Full text stuck in a rut - error msg 7619

I have a full-text index on a production db. The catalog is currently empty. When I try to populate it, I get a message saying I must enable full text for this database. When I try to run sp_fulltext_database 'enable', I get the following message:
Server: Msg 7619, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_fulltext_database, Line 61
Execution of a full-text operation failed. The process cannot access the file because it is being used by another process.
Our OS team could not find any processes other than sqlserver.exe using files in the FTData dir. MSSearch is currently owned by the localsystem account, and ownership has not been changed since the SQL Server install.
I am using SQL 2000 EE. on a Windows 2000 cluster. SP3A is installed.
Has anyone else come across this error? Any advice would be appreciated!

Quote:

Originally posted by lisanova22
I have a full-text index on a production db. The catalog is currently empty. When I try to populate it, I get a message saying I must enable full text for this database. When I try to run sp_fulltext_database 'enable', I get the following message:
Server: Msg 7619, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_fulltext_database, Line 61
Execution of a full-text operation failed. The process cannot access the file because it is being used by another process.
Our OS team could not find any processes other than sqlserver.exe using files in the FTData dir. MSSearch is currently owned by the localsystem account, and ownership has not been changed since the SQL Server install.
I am using SQL 2000 EE. on a Windows 2000 cluster. SP3A is installed.
Has anyone else come across this error? Any advice would be appreciated!

full text issue

I have issue in production full text search where using contains cluase with
long name of client and companies e.g. Robert M Junior Estate if my
contains clause has Robert and M and Junior - it does not return any rows
but if it is Robert and Junior it will return the rows. I have similar test
environment with same version of SQl2000 sp4 and it works when I provide all
3 criterias. I have tried to reproduce on test but unable to produce it.
Tried to dropped the catalogue and rebuilded twice on production,
repopulated. Matching noise files on test and production also.
Any idea ?
Please help
Manoj.
M is a noise word and one behavior of full-text search is that a noise word
cause no results to return. So, I suspect that there is actually a
difference in the noise word files. Please double-check its contents.
Also make sure that the production and test indexes are defined to use the
same language. (I have some British English columns with no noise words and
some English columns with noise words.)
Note: A noise word file with no noise words needs at least a space in it.
(Or an impossible word, such as supercalifragalisticexpialidocious.)
RLF
"Manoj" <Manoj@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E612A941-B35C-4918-A8C8-CBF77E40BEA2@.microsoft.com...
>I have issue in production full text search where using contains cluase
>with
> long name of client and companies e.g. Robert M Junior Estate if my
> contains clause has Robert and M and Junior - it does not return any
> rows
> but if it is Robert and Junior it will return the rows. I have similar
> test
> environment with same version of SQl2000 sp4 and it works when I provide
> all
> 3 criterias. I have tried to reproduce on test but unable to produce it.
> Tried to dropped the catalogue and rebuilded twice on production,
> repopulated. Matching noise files on test and production also.
> Any idea ?
> Please help
|||I have tried replacing noise word files from production to test and
rebuilded catalogue and still works in test but not in production
"Russell Fields" wrote:

> Manoj.
> M is a noise word and one behavior of full-text search is that a noise word
> cause no results to return. So, I suspect that there is actually a
> difference in the noise word files. Please double-check its contents.
> Also make sure that the production and test indexes are defined to use the
> same language. (I have some British English columns with no noise words and
> some English columns with noise words.)
> Note: A noise word file with no noise words needs at least a space in it.
> (Or an impossible word, such as supercalifragalisticexpialidocious.)
> RLF
> "Manoj" <Manoj@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:E612A941-B35C-4918-A8C8-CBF77E40BEA2@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Manoj,
Did you double-check the language definition of your full-text indexes?
RLF
"Manoj" <Manoj@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:61D160A2-8CA6-483A-8999-2AF0E789C447@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
>I have tried replacing noise word files from production to test and
> rebuilded catalogue and still works in test but not in production
> "Russell Fields" wrote:

full text issue

I have issue in production full text search where using contains cluase with
long name of client and companies e.g. Robert M Junior Estate if my
contains clause has Robert and M and Junior - it does not return any rows
but if it is Robert and Junior it will return the rows. I have similar test
environment with same version of SQl2000 sp4 and it works when I provide all
3 criterias. I have tried to reproduce on test but unable to produce it.
Tried to dropped the catalogue and rebuilded twice on production,
repopulated. Matching noise files on test and production also.
Any idea ?
Please helpManoj.
M is a noise word and one behavior of full-text search is that a noise word
cause no results to return. So, I suspect that there is actually a
difference in the noise word files. Please double-check its contents.
Also make sure that the production and test indexes are defined to use the
same language. (I have some British English columns with no noise words and
some English columns with noise words.)
Note: A noise word file with no noise words needs at least a space in it.
(Or an impossible word, such as supercalifragalisticexpialidocious.)
RLF
"Manoj" <Manoj@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E612A941-B35C-4918-A8C8-CBF77E40BEA2@.microsoft.com...
>I have issue in production full text search where using contains cluase
>with
> long name of client and companies e.g. Robert M Junior Estate if my
> contains clause has Robert and M and Junior - it does not return any
> rows
> but if it is Robert and Junior it will return the rows. I have similar
> test
> environment with same version of SQl2000 sp4 and it works when I provide
> all
> 3 criterias. I have tried to reproduce on test but unable to produce it.
> Tried to dropped the catalogue and rebuilded twice on production,
> repopulated. Matching noise files on test and production also.
> Any idea ?
> Please help|||I have tried replacing noise word files from production to test and
rebuilded catalogue and still works in test but not in production
"Russell Fields" wrote:

> Manoj.
> M is a noise word and one behavior of full-text search is that a noise wor
d
> cause no results to return. So, I suspect that there is actually a
> difference in the noise word files. Please double-check its contents.
> Also make sure that the production and test indexes are defined to use the
> same language. (I have some British English columns with no noise words a
nd
> some English columns with noise words.)
> Note: A noise word file with no noise words needs at least a space in it.
> (Or an impossible word, such as supercalifragalisticexpialidocious.)
> RLF
> "Manoj" <Manoj@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:E612A941-B35C-4918-A8C8-CBF77E40BEA2@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||Manoj,
Did you double-check the language definition of your full-text indexes?
RLF
"Manoj" <Manoj@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:61D160A2-8CA6-483A-8999-2AF0E789C447@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
>I have tried replacing noise word files from production to test and
> rebuilded catalogue and still works in test but not in production
> "Russell Fields" wrote:
>

