it as those error messages ?
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" <ten.xoc@.dnartreb.noraa> wrote in message
news:OgmhrwZ6HHA.4436@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> My guess is that they both lead to the same thing (an intermittent problem
> with your network), and they are just raised at different points (e.g. the
> first may be when it can't connect, and the second may be when it has
> connected but then gets cut off).
>
> "Hassan" <hassan@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uHDddtZ6HHA.5360@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>I understand timeouts and SQL Server does not exist error messages, but I
>>am not too sure under what conditions do the following 2 messages occur
>>and the difference. We dont see it often, but at times our applications
>>spits out these messages and would like to know where to start
>>investigating and what they mean. Can you help me narrow it down?
>> [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][DBNETLIB]ConnectionRead (recv()).
>> ~08S01 (11): [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][DBNETLIB]General network
>> error. Check your network documentation.
>> [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver]Communication link failure
>> Thanks
>|||> So is it safe to conclude that its definitely network bound and not some
> SQL Server error that inteprets it as those error messages ?
Why would you assume that it's NOT a network problem? Do you think SQL
Server is trying to trick you, maybe it's embarrassed about some bug that
hasn't been fixed?|||Yes.
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" <ten.xoc@.dnartreb.noraa> wrote in message
news:eyCqJJb6HHA.5160@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> So is it safe to conclude that its definitely network bound and not some
>> SQL Server error that inteprets it as those error messages ?
> Why would you assume that it's NOT a network problem? Do you think SQL
> Server is trying to trick you, maybe it's embarrassed about some bug that
> hasn't been fixed?
>|||Ok. <shrug>
"Hassan" <hassan@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:us4$8pr6HHA.2752@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Yes.
> "Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" <ten.xoc@.dnartreb.noraa> wrote in
> message news:eyCqJJb6HHA.5160@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> So is it safe to conclude that its definitely network bound and not some
>> SQL Server error that inteprets it as those error messages ?
>> Why would you assume that it's NOT a network problem? Do you think SQL
>> Server is trying to trick you, maybe it's embarrassed about some bug that
>> hasn't been fixed?
>|||We have been getting the same issue and have ruled out the network as the
cause. This appears to have caused by additional load on the server as we
recently moved some databases on it. We are going to allocate more memory to
SQL and move some of the databases off the server. Hopefully this will
resolve the issue.
"Hassan" wrote:
> So is it safe to conclude that its definitely network bound and not some SQL
> Server error that inteprets it as those error messages ?
> "Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" <ten.xoc@.dnartreb.noraa> wrote in message
> news:OgmhrwZ6HHA.4436@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> > My guess is that they both lead to the same thing (an intermittent problem
> > with your network), and they are just raised at different points (e.g. the
> > first may be when it can't connect, and the second may be when it has
> > connected but then gets cut off).
> >
> >
> >
> > "Hassan" <hassan@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:uHDddtZ6HHA.5360@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >>I understand timeouts and SQL Server does not exist error messages, but I
> >>am not too sure under what conditions do the following 2 messages occur
> >>and the difference. We dont see it often, but at times our applications
> >>spits out these messages and would like to know where to start
> >>investigating and what they mean. Can you help me narrow it down?
> >>
> >> [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][DBNETLIB]ConnectionRead (recv()).
> >> ~08S01 (11): [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][DBNETLIB]General network
> >> error. Check your network documentation.
> >>
> >> [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver]Communication link failure
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >
> >
>
>|||Moving a high load database off the server and rebooting it has resolved the
issue.
"Hassan" wrote:
> I understand timeouts and SQL Server does not exist error messages, but I am
> not too sure under what conditions do the following 2 messages occur and the
> difference. We dont see it often, but at times our applications spits out
> these messages and would like to know where to start investigating and what
> they mean. Can you help me narrow it down?
> [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][DBNETLIB]ConnectionRead (recv()). ~08S01
> (11): [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][DBNETLIB]General network error.
> Check your network documentation.
> [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver]Communication link failure
> Thanks
>
>

differences in SSIS file locations in SQL Server Agent step

When adding an SSIS step to a SQL Server Agent job, when selecting the location of a config file, the dialog lets you select from the database server you're working with. If selecting the location of the package itself (when the source is File System), the dialog lets you select from the machine where Management Studio is sitting instead of from the database server. Is that intentional? And if so, why? Should I just use a fully qualified file name for the package location rather than one using a drive letter?
Hmmm... Yeah, I don't like that. Though I always deploy by storing the packages in SQL Server versus the file system.

Let's let some of the other guys chime in.... I do know that some of the folks around here never use the SSIS step type in Agent and instead use the Command Line type. That allows them to build the DTEXEC statement the way they need it to be.|||

Phil Brammer wrote:

I do know that some of the folks around here never use the SSIS step type in Agent and instead use the Command Line type. That allows them to build the DTEXEC statement the way they need it to be.

That's might be the way I go. In production we'll be using Control-M anyway, so I might as well just have the command-line all prepped and ready to go for that.
|||

Phil Brammer wrote:

Let's let some of the other guys chime in.... I do know that some of the folks around here never use the SSIS step type in Agent and instead use the Command Line type. That allows them to build the DTEXEC statement the way they need it to be.

And it lets us get the full output of DTEXEC, which is handy for troubleshooting.

Differences in SQL server reporting and Crystal reports

What are the differences in SQL server reporting and Crystal Reports?

What are the pros and cons of using one or the other?

I know nothing about SQL server reporting, does anyone have any resources for it.

macca

Hi Macca

Our company specializes in CRM software and database management so we naturally do alot of reporting/business intelligence.

As with all types software purchases decisions are best made based on outcome requirements, ease of accomplishing short and long term objectives and price of course. In addition, its important to select a product based on in-house skill set as lots of software purchases go vastly underutilized because of complexity in reaching objectives.

There is another product though to SQL Reporting and CDecisions which we also utilize. Its a WEB based product called LogiXML which has a highly intuitive development interface and utilizes a really innovative approach over traditional report writing. The price is great, the features solid and the support tremendous. I would definately suggest you take a look at this as an alternative if you dont have alot of experience in the report writing area.

Kerri Groves
President
LookOut Software Inc.

|||You may want to checkout this article to find differences between Crystal and Reporting Services.

http://www.crystalreportsbook.com/SSRSandCR_ExecSummary.asp

differences in record counts

Hello all,

I have a problem concerning differences in record counts between the measure group and the fact table.
for debugging such a case in Analysis Services 2000, I would have run process on the cube, copy the SQL statement that was generated and debug it using Query Analyser. in sql 2005, I tried doing that but got the sql statement without the joins to the dimensions so no much help in that...

does anyone have a suggestion on how to debug such a case?

Thanks,

Momo

In SSAS 2005, the fact table is not joined to the dimensions during processing unless you implemented a reference dimension and opted to materialize it. In this situation, you will see a join to the intermediate dimension table.

B.

|||

Bryan C. Smith wrote:

In SSAS 2005, the fact table is not joined to the dimensions during processing unless you implemented a reference dimension and opted to materialize it. In this situation, you will see a join to the intermediate dimension table.

B.

So can anyone explain why the poster is observing dropped rows?

In my case I am finding the cubes are not showing any financials. Fact tables are populated correctly. Dimensions appear to be joined correctly - but I understand this wouldnt matter anyway?

Is there a way to see how the cube process is getting its data? Is there a way to check the integrity of a data source view? What is the consequence of incorrectly joining tables in your data source view?

Debugging in AS 2000 seemed much easier!

|||

When you process the cube, you have access to the queries submitted. Take a look at those and test the row counts for each.

B.,

differences in record counts

Hello all,

I have a problem concerning differences in record counts between the measure group and the fact table.
for debugging such a case in Analysis Services 2000, I would have run process on the cube, copy the SQL statement that was generated and debug it using Query Analyser. in sql 2005, I tried doing that but got the sql statement without the joins to the dimensions so no much help in that...

does anyone have a suggestion on how to debug such a case?

Thanks,

Momo

In SSAS 2005, the fact table is not joined to the dimensions during processing unless you implemented a reference dimension and opted to materialize it. In this situation, you will see a join to the intermediate dimension table.

