Can't start sql agent

Hi there,
I install SQL server 2000 in Win 2000 server with SQL SP3
and Win 2000 SP4.
The SQL is default instance and use local system as
service startup account.
Currently I change the startup services account from local
system to domain user account.
SQL Server success start but the sql agant no! I don't
know why? I check the error message - it say cannot
connect local server.
Now I change back the sql agent startup agent to local
system but it still can't start!!
Please help cause I need SQL agent!!
ThanksMay be that the BUILTIN\Administrators group was dropped from SQL Server. If
so, recreate it.
--
Sérgio Monteiro - Brasil
www.sqlpass.org
"Chai" <wingschai@.hotmail.com> escreveu na mensagem
news:082a01c38a25$78aa36f0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi there,
> I install SQL server 2000 in Win 2000 server with SQL SP3
> and Win 2000 SP4.
> The SQL is default instance and use local system as
> service startup account.
> Currently I change the startup services account from local
> system to domain user account.
> SQL Server success start but the sql agant no! I don't
> know why? I check the error message - it say cannot
> connect local server.
> Now I change back the sql agent startup agent to local
> system but it still can't start!!
> Please help cause I need SQL agent!!
> Thanks|||I'd check what the SQL Server instance is listening on. In the errorlog, you
should find entries similar to the following:
2003-10-03 20:45:28.95 server SQL server listening on 67.83.16.85: 1058.
2003-10-03 20:45:28.95 server SQL server listening on 127.0.0.1: 1058.
2003-10-03 20:45:32.49 server SQL server listening on TCP, Shared Memory,
Named Pipes.
Also, you may want to log into the SQL Server box with the SQL Agent account
and try osql -S<ServerName> -E from the command line.
--
Linchi Shea
linchi_shea@.NOSPAMml.com
"Chai" <wingschai@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:082a01c38a25$78aa36f0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi there,
> I install SQL server 2000 in Win 2000 server with SQL SP3
> and Win 2000 SP4.
> The SQL is default instance and use local system as
> service startup account.
> Currently I change the startup services account from local
> system to domain user account.
> SQL Server success start but the sql agant no! I don't
> know why? I check the error message - it say cannot
> connect local server.
> Now I change back the sql agent startup agent to local
> system but it still can't start!!
> Please help cause I need SQL agent!!
> Thanks|||If I'm not mistaken, a different error (other than cannot connect to local
server) would be issued if you drop BUILTIN\Administrators from SQL Server
and then try to start SQLServerAgent.
By the way, SQL Server Agent log file SQLAgent.out may contain useful info.
--
Linchi Shea
linchi_shea@.NOSPAMml.com
"Sérgio Monteiro" <shsmonteiro@.horizon.com.br> wrote in message
news:ucRO6piiDHA.3204@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> May be that the BUILTIN\Administrators group was dropped from SQL Server.
If
> so, recreate it.
> --
> Sérgio Monteiro - Brasil
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Chai" <wingschai@.hotmail.com> escreveu na mensagem
> news:082a01c38a25$78aa36f0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> > Hi there,
> >
> > I install SQL server 2000 in Win 2000 server with SQL SP3
> > and Win 2000 SP4.
> >
> > The SQL is default instance and use local system as
> > service startup account.
> >
> > Currently I change the startup services account from local
> > system to domain user account.
> >
> > SQL Server success start but the sql agant no! I don't
> > know why? I check the error message - it say cannot
> > connect local server.
> >
> > Now I change back the sql agent startup agent to local
> > system but it still can't start!!
> >
> > Please help cause I need SQL agent!!
> >
> > Thanks
>|||You're right. The exact message is "SQLServerAgent could not be started
(reason: SQLServerAgent must be able to
connect to SQLServer as SysAdmin, but '(Unknown)' is not a member of the
SysAdmin role). "
But I remember one situation in which I faced this issue and somebody had
dropped the BUILTIN\Administrators. May be I'm confusing the situations.
Sérgio Monteiro - Brasil
www.sqlpass.org
"Linchi Shea" <linchi_shea@.NOSPAMml.com> escreveu na mensagem
news:#kncH4iiDHA.1692@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> If I'm not mistaken, a different error (other than cannot connect to local
> server) would be issued if you drop BUILTIN\Administrators from SQL Server
> and then try to start SQLServerAgent.
> By the way, SQL Server Agent log file SQLAgent.out may contain useful
info.
> --
> Linchi Shea
> linchi_shea@.NOSPAMml.com
>
> "Sérgio Monteiro" <shsmonteiro@.horizon.com.br> wrote in message
> news:ucRO6piiDHA.3204@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > May be that the BUILTIN\Administrators group was dropped from SQL
Server.
> If
> > so, recreate it.
> >
> > --
> > Sérgio Monteiro - Brasil
> > www.sqlpass.org
> > "Chai" <wingschai@.hotmail.com> escreveu na mensagem
> > news:082a01c38a25$78aa36f0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> > > Hi there,
> > >
> > > I install SQL server 2000 in Win 2000 server with SQL SP3
> > > and Win 2000 SP4.
> > >
> > > The SQL is default instance and use local system as
> > > service startup account.
> > >
> > > Currently I change the startup services account from local
> > > system to domain user account.
> > >
> > > SQL Server success start but the sql agant no! I don't
> > > know why? I check the error message - it say cannot
> > > connect local server.
> > >
> > > Now I change back the sql agent startup agent to local
> > > system but it still can't start!!
> > >
> > > Please help cause I need SQL agent!!
> > >
> > > Thanks
> >
> >
>