full text issue

I have issue in production full text search where using contains cluase with
long name of client and companies e.g. Robert M Junior Estate if my
contains clause has Robert and M and Junior - it does not return any rows
but if it is Robert and Junior it will return the rows. I have similar test
environment with same version of SQl2000 sp4 and it works when I provide all
3 criterias. I have tried to reproduce on test but unable to produce it.
Tried to dropped the catalogue and rebuilded twice on production,
repopulated. Matching noise files on test and production also.
Any idea ?
Please helpManoj.
M is a noise word and one behavior of full-text search is that a noise word
cause no results to return. So, I suspect that there is actually a
difference in the noise word files. Please double-check its contents.
Also make sure that the production and test indexes are defined to use the
same language. (I have some British English columns with no noise words and
some English columns with noise words.)
Note: A noise word file with no noise words needs at least a space in it.
(Or an impossible word, such as supercalifragalisticexpialidocious.)
RLF
"Manoj" <Manoj@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E612A941-B35C-4918-A8C8-CBF77E40BEA2@.microsoft.com...
>I have issue in production full text search where using contains cluase
>with
> long name of client and companies e.g. Robert M Junior Estate if my
> contains clause has Robert and M and Junior - it does not return any
> rows
> but if it is Robert and Junior it will return the rows. I have similar
> test
> environment with same version of SQl2000 sp4 and it works when I provide
> all
> 3 criterias. I have tried to reproduce on test but unable to produce it.
> Tried to dropped the catalogue and rebuilded twice on production,
> repopulated. Matching noise files on test and production also.
> Any idea ?
> Please help|||I have tried replacing noise word files from production to test and
rebuilded catalogue and still works in test but not in production
"Russell Fields" wrote:
> Manoj.
> M is a noise word and one behavior of full-text search is that a noise word
> cause no results to return. So, I suspect that there is actually a
> difference in the noise word files. Please double-check its contents.
> Also make sure that the production and test indexes are defined to use the
> same language. (I have some British English columns with no noise words and
> some English columns with noise words.)
> Note: A noise word file with no noise words needs at least a space in it.
> (Or an impossible word, such as supercalifragalisticexpialidocious.)
> RLF
> "Manoj" <Manoj@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:E612A941-B35C-4918-A8C8-CBF77E40BEA2@.microsoft.com...
> >I have issue in production full text search where using contains cluase
> >with
> > long name of client and companies e.g. Robert M Junior Estate if my
> > contains clause has Robert and M and Junior - it does not return any
> > rows
> > but if it is Robert and Junior it will return the rows. I have similar
> > test
> > environment with same version of SQl2000 sp4 and it works when I provide
> > all
> > 3 criterias. I have tried to reproduce on test but unable to produce it.
> > Tried to dropped the catalogue and rebuilded twice on production,
> > repopulated. Matching noise files on test and production also.
> >
> > Any idea ?
> >
> > Please help
>
>|||Manoj,
Did you double-check the language definition of your full-text indexes?
RLF
"Manoj" <Manoj@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:61D160A2-8CA6-483A-8999-2AF0E789C447@.microsoft.com...
>I have tried replacing noise word files from production to test and
> rebuilded catalogue and still works in test but not in production
> "Russell Fields" wrote:
>> Manoj.
>> M is a noise word and one behavior of full-text search is that a noise
>> word
>> cause no results to return. So, I suspect that there is actually a
>> difference in the noise word files. Please double-check its contents.
>> Also make sure that the production and test indexes are defined to use
>> the
>> same language. (I have some British English columns with no noise words
>> and
>> some English columns with noise words.)
>> Note: A noise word file with no noise words needs at least a space in it.
>> (Or an impossible word, such as supercalifragalisticexpialidocious.)
>> RLF
>> "Manoj" <Manoj@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:E612A941-B35C-4918-A8C8-CBF77E40BEA2@.microsoft.com...
>> >I have issue in production full text search where using contains cluase
>> >with
>> > long name of client and companies e.g. Robert M Junior Estate if my
>> > contains clause has Robert and M and Junior - it does not return any
>> > rows
>> > but if it is Robert and Junior it will return the rows. I have similar
>> > test
>> > environment with same version of SQl2000 sp4 and it works when I
>> > provide
>> > all
>> > 3 criterias. I have tried to reproduce on test but unable to produce
>> > it.
>> > Tried to dropped the catalogue and rebuilded twice on production,
>> > repopulated. Matching noise files on test and production also.
>> >
>> > Any idea ?
>> >
>> > Please help
>>