B.

|||

Bryan C. Smith wrote:

In SSAS 2005, the fact table is not joined to the dimensions during processing unless you implemented a reference dimension and opted to materialize it. In this situation, you will see a join to the intermediate dimension table.

B.

So can anyone explain why the poster is observing dropped rows?

In my case I am finding the cubes are not showing any financials. Fact tables are populated correctly. Dimensions appear to be joined correctly - but I understand this wouldnt matter anyway?

Is there a way to see how the cube process is getting its data? Is there a way to check the integrity of a data source view? What is the consequence of incorrectly joining tables in your data source view?

Debugging in AS 2000 seemed much easier!

|||

When you process the cube, you have access to the queries submitted. Take a look at those and test the row counts for each.

B.,

Differences in MS SQL7 and MS SQL2000

I am having difficulty convincing my management to upgrade from our existing MS SQL7 Database to MS SQL2K. I know that SQL2K offers enhanced performance and ease of use but am unable to find any white paper or documentation online that shows me the advantage of SQL2K over our current older version. Is anyone here facing the same problem as me? If any one has any documentation or hyperlinks to point me in the correct place, just post here or drop me an e-mail at chanmunyew@.msn.com to help...any help at all is greatly appreciated!! thanks guys!More links than you can shake a stick at, hope these help:

http://www.microsoft.com/catalog/display.asp?site=10145&subid=22&pg=4#167937

http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/overview/whatsnew.asp

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;323049

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/prodtechnol/sql/reskit/sql2000/part1/c0261.asp

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/whatsnew/wn_whatnew_7im0.asp

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/itcommunity/chats/trans/sql/sq092700.asp|||Thanks!!!!!

Differences in file sizes sys.database_files and sys.master_files

Hello,
We are seeing a differince in size column for the same files between
sys.database_files and sys.master_files. sys.master_files inidcates smaller
sizes so I think that rules out deferred drop operations. Any ideas? this
is for Tempdb files.
TIA,
All you need is /3GB. Don't worry about /PAE or AWE with 4GB of ram. You can
verify with just taskmgr. However, the RAM will not be commited until it is
needed. You can also look at the SQL memory manager:target server memory
perfmon counter.
/3GB is ok in this configuration most of the time but I would just use it
when it is needed. Sometimes it causes problem for the OS.
Jason Massie
www: http://statisticsio.com
rss: http://feeds.feedburner.com/statisticsio
"Joe" <Joe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:94ECFB89-E022-4A97-988D-B1B992B3DE5D@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> We are seeing a differince in size column for the same files between
> sys.database_files and sys.master_files. sys.master_files inidcates
> smaller
> sizes so I think that rules out deferred drop operations. Any ideas?
> this
> is for Tempdb files.
> TIA,
|||Wow,
Super answer makes a lot of sense.
Thank you very much,
Joe
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:

> Tempdb is special. Sys.master_files holds the size etc to make the tempdb size at startup (remember
> that tempdb is re-created each time you start SQL Server). Sys.database_files inside the database
> holds the actual values.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "Joe" <Joe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:94ECFB89-E022-4A97-988D-B1B992B3DE5D@.microsoft.com...
>
|||TIBOR ROCKS!! :-))
Kevin G. Boles
Indicium Resources, Inc.
SQL Server MVP
kgboles a earthlink dt net
"Joe" <Joe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4A68FA71-9549-4B3F-8F3A-F09D548FF392@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Wow,
> Super answer makes a lot of sense.
> Thank you very much,
> Joe
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:

Differences in file sizes sys.database_files and sys.master_files

Hello,
We are seeing a differince in size column for the same files between
sys.database_files and sys.master_files. sys.master_files inidcates smaller
sizes so I think that rules out deferred drop operations. Any ideas? this
is for Tempdb files.
TIA,All you need is /3GB. Don't worry about /PAE or AWE with 4GB of ram. You can
verify with just taskmgr. However, the RAM will not be commited until it is
needed. You can also look at the SQL memory manager:target server memory
perfmon counter.
/3GB is ok in this configuration most of the time but I would just use it
when it is needed. Sometimes it causes problem for the OS.
Jason Massie
www: http://statisticsio.com
rss: http://feeds.feedburner.com/statisticsio
"Joe" <Joe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:94ECFB89-E022-4A97-988D-B1B992B3DE5D@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> We are seeing a differince in size column for the same files between
> sys.database_files and sys.master_files. sys.master_files inidcates
> smaller
> sizes so I think that rules out deferred drop operations. Any ideas?
> this
> is for Tempdb files.
> TIA,|||Tempdb is special. Sys.master_files holds the size etc to make the tempdb size at startup (remember
that tempdb is re-created each time you start SQL Server). Sys.database_files inside the database
holds the actual values.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Joe" <Joe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:94ECFB89-E022-4A97-988D-B1B992B3DE5D@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> We are seeing a differince in size column for the same files between
> sys.database_files and sys.master_files. sys.master_files inidcates smaller
> sizes so I think that rules out deferred drop operations. Any ideas? this
> is for Tempdb files.
> TIA,|||Wow,
Super answer makes a lot of sense.
Thank you very much,
Joe
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> Tempdb is special. Sys.master_files holds the size etc to make the tempdb size at startup (remember
> that tempdb is re-created each time you start SQL Server). Sys.database_files inside the database
> holds the actual values.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "Joe" <Joe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:94ECFB89-E022-4A97-988D-B1B992B3DE5D@.microsoft.com...
> > Hello,
> > We are seeing a differince in size column for the same files between
> > sys.database_files and sys.master_files. sys.master_files inidcates smaller
> > sizes so I think that rules out deferred drop operations. Any ideas? this
> > is for Tempdb files.
> >
> > TIA,
>|||Glad you found it helpful. :-)
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Joe" <Joe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4A68FA71-9549-4B3F-8F3A-F09D548FF392@.microsoft.com...
> Wow,
> Super answer makes a lot of sense.
> Thank you very much,
> Joe
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>> Tempdb is special. Sys.master_files holds the size etc to make the tempdb size at startup
>> (remember
>> that tempdb is re-created each time you start SQL Server). Sys.database_files inside the database
>> holds the actual values.
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>>
>> "Joe" <Joe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:94ECFB89-E022-4A97-988D-B1B992B3DE5D@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hello,
>> > We are seeing a differince in size column for the same files between
>> > sys.database_files and sys.master_files. sys.master_files inidcates smaller
>> > sizes so I think that rules out deferred drop operations. Any ideas? this
>> > is for Tempdb files.
>> >
>> > TIA,|||TIBOR ROCKS!! :-))
--
Kevin G. Boles
Indicium Resources, Inc.
SQL Server MVP
kgboles a earthlink dt net
"Joe" <Joe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4A68FA71-9549-4B3F-8F3A-F09D548FF392@.microsoft.com...
> Wow,
> Super answer makes a lot of sense.
> Thank you very much,
> Joe
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>> Tempdb is special. Sys.master_files holds the size etc to make the tempdb
>> size at startup (remember
>> that tempdb is re-created each time you start SQL Server).
>> Sys.database_files inside the database
>> holds the actual values.
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>>
>> "Joe" <Joe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:94ECFB89-E022-4A97-988D-B1B992B3DE5D@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hello,
>> > We are seeing a differince in size column for the same files between
>> > sys.database_files and sys.master_files. sys.master_files inidcates
>> > smaller
>> > sizes so I think that rules out deferred drop operations. Any ideas?
>> > this
>> > is for Tempdb files.
>> >
>> > TIA,

Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's?