cant shrink data file

sql2k sp3
Before I start, let me assure you that the 5 gigs of free
space in my db is in the data file, not the log file. I
already shrunk the 7 gig log file with no problem. Now
when I run dbcc shrinkfile(db_data_file) it runs for a
long time and then barely shrinks anything. Am I missing
something here? Any ideas?
Thanks in advance.Chris,
You may need to check for fragmentation.Refer DBCC SHOWCONTIG, DBCC
INDEXDEFRAG in BooksOnLine.
Also, may be..
PRB: DBCC SHRINKFILE and SHRINKDATABASE Commands May Not Work Because of
Sparsely Populated Text, Ntext, or Image Columns
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;324432
--
Dinesh.
SQL Server FAQ at
http://www.tkdinesh.com
"chris" <chrisr@.fingps.com> wrote in message
news:3bbe01c37626$d832d270$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> sql2k sp3
> Before I start, let me assure you that the 5 gigs of free
> space in my db is in the data file, not the log file. I
> already shrunk the 7 gig log file with no problem. Now
> when I run dbcc shrinkfile(db_data_file) it runs for a
> long time and then barely shrinks anything. Am I missing
> something here? Any ideas?
> Thanks in advance.
>|||If you want to see where your data is allocated through the data file go to
www.sqlfe.com. You can see what is at the end of the data file.
--
Barry McAuslin
support@.sqlfe.com
http://www.sqlfe.com
"Dinesh.T.K" <tkdinesh@.nospam.mail.tkdinesh.com> wrote in message
news:%23PZlOfidDHA.828@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Chris,
> You may need to check for fragmentation.Refer DBCC SHOWCONTIG, DBCC
> INDEXDEFRAG in BooksOnLine.
> Also, may be..
> PRB: DBCC SHRINKFILE and SHRINKDATABASE Commands May Not Work Because of
> Sparsely Populated Text, Ntext, or Image Columns
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;324432
> --
> Dinesh.
> SQL Server FAQ at
> http://www.tkdinesh.com
> "chris" <chrisr@.fingps.com> wrote in message
> news:3bbe01c37626$d832d270$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> > sql2k sp3
> >
> > Before I start, let me assure you that the 5 gigs of free
> > space in my db is in the data file, not the log file. I
> > already shrunk the 7 gig log file with no problem. Now
> > when I run dbcc shrinkfile(db_data_file) it runs for a
> > long time and then barely shrinks anything. Am I missing
> > something here? Any ideas?
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
> >
>