Full Text computation eats too much CPU

Hi,
we are using fulltext indexes computation on Production Server.
MSSEARCH eats between 20 % and 40% in a regular manner.
It picks up to 40% then goes down to zero but some secondes later will climb
again to 20 and up to 40%
We are using System SP sp_fulltext_catalog on a main table with 2 millions
rows
and one NVarchar(255) column on which the FT Index is based.
We are searching ways to :
(1) limit CPU took by MSSEARCH
(2) allow FT computation only during a BATCH period not involving User
Activity and Perf degradation.
Many Thanks
Jean-Marc,
The CPU usage you are seeing is normal and expected behavior for the
MSSearch service during FT Indexing and some type of FT Search processing.
Specifically, for FT Indexing during the Shadow Merge and after an
Incremental or Full Population's Master Merge.
Does your production server support more than one CPU? If so, you can also
use the following command prompt command on the server to set the MSSearch
service to one CPU:
at <current_time+1_min> /interactive taskmgr.exe
and then use sp_configure to set SQL Server to use the other CPU to avoid
the MSSearch service from affecting your normal SQL Server processing. If
your production server does not support multiple CPU's, you can use the
sp_fulltext_service 'resource_usage' <value> and set <value> to 1
(background) as the default is 3 and the max is 5. This will reduce the
performance level of the MSSearch service and therefore reduce the FT
Indexing and FT Search performance levels.
Regards,
John
"Jean-Marc PUGIN" <jmpugin@.mobileworkers.com> wrote in message
news:u#zYJ6W0EHA.2540@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> we are using fulltext indexes computation on Production Server.
> MSSEARCH eats between 20 % and 40% in a regular manner.
> It picks up to 40% then goes down to zero but some secondes later will
climb
> again to 20 and up to 40%
> We are using System SP sp_fulltext_catalog on a main table with 2
millions
> rows
> and one NVarchar(255) column on which the FT Index is based.
> We are searching ways to :
> (1) limit CPU took by MSSEARCH
> (2) allow FT computation only during a BATCH period not involving User
> Activity and Perf degradation.
> Many Thanks
>
>

Full Recovery

I have a production DB that is in Simple recovery mode. I want to change it
to Full Recovery mode. Are there any settings that i should change before
switching such as from MULTI to SINGLE_USER mode. Will this affect the
current maintenance plans, backup jobs that i have currently running? The
bottomline is that "is it as simple as changing it to Full recovery in
database properties? Thanks...Yes, it is that simple. But you need to make sure you perform regular transaction log backups when
in full mode (this is the reason to have it in full).
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"mmc" <mmc@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DCA5CC99-1ECB-49E2-90C3-FB7440A4BE34@.microsoft.com...
>I have a production DB that is in Simple recovery mode. I want to change it
> to Full Recovery mode. Are there any settings that i should change before
> switching such as from MULTI to SINGLE_USER mode. Will this affect the
> current maintenance plans, backup jobs that i have currently running? The
> bottomline is that "is it as simple as changing it to Full recovery in
> database properties? Thanks...|||mmc wrote:
> I have a production DB that is in Simple recovery mode. I want to change it
> to Full Recovery mode. Are there any settings that i should change before
> switching such as from MULTI to SINGLE_USER mode. Will this affect the
> current maintenance plans, backup jobs that i have currently running? The
> bottomline is that "is it as simple as changing it to Full recovery in
> database properties? Thanks...
You'll need to schedule periodic transaction log backups, otherwise the
transaction log will never get flushed out and will continue to grow as
new transactions are created.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Could the log growth be handled by creating a "Shrinkfile" or "Shrinkdb" job?
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:
> mmc wrote:
> > I have a production DB that is in Simple recovery mode. I want to change it
> > to Full Recovery mode. Are there any settings that i should change before
> > switching such as from MULTI to SINGLE_USER mode. Will this affect the
> > current maintenance plans, backup jobs that i have currently running? The
> > bottomline is that "is it as simple as changing it to Full recovery in
> > database properties? Thanks...
> You'll need to schedule periodic transaction log backups, otherwise the
> transaction log will never get flushed out and will continue to grow as
> new transactions are created.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
>|||> Could the log growth be handled by creating a "Shrinkfile" or "Shrinkdb" job?
No. Shrinking a file is not the same as emptying it. You can try to shrink the file all you want,
but that will not reduce the number of log records in the file...
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"mmc" <mmc@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:029D7C74-7478-4CA4-A4C4-01529B9B71C0@.microsoft.com...
> Could the log growth be handled by creating a "Shrinkfile" or "Shrinkdb" job?
> "Tracy McKibben" wrote:
>> mmc wrote:
>> > I have a production DB that is in Simple recovery mode. I want to change it
>> > to Full Recovery mode. Are there any settings that i should change before
>> > switching such as from MULTI to SINGLE_USER mode. Will this affect the
>> > current maintenance plans, backup jobs that i have currently running? The
>> > bottomline is that "is it as simple as changing it to Full recovery in
>> > database properties? Thanks...
>> You'll need to schedule periodic transaction log backups, otherwise the
>> transaction log will never get flushed out and will continue to grow as
>> new transactions are created.
>>
>> --
>> Tracy McKibben
>> MCDBA
>> http://www.realsqlguy.com|||mmc wrote:
> Could the log growth be handled by creating a "Shrinkfile" or "Shrinkdb" job?
>
Nope. Shrinking removes free space from the files, it doesn't remove
committed transactions. Backing up the log file will remove the
committed transactions.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||And before you can start making transaction log backups, you'll have to make
a full backup.
You should do that as soon as you make the switch to full mode.
--
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
http://sqlblog.com
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OlQotFyEHHA.2356@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Yes, it is that simple. But you need to make sure you perform regular
> transaction log backups when in full mode (this is the reason to have it
> in full).
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "mmc" <mmc@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:DCA5CC99-1ECB-49E2-90C3-FB7440A4BE34@.microsoft.com...
>>I have a production DB that is in Simple recovery mode. I want to change
>>it
>> to Full Recovery mode. Are there any settings that i should change before
>> switching such as from MULTI to SINGLE_USER mode. Will this affect the
>> current maintenance plans, backup jobs that i have currently running? The
>> bottomline is that "is it as simple as changing it to Full recovery in
>> database properties? Thanks...
>