Hello,
We have a standalone Enterprise edition sql 2000 server that we want to
migrate to a cluster and make it a virtual sql server, for high availability
reasons.
We do not want to change the name of the SQL Server, as hundreds of
databases are on this server, and hundreds of applications refer to this SQL
Server name. Because of these requirements, we cannot use the steps in BOL
to upgrade our standalone to a cluster (that includes changing the sql server
name)
We are moving to two new servers (the current server will be retired)
Does anyone know the following two questions...
Is it possible to take the system databases from a standalone version of SQL
Server, and restore them to a clustered SQL Server?
Are there differences in the system databases on a stand alone SQL Server
vs. a clustered virtual SQL Server?
Here is a high level idea of what we would like to do:
- Stop SQL on the standalone server
- Rename the standalone server
- Install sql on the cluster, and give the virtual sql server the orignal
name of my standalone server
- shutdown sql on the cluster
- copy the data and log files for all system and user databases to the
cluster from the standalone server
- start up sql on the cluster
Thanks for your help and time!
I wouldn't try and copy the system databases from one server to another,
much less from a non-clustered instance to a clustered instance. You are
likely much better off aliasing the old name to the new name using a DNS
record or a client-side alias. Even if you do manage to copy the system
databases, the network name presented to the outside world by the Cluster
won't change so you will not solve your initial problem.
Geoff N.Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"KellyVV" <KellyVV@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6BC09EC5-ACC9-4493-8E89-43684AC9A82E@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> We have a standalone Enterprise edition sql 2000 server that we want to
> migrate to a cluster and make it a virtual sql server, for high
> availability
> reasons.
> We do not want to change the name of the SQL Server, as hundreds of
> databases are on this server, and hundreds of applications refer to this
> SQL
> Server name. Because of these requirements, we cannot use the steps in
> BOL
> to upgrade our standalone to a cluster (that includes changing the sql
> server
> name)
> We are moving to two new servers (the current server will be retired)
> Does anyone know the following two questions...
> Is it possible to take the system databases from a standalone version of
> SQL
> Server, and restore them to a clustered SQL Server?
> Are there differences in the system databases on a stand alone SQL Server
> vs. a clustered virtual SQL Server?
> Here is a high level idea of what we would like to do:
> - Stop SQL on the standalone server
> - Rename the standalone server
> - Install sql on the cluster, and give the virtual sql server the orignal
> name of my standalone server
> - shutdown sql on the cluster
> - copy the data and log files for all system and user databases to the
> cluster from the standalone server
> - start up sql on the cluster
> Thanks for your help and time!
|||The ability to move the system and user databases between a standalone
Enterprise instance and clustered Enterprise server instance as you are
proposing is perfectly possible.
I have not noticed any difference between clustered and non-clustered system
databases, I however have not conducted any comprehensive comparison.
The issues you will more likely encounter here are the same issues as
migrating system databases between standalone instances of SQL.
Have a look at 224071. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/224071.
You may want to evaluate the possibility of migrating your user databases
and specific system information (Logins etc) as an alternative to ensure
your new setup clean.
Your assumptions about the SQL instance names are correct, if I understand
you correctly, are correct: You have a default standalone instance on
ServerX (which will be removed from the network) which you wish to replace
with a ServerX virtual server default instance. The only consideration here
would be that there can not be another preexisting default instance of SQL
installed on the cluster.
Regards
Gary Hope
iSolve Business Solutions
South Africa
"KellyVV" <KellyVV@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6BC09EC5-ACC9-4493-8E89-43684AC9A82E@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> We have a standalone Enterprise edition sql 2000 server that we want to
> migrate to a cluster and make it a virtual sql server, for high
> availability
> reasons.
> We do not want to change the name of the SQL Server, as hundreds of
> databases are on this server, and hundreds of applications refer to this
> SQL
> Server name. Because of these requirements, we cannot use the steps in
> BOL
> to upgrade our standalone to a cluster (that includes changing the sql
> server
> name)
> We are moving to two new servers (the current server will be retired)
> Does anyone know the following two questions...
> Is it possible to take the system databases from a standalone version of
> SQL
> Server, and restore them to a clustered SQL Server?
> Are there differences in the system databases on a stand alone SQL Server
> vs. a clustered virtual SQL Server?
> Here is a high level idea of what we would like to do:
> - Stop SQL on the standalone server
> - Rename the standalone server
> - Install sql on the cluster, and give the virtual sql server the orignal
> name of my standalone server
> - shutdown sql on the cluster
> - copy the data and log files for all system and user databases to the
> cluster from the standalone server
> - start up sql on the cluster
> Thanks for your help and time!

Differences IN AS 2000 and AS 2005

Hi,

I just wanted to know if I can replicate a particular thing that I was able to do in AS 2000 very easily in AS 2005.

Basically I used to define a time dimension in AS 2000 which was basically a single column and was able to split it into 3 levels Year,Quarter and Month using the functinality provided by AS 2000.

Can I do something similar in AS 2005 because the options that I see in order to define a time hierarchy needs me to pick 3 different columns for each time level or hierarchy.

Thanks

There is a new "Server Time Dimension" option that allows you to build a time dimension simply by entering a begin and end date. If you want to control the exact format of how the level members work you can always create a "named query" in the data source view using the date from your fact table and T-SQL date functions to format the level members. The feature you are referring to is no longer available in 2005. Here is an example of a query using a table from the "AdventureWorks" database that demonstrates how you could do this using a named query:

USE [AdventureWorks]

GO

SELECT DISTINCT

OrderDate,

DatePart(year,OrderDate) AS [Year],

'Q' + DateName(quarter,OrderDate) + '-' + Right(DatePart(year,OrderDate),2) AS [Quarter],

Left(DateName(month,OrderDate),3) + '-' + Right(DatePart(year,OrderDate),2) AS [Month],

Right('0' + DateName(day,OrderDate),2) + '-' + Left(DateName(month,OrderDate),3) + '-' + Right(DatePart(year,OrderDate),2) AS [Day]

FROM

Sales.SalesOrderHeader

ORDER BY 1

GO

HTH,

Steve

Differences in ANSI SQL and MSDE Options

I have a database, and I want to run an update script on it. I
understand ANSI standard script. I've used Oracle 10g to learn
databases, and I've used C# for a while now with SQLCommand,
SQLConnection, etc. Now, I'm trying to update a SQL Server (I want to
say 2003 Compact...not sure). I have the script that attached this
database. It's biggest change in the actual running of script is
using GO, and it also doesn't have semi-colons at the end of
statements. Well, I need to know any other nuances like that when
using CREATE DOMAIN, CREATE TABLE, and ALTER TABLE. I'm not sure when
to use GO as I've seen people use it with plenty of commands and few
as well.
Another part that throws me for a loop (mostly cause I can't find
documentation or tutorials) is that it keeps using commands like "exec
sp_dboption," "exec sp_change_users_login," "exec
sp_addsrvrolemember," "exec sp_addrolemember," "GRANT ... CREATE RULE
TO." I'm more worried about how persistent these settings are than I
am anything else.
I just need to find a tutorial or some other form of help to figure
out what else needs to go into my .sql file that has all my DDL
statements. Any help would be appreciated. Any thoughts?
hi,
probably you will find better ANSI compliance if you move to SQLExpress, the
free edition of SQL Server 2005..
anyway..
Gold Panther wrote:
> I have a database, and I want to run an update script on it. I
> understand ANSI standard script. I've used Oracle 10g to learn
> databases, and I've used C# for a while now with SQLCommand,
> SQLConnection, etc. Now, I'm trying to update a SQL Server (I want to
> say 2003 Compact...not sure). I have the script that attached this
> database. It's biggest change in the actual running of script is
> using GO, and it also doesn't have semi-colons at the end of
> statements.
GO is not a SQL keyword.. it's just a batch terminator used in some
interactive tools like Enterprise Manager, Quary Analyzer, SQL Server
Management Studio, oSql.exe, SqlCMD.exe...
as these are the "official" tools provided by Microsoft, GO has become the
"standard" batch terminator in Microsoft SQL Server world...

>Well, I need to know any other nuances like that when
> using CREATE DOMAIN, CREATE TABLE, and ALTER TABLE. I'm not sure when
> to use GO as I've seen people use it with plenty of commands and few
> as well.
you can find lot of these in BooksOn Line, the official guide to SQL Server,
available for free downloadat:
SQL Server 2005 -
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=BE6A2C5D-00DF-4220-B133-29C1E0B6585F&displaylang=en
SQL Server 2000 -
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/downloads/docs/default.mspx
BTW, CREATE DOMAIN is not supported in Microsoft SQL Server..

> Another part that throws me for a loop (mostly cause I can't find
> documentation or tutorials) is that it keeps using commands like "exec
> sp_dboption," "exec sp_change_users_login," "exec
> sp_addsrvrolemember," "exec sp_addrolemember," "GRANT ... CREATE RULE
> TO."
these "kind of" statements are proprietary system stored procedures to
perform management tasks..
again, you can find them and their explanation in BOL..