Can't query attached database

Hello.
I received a detached database/log from my client. I attached the
database to my SQLServer 2000 SP3 installation just fine. In the
enterprise manager I can query any table I want.
However, when I attempt to query a table via the query analyzer, it
always fails, even though I am logged in as the "sa".
Below is my query and the result. I am not having this trouble with any
other database on the system.
select * from employee
Below is the error message:
Server: Msg 208, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Invalid object name 'employee'.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Christian
pariahware@.pariahware.com
Pariahware, Inc. Custom Software and Shareware
http://www.pariahware.com
--
God loved you so much that He gave His only son Jesus.
What have you done with God's gift?Is there really a table called employee? Are you in the right database? Who is the owner of that table?
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Christian Miller" <pariahware@.pariahware.com> wrote in message
news:pariahware-434093.15550916062004@.news2-ge0.southeast.rr.com...
> Hello.
> I received a detached database/log from my client. I attached the
> database to my SQLServer 2000 SP3 installation just fine. In the
> enterprise manager I can query any table I want.
> However, when I attempt to query a table via the query analyzer, it
> always fails, even though I am logged in as the "sa".
> Below is my query and the result. I am not having this trouble with any
> other database on the system.
> select * from employee
> Below is the error message:
> Server: Msg 208, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Invalid object name 'employee'.
> Any help would be appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Christian
> pariahware@.pariahware.com
> Pariahware, Inc. Custom Software and Shareware
> http://www.pariahware.com
> --
> God loved you so much that He gave His only son Jesus.
> What have you done with God's gift?|||In article <uwTZNx9UEHA.1048@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>,
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com>
wrote:
> Is there really a table called employee?
Yes, I can view it in the enterprise manager.
> Are you in the right database?
Yes, I've even used the "use" command to make sure, on occassion.
> Who is the owner of that table?
The owner of the table is "dbo".
When I look under the db's users, "dbo" is a name entry, "sa" is the
login name and access is "permit".|||Try:
SELECT * FROM dbname.dbo.employee. Also, the server might be case-sensitive, make sure you use proper case.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Christian Miller" <pariahware@.pariahware.com> wrote in message
news:pariahware-21E05C.16194316062004@.news2-ge0.southeast.rr.com...
> In article <uwTZNx9UEHA.1048@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>,
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com>
> wrote:
> > Is there really a table called employee?
> Yes, I can view it in the enterprise manager.
> > Are you in the right database?
> Yes, I've even used the "use" command to make sure, on occassion.
> > Who is the owner of that table?
> The owner of the table is "dbo".
> When I look under the db's users, "dbo" is a name entry, "sa" is the
> login name and access is "permit".|||In article
<pariahware-21E05C.16194316062004@.news2-ge0.southeast.rr.com>,
Christian Miller <pariahware@.pariahware.com> wrote:
> In article <uwTZNx9UEHA.1048@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>,
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com>
> wrote:
> > Is there really a table called employee?
> Yes, I can view it in the enterprise manager.
> > Are you in the right database?
> Yes, I've even used the "use" command to make sure, on occassion.
> > Who is the owner of that table?
> The owner of the table is "dbo".
> When I look under the db's users, "dbo" is a name entry, "sa" is the
> login name and access is "permit".
OK, apparently there is not a database table called "employee", but
there is one called "EMPLOYEE". I don't ever remember table name case
being an issue when performing a querying before. I normally uppercase
key words and lowercase table names. Is this a setting in my SQL Server
that I accidentally set?
Thanks,
Christian
pariahware@.pariahware.com
Pariahware, Inc. Custom Software and Shareware
http://www.pariahware.com
--
God loved you so much that He gave His only son Jesus.
What have you done with God's gift?|||Case sensitivity for object names is based on the database collation (if my memory serves me).
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Christian Miller" <pariahware@.pariahware.com> wrote in message
news:pariahware-11C0F9.16271516062004@.news2-ge0.southeast.rr.com...
> In article
> <pariahware-21E05C.16194316062004@.news2-ge0.southeast.rr.com>,
> Christian Miller <pariahware@.pariahware.com> wrote:
> > In article <uwTZNx9UEHA.1048@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>,
> > "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Is there really a table called employee?
> > Yes, I can view it in the enterprise manager.
> >
> > > Are you in the right database?
> > Yes, I've even used the "use" command to make sure, on occassion.
> >
> > > Who is the owner of that table?
> > The owner of the table is "dbo".
> >
> > When I look under the db's users, "dbo" is a name entry, "sa" is the
> > login name and access is "permit".
> OK, apparently there is not a database table called "employee", but
> there is one called "EMPLOYEE". I don't ever remember table name case
> being an issue when performing a querying before. I normally uppercase
> key words and lowercase table names. Is this a setting in my SQL Server
> that I accidentally set?
>
> Thanks,
> Christian
> pariahware@.pariahware.com
> Pariahware, Inc. Custom Software and Shareware
> http://www.pariahware.com
> --
> God loved you so much that He gave His only son Jesus.
> What have you done with God's gift?|||In article <u2N$QN#UEHA.2920@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>,
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com>
wrote:
> Case sensitivity for object names is based on the database collation (if my
> memory serves me).
If that per database file or per server? How would I turn off database
collation if I wanted to? I really appreciate all the help on this.
Thanks,
Christian
pariahware@.pariahware.com
Pariahware, Inc. Custom Software and Shareware
http://www.pariahware.com
--
God loved you so much that He gave His only son Jesus.
What have you done with God's gift?|||Try sp_helpsort to determine the the sort order.
"Christian Miller" <pariahware@.pariahware.com> wrote in message
news:pariahware-434093.15550916062004@.news2-ge0.southeast.rr.com...
> Hello.
> I received a detached database/log from my client. I attached the
> database to my SQLServer 2000 SP3 installation just fine. In the
> enterprise manager I can query any table I want.
> However, when I attempt to query a table via the query analyzer, it
> always fails, even though I am logged in as the "sa".
> Below is my query and the result. I am not having this trouble with any
> other database on the system.
> select * from employee
> Below is the error message:
> Server: Msg 208, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Invalid object name 'employee'.
> Any help would be appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Christian
> pariahware@.pariahware.com
> Pariahware, Inc. Custom Software and Shareware
> http://www.pariahware.com
> --
> God loved you so much that He gave His only son Jesus.
> What have you done with God's gift?