Full Recovery

I have a production DB that is in Simple recovery mode. I want to change it
to Full Recovery mode. Are there any settings that i should change before
switching such as from MULTI to SINGLE_USER mode. Will this affect the
current maintenance plans, backup jobs that i have currently running? The
bottomline is that "is it as simple as changing it to Full recovery in
database properties? Thanks...Yes, it is that simple. But you need to make sure you perform regular transa
ction log backups when
in full mode (this is the reason to have it in full).
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"mmc" <mmc@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DCA5CC99-1ECB-49E2-90C3-FB7440A4BE34@.microsoft.com...
>I have a production DB that is in Simple recovery mode. I want to change it
> to Full Recovery mode. Are there any settings that i should change before
> switching such as from MULTI to SINGLE_USER mode. Will this affect the
> current maintenance plans, backup jobs that i have currently running? The
> bottomline is that "is it as simple as changing it to Full recovery in
> database properties? Thanks...|||mmc wrote:
> I have a production DB that is in Simple recovery mode. I want to change i
t
> to Full Recovery mode. Are there any settings that i should change before
> switching such as from MULTI to SINGLE_USER mode. Will this affect the
> current maintenance plans, backup jobs that i have currently running? The
> bottomline is that "is it as simple as changing it to Full recovery in
> database properties? Thanks...
You'll need to schedule periodic transaction log backups, otherwise the
transaction log will never get flushed out and will continue to grow as
new transactions are created.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Could the log growth be handled by creating a "Shrinkfile" or "Shrinkdb" job
?
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:

> mmc wrote:
> You'll need to schedule periodic transaction log backups, otherwise the
> transaction log will never get flushed out and will continue to grow as
> new transactions are created.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
>|||> Could the log growth be handled by creating a "Shrinkfile" or "Shrinkdb" j
ob?
No. Shrinking a file is not the same as emptying it. You can try to shrink t
he file all you want,
but that will not reduce the number of log records in the file...
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"mmc" <mmc@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:029D7C74-7478-4CA4-A4C4-01529B9B71C0@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Could the log growth be handled by creating a "Shrinkfile" or "Shrinkdb" j
ob?
> "Tracy McKibben" wrote:
>|||mmc wrote:
> Could the log growth be handled by creating a "Shrinkfile" or "Shrinkdb" j
ob?
>
Nope. Shrinking removes free space from the files, it doesn't remove
committed transactions. Backing up the log file will remove the
committed transactions.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||And before you can start making transaction log backups, you'll have to make
a full backup.
You should do that as soon as you make the switch to full mode.
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
http://sqlblog.com
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OlQotFyEHHA.2356@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Yes, it is that simple. But you need to make sure you perform regular
> transaction log backups when in full mode (this is the reason to have it
> in full).
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "mmc" <mmc@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:DCA5CC99-1ECB-49E2-90C3-FB7440A4BE34@.microsoft.com...
>

Full Recovery

I have a production DB that is in Simple recovery mode. I want to change it
to Full Recovery mode. Are there any settings that i should change before
switching such as from MULTI to SINGLE_USER mode. Will this affect the
current maintenance plans, backup jobs that i have currently running? The
bottomline is that "is it as simple as changing it to Full recovery in
database properties? Thanks...
mmc wrote:
> I have a production DB that is in Simple recovery mode. I want to change it
> to Full Recovery mode. Are there any settings that i should change before
> switching such as from MULTI to SINGLE_USER mode. Will this affect the
> current maintenance plans, backup jobs that i have currently running? The
> bottomline is that "is it as simple as changing it to Full recovery in
> database properties? Thanks...
You'll need to schedule periodic transaction log backups, otherwise the
transaction log will never get flushed out and will continue to grow as
new transactions are created.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com
|||Could the log growth be handled by creating a "Shrinkfile" or "Shrinkdb" job?
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:

> mmc wrote:
> You'll need to schedule periodic transaction log backups, otherwise the
> transaction log will never get flushed out and will continue to grow as
> new transactions are created.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
>
|||mmc wrote:
> Could the log growth be handled by creating a "Shrinkfile" or "Shrinkdb" job?
>
Nope. Shrinking removes free space from the files, it doesn't remove
committed transactions. Backing up the log file will remove the
committed transactions.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com