> I'm more worried about how persistent these settings are than I
> am anything else.
eventually please review the "depracation" status of some
keywords/procedures/etc..
for instance, SQL Server 7.0 and 2000 used to attach databases via a system
stored procedure, sp_attach_db, now deprecated (in SQL Server 2005) in
favour of a proprietary extension of the CREATE DATABASE statement, CREATE
DATABASE ... FOR ATTACH, which perform the very same action, but can be
removed in future versions of SQL Server...
sp_adduser deprecated in favour of CREATE USER ... etc...

> I just need to find a tutorial or some other form of help to figure
> out what else needs to go into my .sql file that has all my DDL
> statements. Any help would be appreciated. Any thoughts?
you can have a look in BOL at the supported syntax of each DDL statement as
long as it's requirements..
regards
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.biz http://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.21.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.65.0 and further SQL Tools
-- remove DMO to reply
|||First, make sure what version of SQL Server you're targeting. "SQL Server"
Compact Edition is not really SQL Server--it's SQL Mobile with a new name.
It does not share the same SQL engine as SQL Server.
If the purpose of this exercise is to move database schema from another
existing database I suggest using SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS) to
do the job. This utility can do everything that needs to be done without you
having to build and convert a bunch of scripts.
As you've been told, a SQL script (a set of SQL batch statements) is a file
that separates the individual batches that can't run sequentially with the
"GO" keyword. No, this is not TSQL or any SQL--it's used by all of the
Microsoft SQL utilities to help parse the batches. SQLCMD (or ISQL/OSQL, SQL
Server Management Studio or Visual Studio) all recognize this file syntax
for SQL scripts.
It usually takes more that a simple tutorial on scripts to get one's head
around the utilities used by SQL Server to configure a database, add users,
set the appropriate rights and everything else you seem to be
encountering...
I think my book might help...
hth
____________________________________
William (Bill) Vaughn
Author, Mentor, Consultant
Microsoft MVP
INETA Speaker
www.betav.com/blog/billva
www.betav.com
Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
__________________________________
Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest book:
Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition)
Between now and Nov. 6th 2006 you can sign up for a substantial discount.
Look for the "Early Bird" discount checkbox on the registration form...
------
Microsoft MVP, Author, Mentor
Microsoft MVP
"Gold Panther" <lordbrucegiles@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1176491620.113814.27300@.d57g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com...
>I have a database, and I want to run an update script on it. I
> understand ANSI standard script. I've used Oracle 10g to learn
> databases, and I've used C# for a while now with SQLCommand,
> SQLConnection, etc. Now, I'm trying to update a SQL Server (I want to
> say 2003 Compact...not sure). I have the script that attached this
> database. It's biggest change in the actual running of script is
> using GO, and it also doesn't have semi-colons at the end of
> statements. Well, I need to know any other nuances like that when
> using CREATE DOMAIN, CREATE TABLE, and ALTER TABLE. I'm not sure when
> to use GO as I've seen people use it with plenty of commands and few
> as well.
> Another part that throws me for a loop (mostly cause I can't find
> documentation or tutorials) is that it keeps using commands like "exec
> sp_dboption," "exec sp_change_users_login," "exec
> sp_addsrvrolemember," "exec sp_addrolemember," "GRANT ... CREATE RULE
> TO." I'm more worried about how persistent these settings are than I
> am anything else.
> I just need to find a tutorial or some other form of help to figure
> out what else needs to go into my .sql file that has all my DDL
> statements. Any help would be appreciated. Any thoughts?
>
|||Thank both of you for the help. I believe you helped me find the
information I need. By the way, I started to buy your book Mr.
Vaughn, but I ran into multiple books of your 13 (I think that's how
many you said you have) that involve databases. I was not sure at the
time which to look into. If I look again today, I will probably be
able to determine that as it was Friday afternoon when I looked the
first time. Everybody gets a little drained by the end of the week.
Thank you both though.
|||Ah, yes. The most current, comprehensive and most complete is Hitchhiker's
Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition). Let me know if it
helps--I'm convinced it will.
____________________________________
William (Bill) Vaughn
Author, Mentor, Consultant
Microsoft MVP
INETA Speaker
www.betav.com/blog/billva
www.betav.com
Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
__________________________________
Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest book:
Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition)
Between now and Nov. 6th 2006 you can sign up for a substantial discount.
Look for the "Early Bird" discount checkbox on the registration form...
------
Microsoft MVP, Author, Mentor
Microsoft MVP
"Gold Panther" <lordbrucegiles@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1176730402.516417.311350@.w1g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com...
> Thank both of you for the help. I believe you helped me find the
> information I need. By the way, I started to buy your book Mr.
> Vaughn, but I ran into multiple books of your 13 (I think that's how
> many you said you have) that involve databases. I was not sure at the
> time which to look into. If I look again today, I will probably be
> able to determine that as it was Friday afternoon when I looked the
> first time. Everybody gets a little drained by the end of the week.
> Thank you both though.
>
|||William (Bill) Vaughn wrote:
> Ah, yes. The most current, comprehensive and most complete is
> Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition). Let
> me know if it helps--I'm convinced it will.
>
I only have the 6th edition :D
great book..
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.biz http://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.21.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.65.0 and further SQL Tools
-- remove DMO to reply
|||The 6th Edition was written before I left MS--almost a decade ago. A lot has
changed since then but a lot has really remained the same. The new book is a
total re-write from all of my books. All of the examples are new but many of
the best concepts are included and brought up to date. The 7th Edition is my
last book (on paper)--at least on technical subjects. I'm working on a
novel... ;)
William (Bill) Vaughn
Author, Mentor, Consultant
Microsoft MVP
INETA Speaker
www.betav.com/blog/billva
www.betav.com
Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
__________________________________
Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest books:
Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition) and
Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition
------
"Andrea Montanari" <andrea.sqlDMO@.virgilio.it> wrote in message
news:58jhtvF2g5dshU1@.mid.individual.net...
> William (Bill) Vaughn wrote:
> I only have the 6th edition :D
> great book..
> --
> Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
> http://www.asql.biz http://italy.mvps.org
> DbaMgr2k ver 0.21.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.65.0 and further SQL Tools
> -- remove DMO to reply
>
|||> > William (Bill) Vaughn wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
I will be testing that section once we get our test system in. If it
doesn't work the way I have it, I will definitely buy the book.
Thanks.
Off subject a little but what's the novel about?
|||It's about a clan of beings that live in the forest with a few magical
powers...
____________________________________
William (Bill) Vaughn
Author, Mentor, Consultant
Microsoft MVP
INETA Speaker
www.betav.com/blog/billva
www.betav.com
Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
__________________________________
Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest book:
Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition)
and Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition (EBook)
------
"Gold Panther" <lordbrucegiles@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1176993337.593923.228560@.y80g2000hsf.googlegr oups.com...
> I will be testing that section once we get our test system in. If it
> doesn't work the way I have it, I will definitely buy the book.
> Thanks.
> Off subject a little but what's the novel about?
>
|||On Apr 19, 9:25 pm, "William \(Bill\) Vaughn"
<billvaRemoveT...@.betav.com> wrote:
> It's about a clan of beings that live in the forest with a few magical
> powers...
> --
> ____________________________________
> William (Bill) Vaughn
> Author, Mentor, Consultant
> Microsoft MVP
> INETA Speakerwww.betav.com/blog/billvawww.betav.com
> Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> __________________________________
> Visitwww.hitchhikerguides.netto get more information on my latest book:
> Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition)
> and Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition (EBook)
> ----X---
> "Gold Panther" <lordbrucegi...@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1176993337.593923.228560@.y80g2000hsf.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
That sounds great! I might buy that when you're done too. : )

differences btween SQL Server and MSDE

Hi

I wonder what the differences between MSDE and SQL Server are. The main thing I'm conserned about is...

Are there any limit of concurrent users to the MSDE?

Regards

MM,

I believe the number of concurrent users in MSDE is limited to 5.