Can't query attached database

Hello.
I received a detached database/log from my client. I attached the
database to my SQLServer 2000 SP3 installation just fine. In the
enterprise manager I can query any table I want.
However, when I attempt to query a table via the query analyzer, it
always fails, even though I am logged in as the "sa".
Below is my query and the result. I am not having this trouble with any
other database on the system.
select * from employee
Below is the error message:
Server: Msg 208, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Invalid object name 'employee'.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Christian
pariahware@.pariahware.com
Pariahware, Inc. Custom Software and Shareware
http://www.pariahware.com
God loved you so much that He gave His only son Jesus.
What have you done with God's gift?
Is there really a table called employee? Are you in the right database? Who is the owner of that table?
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Christian Miller" <pariahware@.pariahware.com> wrote in message
news:pariahware-434093.15550916062004@.news2-ge0.southeast.rr.com...
> Hello.
> I received a detached database/log from my client. I attached the
> database to my SQLServer 2000 SP3 installation just fine. In the
> enterprise manager I can query any table I want.
> However, when I attempt to query a table via the query analyzer, it
> always fails, even though I am logged in as the "sa".
> Below is my query and the result. I am not having this trouble with any
> other database on the system.
> select * from employee
> Below is the error message:
> Server: Msg 208, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Invalid object name 'employee'.
> Any help would be appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Christian
> pariahware@.pariahware.com
> Pariahware, Inc. Custom Software and Shareware
> http://www.pariahware.com
> --
> God loved you so much that He gave His only son Jesus.
> What have you done with God's gift?
|||In article <uwTZNx9UEHA.1048@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>,
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com>
wrote:

> Is there really a table called employee?
Yes, I can view it in the enterprise manager.

> Are you in the right database?
Yes, I've even used the "use" command to make sure, on occassion.

> Who is the owner of that table?
The owner of the table is "dbo".
When I look under the db's users, "dbo" is a name entry, "sa" is the
login name and access is "permit".
|||Try:
SELECT * FROM dbname.dbo.employee. Also, the server might be case-sensitive, make sure you use proper case.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Christian Miller" <pariahware@.pariahware.com> wrote in message
news:pariahware-21E05C.16194316062004@.news2-ge0.southeast.rr.com...
> In article <uwTZNx9UEHA.1048@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>,
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com>
> wrote:
> Yes, I can view it in the enterprise manager.
> Yes, I've even used the "use" command to make sure, on occassion.
> The owner of the table is "dbo".
> When I look under the db's users, "dbo" is a name entry, "sa" is the
> login name and access is "permit".
|||Try sp_helpsort to determine the the sort order.
"Christian Miller" <pariahware@.pariahware.com> wrote in message
news:pariahware-434093.15550916062004@.news2-ge0.southeast.rr.com...
> Hello.
> I received a detached database/log from my client. I attached the
> database to my SQLServer 2000 SP3 installation just fine. In the
> enterprise manager I can query any table I want.
> However, when I attempt to query a table via the query analyzer, it
> always fails, even though I am logged in as the "sa".
> Below is my query and the result. I am not having this trouble with any
> other database on the system.
> select * from employee
> Below is the error message:
> Server: Msg 208, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Invalid object name 'employee'.
> Any help would be appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Christian
> pariahware@.pariahware.com
> Pariahware, Inc. Custom Software and Shareware
> http://www.pariahware.com
> --
> God loved you so much that He gave His only son Jesus.
> What have you done with God's gift?