Full Install for SP2

I have one production SQL server 2000 with Reporting services SP2 installed
on it. I have a redundent IIS 6.0 just purchased. I went to install RS on
it and point it to the production machine but it won't install because the CD
I have is RS SP1 which isn't compatible with SP2. How can I get my hands on
a Full install of RS SP2 so that I can install it on my new IIS machine?
Thanks,
JohnThere is not a full install with SP2. You have to install and then upgrade
with SP2. SP2 includes all the fixes from SP1.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"John Supplee" <JohnSupplee@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D8929F90-02FE-4782-AECF-E3028CC5C72F@.microsoft.com...
>I have one production SQL server 2000 with Reporting services SP2 installed
> on it. I have a redundent IIS 6.0 just purchased. I went to install RS
> on
> it and point it to the production machine but it won't install because the
> CD
> I have is RS SP1 which isn't compatible with SP2. How can I get my hands
> on
> a Full install of RS SP2 so that I can install it on my new IIS machine?
> Thanks,
> John
>|||Bruce,
Thanks for your reply. I already have SP2 installed. I am trying to
install Reporting Services on a new IIS machine and it won't let me because I
have a RS SP1 install and that is not compatible with SP2. Are you telling
me the only way to install this on my new machine is to completely uninstall
RS, on my production machine, and then reinstall RS on the new IIS machine?
Do you know if MS is going to come out with a CD soon for a full RS SP2
install? Since SP2 is incompatible with SP1 I can't imagine I'll be the only
one with this problem...
Thanks,
John
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> There is not a full install with SP2. You have to install and then upgrade
> with SP2. SP2 includes all the fixes from SP1.
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "John Supplee" <JohnSupplee@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D8929F90-02FE-4782-AECF-E3028CC5C72F@.microsoft.com...
> >I have one production SQL server 2000 with Reporting services SP2 installed
> > on it. I have a redundent IIS 6.0 just purchased. I went to install RS
> > on
> > it and point it to the production machine but it won't install because the
> > CD
> > I have is RS SP1 which isn't compatible with SP2. How can I get my hands
> > on
> > a Full install of RS SP2 so that I can install it on my new IIS machine?
> > Thanks,
> > John
> >
>
>|||I'm confused on what you are trying to do. Are you setting up up a web farm?
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"John Supplee" <JohnSupplee@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DB20322D-8C67-43A0-B520-24BF7E80C34B@.microsoft.com...
> Bruce,
> Thanks for your reply. I already have SP2 installed. I am trying to
> install Reporting Services on a new IIS machine and it won't let me
> because I
> have a RS SP1 install and that is not compatible with SP2. Are you
> telling
> me the only way to install this on my new machine is to completely
> uninstall
> RS, on my production machine, and then reinstall RS on the new IIS
> machine?
> Do you know if MS is going to come out with a CD soon for a full RS SP2
> install? Since SP2 is incompatible with SP1 I can't imagine I'll be the
> only
> one with this problem...
> Thanks,
> John
> "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> There is not a full install with SP2. You have to install and then
>> upgrade
>> with SP2. SP2 includes all the fixes from SP1.
>>
>> --
>> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> "John Supplee" <JohnSupplee@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:D8929F90-02FE-4782-AECF-E3028CC5C72F@.microsoft.com...
>> >I have one production SQL server 2000 with Reporting services SP2
>> >installed
>> > on it. I have a redundent IIS 6.0 just purchased. I went to install
>> > RS
>> > on
>> > it and point it to the production machine but it won't install because
>> > the
>> > CD
>> > I have is RS SP1 which isn't compatible with SP2. How can I get my
>> > hands
>> > on
>> > a Full install of RS SP2 so that I can install it on my new IIS
>> > machine?
>> > Thanks,
>> > John
>> >
>>|||I am setting up redundancy. I have a production IIS and SQL server running
RS SP2. I have a redundant SQL server that is getting updates from the
production server using Double-take. I would like to have the production IIS
machine replicate to the backup IIS machine using the same software. In
order to do this I need all the same products and versions on the redundant
server before I set up the replication. Unfortunately I upgraded my
production IIS and SQL to SP2 before I did the original install of RS on my
backup IIS machine. I tried installing RS but it tells me my CD RS version,
SP1, is incompatible with the production SQL version, SP2. I figured it
would be easy enough to just get a CD with a full install, including SP2,
from MS.
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> I'm confused on what you are trying to do. Are you setting up up a web farm?
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>
> "John Supplee" <JohnSupplee@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:DB20322D-8C67-43A0-B520-24BF7E80C34B@.microsoft.com...
> > Bruce,
> > Thanks for your reply. I already have SP2 installed. I am trying to
> > install Reporting Services on a new IIS machine and it won't let me