Zack|||This topic has been discussed many times on this Forum. For example, please see this post:view post 399794

Terri

differences between versions of SQL serve2005

I just purchased 2 copies of SQL Server 2005 standard edition at the tune of
$1000 each. It comes with 5 CALs. I had been using SQLExpress 2005 but
decided to use the full version prior to shipping the deliverable. When I
went to install the software (on a michine with SQL Express already
installed) I was essentially told that everything that I wanted to install
was already there!
So what did I gain for my $1000?
Actually I believe I am going backwards. I do not know the limits for
concurrent connections for SQLExpress but I had vereral clients connected
and it never complained. Byt I am now limited to 5 seats!
This is a reasonably low duty server running on WinNT with a simple dual
core processor. It is not critical. I was able to stress the SQL Express
server by sending it data at a 30X rate of normal operation without any
problems.
The server goes out with a $275K piece of equipment so I did not mind the
expenditure but if I gain nothing...well it is hard to justify.
Or am I missing something?
Thanks
I don't know what the actual message stated but Express and Std are not the
same things. Yes they share the same code base etc but Std comes with SSMS
and Express does not. Actually you can download SSMS express. But Std gives
you unlimited memory usage, up to 4 procs (not counting cores) and unlimited
db size plus a lot more. Express is limited to 1GB memory, 4GB db and 1 Proc
plus some others like does not include SQL Agent etc. See more here:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/compare-features.mspx
As long as you don't need any of those missing features or won't exceed the
limits of Express it would have been just fine. By the way Workgroup may
also have been an option and it's half the cost of Std.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors
"Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
news:JAI3j.260$9x7.116@.newsfe05.lga...
>I just purchased 2 copies of SQL Server 2005 standard edition at the tune
>of
> $1000 each. It comes with 5 CALs. I had been using SQLExpress 2005 but
> decided to use the full version prior to shipping the deliverable. When I
> went to install the software (on a michine with SQL Express already
> installed) I was essentially told that everything that I wanted to install
> was already there!
> So what did I gain for my $1000?
> Actually I believe I am going backwards. I do not know the limits for
> concurrent connections for SQLExpress but I had vereral clients connected
> and it never complained. Byt I am now limited to 5 seats!
> This is a reasonably low duty server running on WinNT with a simple dual
> core processor. It is not critical. I was able to stress the SQL Express
> server by sending it data at a 30X rate of normal operation without any
> problems.
> The server goes out with a $275K piece of equipment so I did not mind the
> expenditure but if I gain nothing...well it is hard to justify.
> Or am I missing something?
> Thanks
>
>
|||Thanks Andrew,
I was aware of the memory llimitation though I did not know about the memory
limit. Considering that we replaced Paradox with MSDE and now Express, I
think Express will suffice.
I am unsure what you mean by "1 Proc ". Do you mean Stored Procedure? I
have several running under both MSDE and SQLExpress.
Thanks
Larry
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:uEu5$8uMIHA.5224@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>I don't know what the actual message stated but Express and Std are not the
>same things. Yes they share the same code base etc but Std comes with SSMS
>and Express does not. Actually you can download SSMS express. But Std
>gives you unlimited memory usage, up to 4 procs (not counting cores) and
>unlimited db size plus a lot more. Express is limited to 1GB memory, 4GB db
>and 1 Proc plus some others like does not include SQL Agent etc. See more
>here:
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/compare-features.mspx
> As long as you don't need any of those missing features or won't exceed
> the limits of Express it would have been just fine. By the way Workgroup
> may also have been an option and it's half the cost of Std.
>
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> Solid Quality Mentors
>
> "Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
> news:JAI3j.260$9x7.116@.newsfe05.lga...
>
|||Hi Larry
1 Proc means 1 Processor.
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.InsideSQLServer.com
http://sqlblog.com
"Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
news:5FK3j.127$Wl1.49@.newsfe06.lga...
> Thanks Andrew,
> I was aware of the memory llimitation though I did not know about the
> memory limit. Considering that we replaced Paradox with MSDE and now
> Express, I think Express will suffice.
> I am unsure what you mean by "1 Proc ". Do you mean Stored Procedure? I
> have several running under both MSDE and SQLExpress.
> Thanks
> Larry
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:uEu5$8uMIHA.5224@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
|||The thing that surprized me that you did not even bother yourself to take a
look at the differences between editions of SQL Server before buying its
licenses and now your are complaining. This is weird indeed.
Ekrem nsoy
"Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
news:5FK3j.127$Wl1.49@.newsfe06.lga...
> Thanks Andrew,
> I was aware of the memory llimitation though I did not know about the
> memory limit. Considering that we replaced Paradox with MSDE and now
> Express, I think Express will suffice.
> I am unsure what you mean by "1 Proc ". Do you mean Stored Procedure? I
> have several running under both MSDE and SQLExpress.
> Thanks
> Larry
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:uEu5$8uMIHA.5224@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
|||I am the developer. Others make the purchasing decision. We are a
manufacturing company and do a lot of things the "wierd" way. Thank you,
"Ekrem nsoy" <ekrem@.btegitim.com> wrote in message
news:52F09469-E27E-419E-960F-44BEAC5C0AEE@.microsoft.com...
> The thing that surprized me that you did not even bother yourself to take
> a look at the differences between editions of SQL Server before buying its
> licenses and now your are complaining. This is weird indeed.
> --
> Ekrem nsoy
>
> "Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
> news:5FK3j.127$Wl1.49@.newsfe06.lga...
>
|||Larry,
As Kalen pointed out I meant Processor. But I highly recommend you review
the document I listed for all the differences.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors
"Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
news:5FK3j.127$Wl1.49@.newsfe06.lga...
> Thanks Andrew,
> I was aware of the memory llimitation though I did not know about the
> memory limit. Considering that we replaced Paradox with MSDE and now
> Express, I think Express will suffice.
> I am unsure what you mean by "1 Proc ". Do you mean Stored Procedure? I
> have several running under both MSDE and SQLExpress.
> Thanks
> Larry
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:uEu5$8uMIHA.5224@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>