Can't query attached database

Hello.
I received a detached database/log from my client. I attached the
database to my SQLServer 2000 SP3 installation just fine. In the
enterprise manager I can query any table I want.
However, when I attempt to query a table via the query analyzer, it
always fails, even though I am logged in as the "sa".
Below is my query and the result. I am not having this trouble with any
other database on the system.
select * from employee
Below is the error message:
Server: Msg 208, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Invalid object name 'employee'.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Christian
pariahware@.pariahware.com
Pariahware, Inc. Custom Software and Shareware
http://www.pariahware.com
--
God loved you so much that He gave His only son Jesus.
What have you done with God's gift?Is there really a table called employee? Are you in the right database? Who
is the owner of that table?
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Christian Miller" <pariahware@.pariahware.com> wrote in message
news:pariahware-434093.15550916062004@.news2-ge0.southeast.rr.com...
> Hello.
> I received a detached database/log from my client. I attached the
> database to my SQLServer 2000 SP3 installation just fine. In the
> enterprise manager I can query any table I want.
> However, when I attempt to query a table via the query analyzer, it
> always fails, even though I am logged in as the "sa".
> Below is my query and the result. I am not having this trouble with any
> other database on the system.
> select * from employee
> Below is the error message:
> Server: Msg 208, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Invalid object name 'employee'.
> Any help would be appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Christian
> pariahware@.pariahware.com
> Pariahware, Inc. Custom Software and Shareware
> http://www.pariahware.com
> --
> God loved you so much that He gave His only son Jesus.
> What have you done with God's gift?|||In article <uwTZNx9UEHA.1048@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>,
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com>
wrote:

> Is there really a table called employee?
Yes, I can view it in the enterprise manager.

> Are you in the right database?
Yes, I've even used the "use" command to make sure, on occassion.

> Who is the owner of that table?
The owner of the table is "dbo".
When I look under the db's users, "dbo" is a name entry, "sa" is the
login name and access is "permit".|||Try:
SELECT * FROM dbname.dbo.employee. Also, the server might be case-sensitive,
make sure you use proper case.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Christian Miller" <pariahware@.pariahware.com> wrote in message
news:pariahware-21E05C.16194316062004@.news2-ge0.southeast.rr.com...
> In article <uwTZNx9UEHA.1048@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>,
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Yes, I can view it in the enterprise manager.
>
> Yes, I've even used the "use" command to make sure, on occassion.
>
> The owner of the table is "dbo".
> When I look under the db's users, "dbo" is a name entry, "sa" is the
> login name and access is "permit".|||Try sp_helpsort to determine the the sort order.
"Christian Miller" <pariahware@.pariahware.com> wrote in message
news:pariahware-434093.15550916062004@.news2-ge0.southeast.rr.com...
> Hello.
> I received a detached database/log from my client. I attached the
> database to my SQLServer 2000 SP3 installation just fine. In the
> enterprise manager I can query any table I want.
> However, when I attempt to query a table via the query analyzer, it
> always fails, even though I am logged in as the "sa".
> Below is my query and the result. I am not having this trouble with any
> other database on the system.
> select * from employee
> Below is the error message:
> Server: Msg 208, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Invalid object name 'employee'.
> Any help would be appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Christian
> pariahware@.pariahware.com
> Pariahware, Inc. Custom Software and Shareware
> http://www.pariahware.com
> --
> God loved you so much that He gave His only son Jesus.
> What have you done with God's gift?

can't manully start jobs

The job in SQL server agent won't manully start after installed SP3 for SQL
server 2000. But scheduled jobs are runing fine automatically.
Thanks for any reply.What errors do you get? What is in the SQLAgent.out file in
the Log directory?
-Sue
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 08:16:15 -0800, new
<new@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>The job in SQL server agent won't manully start after installed SP3 for SQL
>server 2000. But scheduled jobs are runing fine automatically.
>Thanks for any reply.|||This may be a given, but make sure that the EM registration for this instanc
e
has the proper rights to exe jobs. If you are using Windows Authentication o
n
this registration, then make sure the win login you are using has sa. Some
permission levels allow you to view jobs, but can not execute them.
Thanks,
Rick MCP
"new" wrote:

> The job in SQL server agent won't manully start after installed SP3 for SQ
L
> server 2000. But scheduled jobs are runing fine automatically.
> Thanks for any reply.

can't manully start jobs

The job in SQL server agent won't manully start after installed SP3 for SQL
server 2000. But scheduled jobs are runing fine automatically.
Thanks for any reply.
What errors do you get? What is in the SQLAgent.out file in
the Log directory?
-Sue
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 08:16:15 -0800, new
<new@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>The job in SQL server agent won't manully start after installed SP3 for SQL
>server 2000. But scheduled jobs are runing fine automatically.
>Thanks for any reply.
|||This may be a given, but make sure that the EM registration for this instance
has the proper rights to exe jobs. If you are using Windows Authentication on
this registration, then make sure the win login you are using has sa. Some
permission levels allow you to view jobs, but can not execute them.
Thanks,
Rick MCP
"new" wrote:

> The job in SQL server agent won't manully start after installed SP3 for SQL
> server 2000. But scheduled jobs are runing fine automatically.
> Thanks for any reply.

can't manully start jobs

The job in SQL server agent won't manully start after installed SP3 for SQL
server 2000. But scheduled jobs are runing fine automatically.
Thanks for any reply.What errors do you get? What is in the SQLAgent.out file in
the Log directory?
-Sue
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 08:16:15 -0800, new
<new@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>The job in SQL server agent won't manully start after installed SP3 for SQL
>server 2000. But scheduled jobs are runing fine automatically.
>Thanks for any reply.|||This may be a given, but make sure that the EM registration for this instance
has the proper rights to exe jobs. If you are using Windows Authentication on
this registration, then make sure the win login you are using has sa. Some
permission levels allow you to view jobs, but can not execute them.
Thanks,
Rick MCP
"new" wrote:
> The job in SQL server agent won't manully start after installed SP3 for SQL
> server 2000. But scheduled jobs are runing fine automatically.
> Thanks for any reply.

Can't increase datafile size

Hello All, a peculiar problem. I have a SQL Server 2000 with SP3. The
database on it has several datafiles spread over two file groups
"primary" and "secondary". On one of the files, which is on the primary
file group, when I try to increase the space allocated from 2100MB to
3000 MB it won't do it. No error message is generated. I am doing this
on enterprise manager. There is plenty of space on the disk to allow
for this increase. Any ideas? I am able to increase the datafile by
100 MB. So I can go from 2100 to 2200 but not to 3000.
Thanks,
Raziq.
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!Disk quota? Also, some confusion can sometimes be eliminated by
communication in the form of TSQL statements instead of "I do this in EM". I
suggest you construct a TSQL statement to do the file size change and post
here if you don't sort it out. ALTER DATABASE... MODIFY FILE...
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at:
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"Raziq Shekha" <raziq_shekha@.anadarko.com> wrote in message
news:e5M%23LEVrDHA.2636@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hello All, a peculiar problem. I have a SQL Server 2000 with SP3. The
> database on it has several datafiles spread over two file groups
> "primary" and "secondary". On one of the files, which is on the primary
> file group, when I try to increase the space allocated from 2100MB to
> 3000 MB it won't do it. No error message is generated. I am doing this
> on enterprise manager. There is plenty of space on the disk to allow
> for this increase. Any ideas? I am able to increase the datafile by
> 100 MB. So I can go from 2100 to 2200 but not to 3000.
> Thanks,
> Raziq.
>
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
> Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!|||Check your restricted file growth.. that one gets me all
the time..
>--Original Message--
>Hello All, a peculiar problem. I have a SQL Server 2000
with SP3. The
>database on it has several datafiles spread over two file
groups
>"primary" and "secondary". On one of the files, which is
on the primary
>file group, when I try to increase the space allocated
from 2100MB to
>3000 MB it won't do it. No error message is generated.
I am doing this
>on enterprise manager. There is plenty of space on the
disk to allow
>for this increase. Any ideas? I am able to increase the
datafile by
>100 MB. So I can go from 2100 to 2200 but not to 3000.
>Thanks,
>Raziq.
>
>*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com
***
>Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
>.
>

Can't get new LUN/Logical Drive visible from within SQL Server on cluster.