> > because I
> > have a RS SP1 install and that is not compatible with SP2. Are you
> > telling
> > me the only way to install this on my new machine is to completely
> > uninstall
> > RS, on my production machine, and then reinstall RS on the new IIS
> > machine?
> > Do you know if MS is going to come out with a CD soon for a full RS SP2
> > install? Since SP2 is incompatible with SP1 I can't imagine I'll be the
> > only
> > one with this problem...
> >
> > Thanks,
> > John
> >
> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >> There is not a full install with SP2. You have to install and then
> >> upgrade
> >> with SP2. SP2 includes all the fixes from SP1.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >>
> >> "John Supplee" <JohnSupplee@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:D8929F90-02FE-4782-AECF-E3028CC5C72F@.microsoft.com...
> >> >I have one production SQL server 2000 with Reporting services SP2
> >> >installed
> >> > on it. I have a redundent IIS 6.0 just purchased. I went to install
> >> > RS
> >> > on
> >> > it and point it to the production machine but it won't install because
> >> > the
> >> > CD
> >> > I have is RS SP1 which isn't compatible with SP2. How can I get my
> >> > hands
> >> > on
> >> > a Full install of RS SP2 so that I can install it on my new IIS
> >> > machine?
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > John
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>|||You might not be the only one but what you are doing is not the normal way
for redundancy (by normal I mean the way the product is designed to provide
redundancy). RS was designed to provide reduncancy by creating a web farm.
All the IIS boxes use the same, single database server (which could have a
redundancy setup). The downside of this is licensing, each box needs to have
an enterprise license. Although this might still be the case with what you
are doing as well. At a minimum today you need 2 licenses. One for your IIS
box and one for your SQL Server box.
I suggesting reading up on how to install and setup a web farm, could be it
would give you ideas on how to move ahead with this.
Off the top of my head one thing you could do is to temporarily have SQL
Server locally on the second box and install RS. Then when done point it
away from being local to the other SQL Server box and remove SQL Server from
the second IIS box. I know this is possible but have not done it myself.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"John Supplee" <JohnSupplee@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CC7BDAC3-1F73-4848-A0E8-F190068C363B@.microsoft.com...
>I am setting up redundancy. I have a production IIS and SQL server running
> RS SP2. I have a redundant SQL server that is getting updates from the
> production server using Double-take. I would like to have the production
> IIS
> machine replicate to the backup IIS machine using the same software. In
> order to do this I need all the same products and versions on the
> redundant
> server before I set up the replication. Unfortunately I upgraded my
> production IIS and SQL to SP2 before I did the original install of RS on
> my
> backup IIS machine. I tried installing RS but it tells me my CD RS
> version,
> SP1, is incompatible with the production SQL version, SP2. I figured it
> would be easy enough to just get a CD with a full install, including SP2,
> from MS.
> "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> I'm confused on what you are trying to do. Are you setting up up a web
>> farm?
>>
>> --
>> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>>
>> "John Supplee" <JohnSupplee@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:DB20322D-8C67-43A0-B520-24BF7E80C34B@.microsoft.com...
>> > Bruce,
>> > Thanks for your reply. I already have SP2 installed. I am trying to
>> > install Reporting Services on a new IIS machine and it won't let me
>> > because I
>> > have a RS SP1 install and that is not compatible with SP2. Are you
>> > telling
>> > me the only way to install this on my new machine is to completely
>> > uninstall
>> > RS, on my production machine, and then reinstall RS on the new IIS
>> > machine?
>> > Do you know if MS is going to come out with a CD soon for a full RS SP2
>> > install? Since SP2 is incompatible with SP1 I can't imagine I'll be
>> > the
>> > only
>> > one with this problem...
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > John
>> >
>> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> There is not a full install with SP2. You have to install and then
>> >> upgrade
>> >> with SP2. SP2 includes all the fixes from SP1.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >>
>> >> "John Supplee" <JohnSupplee@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> >> message
>> >> news:D8929F90-02FE-4782-AECF-E3028CC5C72F@.microsoft.com...
>> >> >I have one production SQL server 2000 with Reporting services SP2
>> >> >installed
>> >> > on it. I have a redundent IIS 6.0 just purchased. I went to
>> >> > install
>> >> > RS
>> >> > on
>> >> > it and point it to the production machine but it won't install
>> >> > because
>> >> > the
>> >> > CD
>> >> > I have is RS SP1 which isn't compatible with SP2. How can I get my
>> >> > hands
>> >> > on
>> >> > a Full install of RS SP2 so that I can install it on my new IIS
>> >> > machine?
>> >> > Thanks,
>> >> > John
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>