differences between versions of SQL serve2005

I just purchased 2 copies of SQL Server 2005 standard edition at the tune of
$1000 each. It comes with 5 CALs. I had been using SQLExpress 2005 but
decided to use the full version prior to shipping the deliverable. When I
went to install the software (on a michine with SQL Express already
installed) I was essentially told that everything that I wanted to install
was already there!
So what did I gain for my $1000'
Actually I believe I am going backwards. I do not know the limits for
concurrent connections for SQLExpress but I had vereral clients connected
and it never complained. Byt I am now limited to 5 seats!
This is a reasonably low duty server running on WinNT with a simple dual
core processor. It is not critical. I was able to stress the SQL Express
server by sending it data at a 30X rate of normal operation without any
problems.
The server goes out with a $275K piece of equipment so I did not mind the
expenditure but if I gain nothing...well it is hard to justify.
Or am I missing something?
ThanksI don't know what the actual message stated but Express and Std are not the
same things. Yes they share the same code base etc but Std comes with SSMS
and Express does not. Actually you can download SSMS express. But Std gives
you unlimited memory usage, up to 4 procs (not counting cores) and unlimited
db size plus a lot more. Express is limited to 1GB memory, 4GB db and 1 Proc
plus some others like does not include SQL Agent etc. See more here:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodin...e-features.mspx
As long as you don't need any of those missing features or won't exceed the
limits of Express it would have been just fine. By the way Workgroup may
also have been an option and it's half the cost of Std.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors
"Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
news:JAI3j.260$9x7.116@.newsfe05.lga...
>I just purchased 2 copies of SQL Server 2005 standard edition at the tune
>of
> $1000 each. It comes with 5 CALs. I had been using SQLExpress 2005 but
> decided to use the full version prior to shipping the deliverable. When I
> went to install the software (on a michine with SQL Express already
> installed) I was essentially told that everything that I wanted to install
> was already there!
> So what did I gain for my $1000'
> Actually I believe I am going backwards. I do not know the limits for
> concurrent connections for SQLExpress but I had vereral clients connected
> and it never complained. Byt I am now limited to 5 seats!
> This is a reasonably low duty server running on WinNT with a simple dual
> core processor. It is not critical. I was able to stress the SQL Express
> server by sending it data at a 30X rate of normal operation without any
> problems.
> The server goes out with a $275K piece of equipment so I did not mind the
> expenditure but if I gain nothing...well it is hard to justify.
> Or am I missing something?
> Thanks
>
>|||Thanks Andrew,
I was aware of the memory llimitation though I did not know about the memory
limit. Considering that we replaced Paradox with MSDE and now Express, I
think Express will suffice.
I am unsure what you mean by "1 Proc ". Do you mean Stored Procedure? I
have several running under both MSDE and SQLExpress.
Thanks
Larry
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:uEu5$8uMIHA.5224@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>I don't know what the actual message stated but Express and Std are not the
>same things. Yes they share the same code base etc but Std comes with SSMS
>and Express does not. Actually you can download SSMS express. But Std
>gives you unlimited memory usage, up to 4 procs (not counting cores) and
>unlimited db size plus a lot more. Express is limited to 1GB memory, 4GB db
>and 1 Proc plus some others like does not include SQL Agent etc. See more
>here:
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodin...e-features.mspx
> As long as you don't need any of those missing features or won't exceed
> the limits of Express it would have been just fine. By the way Workgroup
> may also have been an option and it's half the cost of Std.
>
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> Solid Quality Mentors
>
> "Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
> news:JAI3j.260$9x7.116@.newsfe05.lga...
>|||Hi Larry
1 Proc means 1 Processor.
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.InsideSQLServer.com
http://sqlblog.com
"Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
news:5FK3j.127$Wl1.49@.newsfe06.lga...
> Thanks Andrew,
> I was aware of the memory llimitation though I did not know about the
> memory limit. Considering that we replaced Paradox with MSDE and now
> Express, I think Express will suffice.
> I am unsure what you mean by "1 Proc ". Do you mean Stored Procedure? I
> have several running under both MSDE and SQLExpress.
> Thanks
> Larry
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:uEu5$8uMIHA.5224@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>|||The thing that surprized me that you did not even bother yourself to take a
look at the differences between editions of SQL Server before buying its
licenses and now your are complaining. This is weird indeed.
Ekrem nsoy
"Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
news:5FK3j.127$Wl1.49@.newsfe06.lga...
> Thanks Andrew,
> I was aware of the memory llimitation though I did not know about the
> memory limit. Considering that we replaced Paradox with MSDE and now
> Express, I think Express will suffice.
> I am unsure what you mean by "1 Proc ". Do you mean Stored Procedure? I
> have several running under both MSDE and SQLExpress.
> Thanks
> Larry
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:uEu5$8uMIHA.5224@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>|||I am the developer. Others make the purchasing decision. We are a
manufacturing company and do a lot of things the "wierd" way. Thank you,
"Ekrem nsoy" <ekrem@.btegitim.com> wrote in message
news:52F09469-E27E-419E-960F-44BEAC5C0AEE@.microsoft.com...
> The thing that surprized me that you did not even bother yourself to take
> a look at the differences between editions of SQL Server before buying its
> licenses and now your are complaining. This is weird indeed.
> --
> Ekrem nsoy
>
> "Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
> news:5FK3j.127$Wl1.49@.newsfe06.lga...
>|||Larry,
As Kalen pointed out I meant Processor. But I highly recommend you review
the document I listed for all the differences.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors
"Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
news:5FK3j.127$Wl1.49@.newsfe06.lga...
> Thanks Andrew,
> I was aware of the memory llimitation though I did not know about the
> memory limit. Considering that we replaced Paradox with MSDE and now
> Express, I think Express will suffice.
> I am unsure what you mean by "1 Proc ". Do you mean Stored Procedure? I
> have several running under both MSDE and SQLExpress.
> Thanks
> Larry
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:uEu5$8uMIHA.5224@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>