We have had a working SQL Server 2000 SP3 (default instance) on two node MS
Windows 2000 Advanced Server with MS Cluster servcie working for over a year
now.
The shared Q: and E: drives are actually two seperate LUNS from a SAN
connected via Host Bus Adapters..
Recently, needed another logical drive. Added another LUN from the SAN.
Configured it as basic disk, drive letter F: It show up in Disk Manager
exactly like the pre-existing E: drive in terms of attribute values.
It is a working a normal drive on the primary node.
Using the cluster administrator, it was added as a physical disk resource
and added to the iManage SQL Cluster Group, the same as the E: drive.
It shows up as online and owned by the primary node where the SQL Server is
active.
However, it does not show up with the Enterprise Manage for the SQL Server.
Only E: is showing. Have even rebooted the nodes for the cluster.
The logical drive F: is available for all other uses, but it cannot be seen
by the SQL Server.
Scott Lord
Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
New York, New York
slord@.willkie.com
you have to add new drive as a SQL Server Dependency in cluster administrator. once you added into sqlserver dependency then enterprise mangager see the drive.
Regards
Ram
Systems SQL DBA|||I for get tell one more step . you have to add resource in Cluster administrator.
Regards
Ram

Quote:

Originally posted by yvr4
you have to add new drive as a SQL Server Dependency in cluster administrator. once you added into sqlserver dependency then enterprise mangager see the drive.
Regards
Ram
Systems SQL DBA