differences between versions of SQL serve2005

I just purchased 2 copies of SQL Server 2005 standard edition at the tune of
$1000 each. It comes with 5 CALs. I had been using SQLExpress 2005 but
decided to use the full version prior to shipping the deliverable. When I
went to install the software (on a michine with SQL Express already
installed) I was essentially told that everything that I wanted to install
was already there!
So what did I gain for my $1000'
Actually I believe I am going backwards. I do not know the limits for
concurrent connections for SQLExpress but I had vereral clients connected
and it never complained. Byt I am now limited to 5 seats!
This is a reasonably low duty server running on WinNT with a simple dual
core processor. It is not critical. I was able to stress the SQL Express
server by sending it data at a 30X rate of normal operation without any
problems.
The server goes out with a $275K piece of equipment so I did not mind the
expenditure but if I gain nothing...well it is hard to justify.
Or am I missing something?
ThanksI don't know what the actual message stated but Express and Std are not the
same things. Yes they share the same code base etc but Std comes with SSMS
and Express does not. Actually you can download SSMS express. But Std gives
you unlimited memory usage, up to 4 procs (not counting cores) and unlimited
db size plus a lot more. Express is limited to 1GB memory, 4GB db and 1 Proc
plus some others like does not include SQL Agent etc. See more here:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/compare-features.mspx
As long as you don't need any of those missing features or won't exceed the
limits of Express it would have been just fine. By the way Workgroup may
also have been an option and it's half the cost of Std.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors
"Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
news:JAI3j.260$9x7.116@.newsfe05.lga...
>I just purchased 2 copies of SQL Server 2005 standard edition at the tune
>of
> $1000 each. It comes with 5 CALs. I had been using SQLExpress 2005 but
> decided to use the full version prior to shipping the deliverable. When I
> went to install the software (on a michine with SQL Express already
> installed) I was essentially told that everything that I wanted to install
> was already there!
> So what did I gain for my $1000'
> Actually I believe I am going backwards. I do not know the limits for
> concurrent connections for SQLExpress but I had vereral clients connected
> and it never complained. Byt I am now limited to 5 seats!
> This is a reasonably low duty server running on WinNT with a simple dual
> core processor. It is not critical. I was able to stress the SQL Express
> server by sending it data at a 30X rate of normal operation without any
> problems.
> The server goes out with a $275K piece of equipment so I did not mind the
> expenditure but if I gain nothing...well it is hard to justify.
> Or am I missing something?
> Thanks
>
>|||Thanks Andrew,
I was aware of the memory llimitation though I did not know about the memory
limit. Considering that we replaced Paradox with MSDE and now Express, I
think Express will suffice.
I am unsure what you mean by "1 Proc ". Do you mean Stored Procedure? I
have several running under both MSDE and SQLExpress.
Thanks
Larry
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:uEu5$8uMIHA.5224@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>I don't know what the actual message stated but Express and Std are not the
>same things. Yes they share the same code base etc but Std comes with SSMS
>and Express does not. Actually you can download SSMS express. But Std
>gives you unlimited memory usage, up to 4 procs (not counting cores) and
>unlimited db size plus a lot more. Express is limited to 1GB memory, 4GB db
>and 1 Proc plus some others like does not include SQL Agent etc. See more
>here:
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/compare-features.mspx
> As long as you don't need any of those missing features or won't exceed
> the limits of Express it would have been just fine. By the way Workgroup
> may also have been an option and it's half the cost of Std.
>
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> Solid Quality Mentors
>
> "Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
> news:JAI3j.260$9x7.116@.newsfe05.lga...
>>I just purchased 2 copies of SQL Server 2005 standard edition at the tune
>>of
>> $1000 each. It comes with 5 CALs. I had been using SQLExpress 2005 but
>> decided to use the full version prior to shipping the deliverable. When
>> I
>> went to install the software (on a michine with SQL Express already
>> installed) I was essentially told that everything that I wanted to
>> install
>> was already there!
>> So what did I gain for my $1000'
>> Actually I believe I am going backwards. I do not know the limits for
>> concurrent connections for SQLExpress but I had vereral clients connected
>> and it never complained. Byt I am now limited to 5 seats!
>> This is a reasonably low duty server running on WinNT with a simple dual
>> core processor. It is not critical. I was able to stress the SQL
>> Express
>> server by sending it data at a 30X rate of normal operation without any
>> problems.
>> The server goes out with a $275K piece of equipment so I did not mind the
>> expenditure but if I gain nothing...well it is hard to justify.
>> Or am I missing something?
>> Thanks
>>
>|||Hi Larry
1 Proc means 1 Processor.
--
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.InsideSQLServer.com
http://sqlblog.com
"Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
news:5FK3j.127$Wl1.49@.newsfe06.lga...
> Thanks Andrew,
> I was aware of the memory llimitation though I did not know about the
> memory limit. Considering that we replaced Paradox with MSDE and now
> Express, I think Express will suffice.
> I am unsure what you mean by "1 Proc ". Do you mean Stored Procedure? I
> have several running under both MSDE and SQLExpress.
> Thanks
> Larry
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:uEu5$8uMIHA.5224@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>I don't know what the actual message stated but Express and Std are not
>>the same things. Yes they share the same code base etc but Std comes with
>>SSMS and Express does not. Actually you can download SSMS express. But
>>Std gives you unlimited memory usage, up to 4 procs (not counting cores)
>>and unlimited db size plus a lot more. Express is limited to 1GB memory,
>>4GB db and 1 Proc plus some others like does not include SQL Agent etc.
>>See more here:
>> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/compare-features.mspx
>> As long as you don't need any of those missing features or won't exceed
>> the limits of Express it would have been just fine. By the way Workgroup
>> may also have been an option and it's half the cost of Std.
>>
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>> Solid Quality Mentors
>>
>> "Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
>> news:JAI3j.260$9x7.116@.newsfe05.lga...
>>I just purchased 2 copies of SQL Server 2005 standard edition at the tune
>>of
>> $1000 each. It comes with 5 CALs. I had been using SQLExpress 2005 but
>> decided to use the full version prior to shipping the deliverable. When
>> I
>> went to install the software (on a michine with SQL Express already
>> installed) I was essentially told that everything that I wanted to
>> install
>> was already there!
>> So what did I gain for my $1000'
>> Actually I believe I am going backwards. I do not know the limits for
>> concurrent connections for SQLExpress but I had vereral clients
>> connected
>> and it never complained. Byt I am now limited to 5 seats!
>> This is a reasonably low duty server running on WinNT with a simple dual
>> core processor. It is not critical. I was able to stress the SQL
>> Express
>> server by sending it data at a 30X rate of normal operation without any
>> problems.
>> The server goes out with a $275K piece of equipment so I did not mind
>> the
>> expenditure but if I gain nothing...well it is hard to justify.
>> Or am I missing something?
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>|||The thing that surprized me that you did not even bother yourself to take a
look at the differences between editions of SQL Server before buying its
licenses and now your are complaining. This is weird indeed.
--
Ekrem Önsoy
"Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
news:5FK3j.127$Wl1.49@.newsfe06.lga...
> Thanks Andrew,
> I was aware of the memory llimitation though I did not know about the
> memory limit. Considering that we replaced Paradox with MSDE and now
> Express, I think Express will suffice.
> I am unsure what you mean by "1 Proc ". Do you mean Stored Procedure? I
> have several running under both MSDE and SQLExpress.
> Thanks
> Larry
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:uEu5$8uMIHA.5224@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>I don't know what the actual message stated but Express and Std are not
>>the same things. Yes they share the same code base etc but Std comes with
>>SSMS and Express does not. Actually you can download SSMS express. But
>>Std gives you unlimited memory usage, up to 4 procs (not counting cores)
>>and unlimited db size plus a lot more. Express is limited to 1GB memory,
>>4GB db and 1 Proc plus some others like does not include SQL Agent etc.
>>See more here:
>> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/compare-features.mspx
>> As long as you don't need any of those missing features or won't exceed
>> the limits of Express it would have been just fine. By the way Workgroup
>> may also have been an option and it's half the cost of Std.
>>
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>> Solid Quality Mentors
>>
>> "Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
>> news:JAI3j.260$9x7.116@.newsfe05.lga...
>>I just purchased 2 copies of SQL Server 2005 standard edition at the tune
>>of
>> $1000 each. It comes with 5 CALs. I had been using SQLExpress 2005 but
>> decided to use the full version prior to shipping the deliverable. When
>> I
>> went to install the software (on a michine with SQL Express already
>> installed) I was essentially told that everything that I wanted to
>> install
>> was already there!
>> So what did I gain for my $1000'
>> Actually I believe I am going backwards. I do not know the limits for
>> concurrent connections for SQLExpress but I had vereral clients
>> connected
>> and it never complained. Byt I am now limited to 5 seats!
>> This is a reasonably low duty server running on WinNT with a simple dual
>> core processor. It is not critical. I was able to stress the SQL
>> Express
>> server by sending it data at a 30X rate of normal operation without any
>> problems.
>> The server goes out with a $275K piece of equipment so I did not mind
>> the
>> expenditure but if I gain nothing...well it is hard to justify.
>> Or am I missing something?
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>|||I am the developer. Others make the purchasing decision. We are a
manufacturing company and do a lot of things the "wierd" way. Thank you,
"Ekrem Önsoy" <ekrem@.btegitim.com> wrote in message
news:52F09469-E27E-419E-960F-44BEAC5C0AEE@.microsoft.com...
> The thing that surprized me that you did not even bother yourself to take
> a look at the differences between editions of SQL Server before buying its
> licenses and now your are complaining. This is weird indeed.
> --
> Ekrem Önsoy
>
> "Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
> news:5FK3j.127$Wl1.49@.newsfe06.lga...
>> Thanks Andrew,
>> I was aware of the memory llimitation though I did not know about the
>> memory limit. Considering that we replaced Paradox with MSDE and now
>> Express, I think Express will suffice.
>> I am unsure what you mean by "1 Proc ". Do you mean Stored Procedure? I
>> have several running under both MSDE and SQLExpress.
>> Thanks
>> Larry
>>
>> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
>> news:uEu5$8uMIHA.5224@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>I don't know what the actual message stated but Express and Std are not
>>the same things. Yes they share the same code base etc but Std comes with
>>SSMS and Express does not. Actually you can download SSMS express. But
>>Std gives you unlimited memory usage, up to 4 procs (not counting cores)
>>and unlimited db size plus a lot more. Express is limited to 1GB memory,
>>4GB db and 1 Proc plus some others like does not include SQL Agent etc.
>>See more here:
>> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/compare-features.mspx
>> As long as you don't need any of those missing features or won't exceed
>> the limits of Express it would have been just fine. By the way Workgroup
>> may also have been an option and it's half the cost of Std.
>>
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>> Solid Quality Mentors
>>
>> "Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
>> news:JAI3j.260$9x7.116@.newsfe05.lga...
>>I just purchased 2 copies of SQL Server 2005 standard edition at the
>>tune of
>> $1000 each. It comes with 5 CALs. I had been using SQLExpress 2005
>> but
>> decided to use the full version prior to shipping the deliverable.
>> When I
>> went to install the software (on a michine with SQL Express already
>> installed) I was essentially told that everything that I wanted to
>> install
>> was already there!
>> So what did I gain for my $1000'
>> Actually I believe I am going backwards. I do not know the limits for
>> concurrent connections for SQLExpress but I had vereral clients
>> connected
>> and it never complained. Byt I am now limited to 5 seats!
>> This is a reasonably low duty server running on WinNT with a simple
>> dual
>> core processor. It is not critical. I was able to stress the SQL
>> Express
>> server by sending it data at a 30X rate of normal operation without any
>> problems.
>> The server goes out with a $275K piece of equipment so I did not mind
>> the
>> expenditure but if I gain nothing...well it is hard to justify.
>> Or am I missing something?
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>|||Larry,
As Kalen pointed out I meant Processor. But I highly recommend you review
the document I listed for all the differences.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
Solid Quality Mentors
"Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
news:5FK3j.127$Wl1.49@.newsfe06.lga...
> Thanks Andrew,
> I was aware of the memory llimitation though I did not know about the
> memory limit. Considering that we replaced Paradox with MSDE and now
> Express, I think Express will suffice.
> I am unsure what you mean by "1 Proc ". Do you mean Stored Procedure? I
> have several running under both MSDE and SQLExpress.
> Thanks
> Larry
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:uEu5$8uMIHA.5224@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>I don't know what the actual message stated but Express and Std are not
>>the same things. Yes they share the same code base etc but Std comes with
>>SSMS and Express does not. Actually you can download SSMS express. But
>>Std gives you unlimited memory usage, up to 4 procs (not counting cores)
>>and unlimited db size plus a lot more. Express is limited to 1GB memory,
>>4GB db and 1 Proc plus some others like does not include SQL Agent etc.
>>See more here:
>> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/compare-features.mspx
>> As long as you don't need any of those missing features or won't exceed
>> the limits of Express it would have been just fine. By the way Workgroup
>> may also have been an option and it's half the cost of Std.
>>
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>> Solid Quality Mentors
>>
>> "Larry Killen" <lkillen@.charter.net> wrote in message
>> news:JAI3j.260$9x7.116@.newsfe05.lga...
>>I just purchased 2 copies of SQL Server 2005 standard edition at the tune
>>of
>> $1000 each. It comes with 5 CALs. I had been using SQLExpress 2005 but
>> decided to use the full version prior to shipping the deliverable. When
>> I
>> went to install the software (on a michine with SQL Express already
>> installed) I was essentially told that everything that I wanted to
>> install
>> was already there!
>> So what did I gain for my $1000'
>> Actually I believe I am going backwards. I do not know the limits for
>> concurrent connections for SQLExpress but I had vereral clients
>> connected
>> and it never complained. Byt I am now limited to 5 seats!
>> This is a reasonably low duty server running on WinNT with a simple dual
>> core processor. It is not critical. I was able to stress the SQL
>> Express
>> server by sending it data at a 30X rate of normal operation without any
>> problems.
>> The server goes out with a $275K piece of equipment so I did not mind
>> the
>> expenditure but if I gain nothing...well it is hard to justify.
>> Or am I missing something?
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>

Differences between two Columns

Has anyone computed a difference between two columns in a matrix agianst
the group by column?
Example
YEAR Diff
2003 2004
Company A 100 200 100
Company B 50 200 150
I posted this question earlier but I don't think I was clear about what
I was asking about. If anyone has any ideas please let me know. This
is a pretty common problem for our reporting efforts so a solution would
be greatly appreciated.
Thanks Ahead of Time
Steve
sfibich@.pfgc.comOne way to compute the difference between two columns is to write a function
(either embedded in the .rdl or as an assembly) and call the function from
the cell that is going to hold the return value.
Using your example and using an embedded function:
In the Tab=Layout of your design, click the menu item 'Report' then click
'Report
Properties'. On the resulting dialog box, click Tab=Code. Type in the
function:
Public Function ColumnDiff (YearAmt1 as integer, YearAmt2 as integer)
RETURN YearAmt2 - YearAmt1
End Function
Then in the Layout of your form: put the following expression in your 'Diff'
cell.
=Code.ColumnDiff(Fields!YearAmt1.Value, Fields!YearAmt2.Value)
Good Luck
Dawn|||Dawn wrote:
> One way to compute the difference between two columns is to write a function
> (either embedded in the .rdl or as an assembly) and call the function from
> the cell that is going to hold the return value.
> Using your example and using an embedded function:
> In the Tab=Layout of your design, click the menu item 'Report' then click
> 'Report
> Properties'. On the resulting dialog box, click Tab=Code. Type in the
> function:
> Public Function ColumnDiff (YearAmt1 as integer, YearAmt2 as integer)
> RETURN YearAmt2 - YearAmt1
> End Function
> Then in the Layout of your form: put the following expression in your 'Diff'
> cell.
> =Code.ColumnDiff(Fields!YearAmt1.Value, Fields!YearAmt2.Value)
> Good Luck
> Dawn
>
>
>
>
>
Thats not exactly what I'm looking for. My data is not structure in a
way that I have two columns of data already split on years, it is one
column depicting dollar values, another column depicting year.
Example Data Result Set:
Year Sales Dollars
2004 1000
2003 1020
2002 900
2001 50
2000 1000
What I would want is to put the data into a Matrix
Example:
Year 2004 2003 diff2004/2003 2002 diff
Dollar Value 1000 1020 -20 900 +30
I am wondering if anyone else is running into any year over year
comparison reports and how they are handling it. If anyone has any
suggestions please let me know.
Thanks

Differences between TSQL and SQL-92

Hi,
I guess there should be some differences between SQL Server's dialect
TSQL and strictily the SQL-92 standard.
For a researcg work I'm doing I need to collect and study this
difference, I've not found big things so far more than a few difference
in functions, unless my BNF lecture is failing.
Does anybody know an existing article that already put TSQL and SQL-92
face to face ?
Is there any big noticeable difference that you can cite here in this
newsgroup ?
Thanks in advance,Bunch of things. Which level of ANSI SQL -92? SQL Server supports the entry
level, but it also has a
load of stuff outside ANSI SQL 92. In SQL Server resource kit, there's a big
word doc which points
out whether each TSQL command adheres to ANSI SQL-92. Also, you can try the
SQL validator at
www.mimer.com.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
<craigkenisston@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1109363354.285681.136860@.f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> I guess there should be some differences between SQL Server's dialect
> TSQL and strictily the SQL-92 standard.
> For a researcg work I'm doing I need to collect and study this
> difference, I've not found big things so far more than a few difference
> in functions, unless my BNF lecture is failing.
> Does anybody know an existing article that already put TSQL and SQL-92
> face to face ?
> Is there any big noticeable difference that you can cite here in this
> newsgroup ?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>|||Why are you concerned with a standard that's obsolete:)|||>> Why are you concerned with a standard that's obsolete:) <<
Because the US Government says that SQL-99 and beyond are "Standards in
progress" and they want to see SQL-92 conformance? Because Microsoft
and the other big guys are *still* trying to come up to it?
Much of SQL-99 and SQL:2003 are like Algol-68, ADA and PL/I. Possible
to implement at great expense, but impossible for the average guy to
program with and doomed to produce horrible bulky code even for simple
tasks.|||--CELKO-- wrote:
>
> Because the US Government says that SQL-99 and beyond are "Standards in
> progress" and they want to see SQL-92 conformance? Because Microsoft
> and the other big guys are *still* trying to come up to it?
> Much of SQL-99 and SQL:2003 are like Algol-68, ADA and PL/I. Possible
> to implement at great expense, but impossible for the average guy to
> program with and doomed to produce horrible bulky code even for simple
> tasks.
>
--BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE--
Hash: SHA1
What about Ocelot DB? They claim to be compliant w/ SQL-99 and the
software is Open-Source (inexpensive?).
http://www.ocelot.ca/
"This is an uncrippled SQL:1999 database management system, an official
implementation of ISO standard SQL and ANSI standard SQL."
MGFoster:::mgf00 <at> earthlink <decimal-point> net
Oakland, CA (USA)
--BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE--
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv
iQA/ AwUBQiKkPIechKqOuFEgEQI5kQCfSGyubHDnApwA
bmeOvPkGhEWOhwAAoOT7
nMt9jFhsUm7mAXhgEPORninN
=Gx9I
--END PGP SIGNATURE--|||MGFoster wrote:
> --CELKO-- wrote:
>
> --BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE--
> Hash: SHA1
> What about Ocelot DB? They claim to be compliant w/ SQL-99 and the
> software is Open-Source (inexpensive?).
> http://www.ocelot.ca/
> "This is an uncrippled SQL:1999 database management system, an official
> implementation of ISO standard SQL and ANSI standard SQL."
>
--BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE--
Hash: SHA1
On second reading of the ocelot site I believe I've been mislead by the
"SQL:1999" designation instead of "SQL-99." Ocelot's designation seems
to indicate that the product was finished in 1999, not that it is fully
SQL-99 compliant RDBMS.
MGFoster:::mgf00 <at> earthlink <decimal-point> net
Oakland, CA (USA)
--BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE--
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv
iQA/ AwUBQiOe6IechKqOuFEgEQIl2gCfRdhJqAcXXSZb
N6RDhOg9tr7J78gAoIxr
oeMayceW7oem+/h1xBCm3lma
=UxGQ
--END PGP SIGNATURE--|||Are you Joe Celko ?
Well, I guess no other can reply with such authority :)
I recently ordered a couple of your books.
I wonder if you can make some recommendation on the following:
Im in a team working on the implementation of a query processor for a
propietary data format.
We need information specifically about the query processor
implementation in a database management system.
Besides the thousands articles in ACM and VLDB, which take very
specific topics, we have found just two books that cover this :
- Database Management Systems by Raghu Ramakrishnan
- Database Systems: The Complete Book by Garcia-Molina
Could you recommend other books on this topic ?
Thanks in advance !