|||Have you made it a dependency of the SQL Server group?
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com
..
"Scott Lord" <nomail@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:ehHkGQKCFHA.2404@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
We have had a working SQL Server 2000 SP3 (default instance) on two node MS
Windows 2000 Advanced Server with MS Cluster servcie working for over a year
now.
The shared Q: and E: drives are actually two seperate LUNS from a SAN
connected via Host Bus Adapters..
Recently, needed another logical drive. Added another LUN from the SAN.
Configured it as basic disk, drive letter F: It show up in Disk Manager
exactly like the pre-existing E: drive in terms of attribute values.
It is a working a normal drive on the primary node.
Using the cluster administrator, it was added as a physical disk resource
and added to the iManage SQL Cluster Group, the same as the E: drive.
It shows up as online and owned by the primary node where the SQL Server is
active.
However, it does not show up with the Enterprise Manage for the SQL Server.
Only E: is showing. Have even rebooted the nodes for the cluster.
The logical drive F: is available for all other uses, but it cannot be seen
by the SQL Server.
Scott Lord
Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
New York, New York
slord@.willkie.com
|||Thanks to Tom Moreau and yvr4 for their answers. I am pretty sure they both
identified the problem, I haven't been able to successfully test their
solution.
I had not added it as a dependency for the SQL Server. I only had it added
it to the SQL Cluster Group. I just tried adding it as a dependency to the
SQL Server.
FYI: The disk resource F: is online to the primary node and the SQL Server
is and online to the primary node.
In the cluster administrator, simply pulling up the properties to the SQL
Server and going to the Dependencies tab showed the F: drive on the left as
an available resource to be added as a dependency. I highlighted the F:
drive and tried to add it. I got a slightly ambiguous error message which I
will also type the text from the error message box.
Message box title: Cluster Administrator
Yellow triangle with exclamation point icon.
An error occurred attempting to add 'Disk F:' as a dependency of 'SQL
Server':
The operation could not be completed because the cluster resource is online.
Error ID: 5019 (0000139b).
This is a production environment: I am concerned about two things. Which
resource, the F: drive or the SQL Server is the error message meaning when
it say 'because the cluster resource is online' I know that I would like
for it to mean the disk drive, but I am modifying the SQL Server dependency
tree, so it is possible it means the SQL Server. I can't take that offline
except during a maintenance window. Also, if I simply take the disk drive
F: resource offline in the cluster administrator window in order to add it
to the SQL Server dependency tree, will it cause a fail-over of the SQL
Server since the newly defined dependency, F: disk drive resource, is not
online. That is what the dependency tree is for, isn't it.
I hope the answer is simply, take the disk drive F: resource offline in
cluster administrator, add it as a dependency to the SQL Server, and it will
either come online itself or I can manually bring it online, without the SQL
Server failing over.
Alternatively, I can accept needing to take the SQL Server offline in the
cluster administrator, having the disk drive F: resource online, adding it
as a dependency to the SQL Server and bringing the SQL Server online.
Sorry about these additional questions, but I thought the error message was
a little ambiguous, and I am concerned about adding an offline resource as a
dependency if it will cause a fail-over in our production environment. We
do not have a test cluster to try this on.
Scott Lord
Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
New York, New York
slord@.willkie.com
"yvr4" <yvr4.1jt3a0@.mail.mcse.ms> wrote in message
news:yvr4.1jt3a0@.mail.mcse.ms...
> you have to add new drive as a SQL Server Dependency in cluster
> administrator. once you added into sqlserver dependency then enterprise
> mangager see the drive.
> Regards
> Ram
> Systems SQL DBA
>
> --
> yvr4
> Posted via http://www.mcse.ms
> View this thread: http://www.mcse.ms/message1393040.html
>
|||That error message is correct. You must take the SQL Server resource
offline to change its dependencies.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Scott Lord" <nomail@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:e97ziSUCFHA.2384@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Thanks to Tom Moreau and yvr4 for their answers. I am pretty sure they
both
> identified the problem, I haven't been able to successfully test their
> solution.
> I had not added it as a dependency for the SQL Server. I only had it
added
> it to the SQL Cluster Group. I just tried adding it as a dependency to
the
> SQL Server.
> FYI: The disk resource F: is online to the primary node and the SQL
Server
> is and online to the primary node.
> In the cluster administrator, simply pulling up the properties to the SQL
> Server and going to the Dependencies tab showed the F: drive on the left
as
> an available resource to be added as a dependency. I highlighted the F:
> drive and tried to add it. I got a slightly ambiguous error message which
I
> will also type the text from the error message box.
> --
> Message box title: Cluster Administrator
> Yellow triangle with exclamation point icon.
> An error occurred attempting to add 'Disk F:' as a dependency of 'SQL
> Server':
> The operation could not be completed because the cluster resource is
online.
> Error ID: 5019 (0000139b).
> --
> This is a production environment: I am concerned about two things. Which
> resource, the F: drive or the SQL Server is the error message meaning when
> it say 'because the cluster resource is online' I know that I would like
> for it to mean the disk drive, but I am modifying the SQL Server
dependency
> tree, so it is possible it means the SQL Server. I can't take that
offline
> except during a maintenance window. Also, if I simply take the disk drive
> F: resource offline in the cluster administrator window in order to add it
> to the SQL Server dependency tree, will it cause a fail-over of the SQL
> Server since the newly defined dependency, F: disk drive resource, is not
> online. That is what the dependency tree is for, isn't it.
> I hope the answer is simply, take the disk drive F: resource offline in
> cluster administrator, add it as a dependency to the SQL Server, and it
will
> either come online itself or I can manually bring it online, without the
SQL
> Server failing over.
> Alternatively, I can accept needing to take the SQL Server offline in the
> cluster administrator, having the disk drive F: resource online, adding it
> as a dependency to the SQL Server and bringing the SQL Server online.
> Sorry about these additional questions, but I thought the error message
was
> a little ambiguous, and I am concerned about adding an offline resource as
a
> dependency if it will cause a fail-over in our production environment. We
> do not have a test cluster to try this on.
> Scott Lord
> Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
> New York, New York
> slord@.willkie.com
> "yvr4" <yvr4.1jt3a0@.mail.mcse.ms> wrote in message
> news:yvr4.1jt3a0@.mail.mcse.ms...
>
|||Thank you Geoff.
I will schedule the change to the dependency tree for SQL Server to occur
during a maintenance window.
Scott
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
news:%23mHvubUCFHA.4004@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> That error message is correct. You must take the SQL Server resource
> offline to change its dependencies.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Scott Lord" <nomail@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:e97ziSUCFHA.2384@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> both
> added
> the
> Server
SQL[vbcol=seagreen]
> as
which[vbcol=seagreen]
> I
> online.
Which[vbcol=seagreen]
when[vbcol=seagreen]
like[vbcol=seagreen]
> dependency
> offline
drive[vbcol=seagreen]
it[vbcol=seagreen]
not[vbcol=seagreen]
> will
> SQL
the[vbcol=seagreen]
it[vbcol=seagreen]
> was
as[vbcol=seagreen]
> a
We[vbcol=seagreen]
enterprise
>