Entry point not found...mdt2fw.dll

I am having an SQL Server problem. I installed the Standard Edition of SQL Server 7 on a new server (Windows 2000 Server). When I open the SQL Server Enterprise Manager, I get errors when trying to open a database table.
The first error: The procedure entry point ? DaVinciVShowSQLVersionWarning@.@.YXGPAUHWND_@.@.@.Z could not be located in the dynamic link library mdt2fw.dll
The second error:An unexpected error happened during this operation. [MS Design Tools] - The specified procedure could not be found.
Any assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated.
it could be a problem with a dll not being registered proplery. Try
registering that dll again using regsrv. However, you also might want to
read your sqlstp.log to check for any error messages duirng the install.
You'll find this in your WinNT folder.
Vikram Jayaram
Microsoft, SQL Server
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Subscribe to MSDN & use http://msdn.microsoft.com/newsgroups.
|||Thanks!
I will give it a try on Monday. Hopefully this will fix the problem.
Ray
"Ray" wrote:

> I am having an SQL Server problem. I installed the Standard Edition of SQL Server 7 on a new server (Windows 2000 Server). When I open the SQL Server Enterprise Manager, I get errors when trying to open a database table.
> The first error: The procedure entry point ? DaVinciVShowSQLVersionWarning@.@.YXGPAUHWND_@.@.@.Z could not be located in the dynamic link library mdt2fw.dll
> The second error:An unexpected error happened during this operation. [MS Design Tools] - The specified procedure could not be found.
> Any assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated.
sql

Entry point not found...mdt2fw.dll

I am having an SQL Server problem. I installed the Standard Edition of SQL
Server 7 on a new server (Windows 2000 Server). When I open the SQL Server
Enterprise Manager, I get errors when trying to open a database table.
The first error: The procedure entry point ? DaVinciVShowSQLVersionWarning@.@.
YXGPAUHWND_@.@.@.Z could not be located in the dynamic link library mdt2fw.dll
The second error:An unexpected error happened during this operation. [MS
Design Tools] - The specified procedure could not be found.
Any assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated.it could be a problem with a dll not being registered proplery. Try
registering that dll again using regsrv. However, you also might want to
read your sqlstp.log to check for any error messages duirng the install.
You'll find this in your WinNT folder.
Vikram Jayaram
Microsoft, SQL Server
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Subscribe to MSDN & use http://msdn.microsoft.com/newsgroups.|||Thanks!
I will give it a try on Monday. Hopefully this will fix the problem.
Ray
"Ray" wrote:

> I am having an SQL Server problem. I installed the Standard Edition of SQ
L Server 7 on a new server (Windows 2000 Server). When I open the SQL Serve
r Enterprise Manager, I get errors when trying to open a database table.
> The first error: The procedure entry point ? DaVinciVShowSQLVersionWarning
@.@.YXGPAUHWND_@.@.@.Z could not be located in the dynamic link library mdt2fw.dl
l
> The second error:An unexpected error happened during this operation. [
MS Design Tools] - The specified procedure could not be found.
> Any assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Entry point not found...mdt2fw.dll

I am having an SQL Server problem. I installed the Standard Edition of SQL Server 7 on a new server (Windows 2000 Server). When I open the SQL Server Enterprise Manager, I get errors when trying to open a database table.
The first error: The procedure entry point ? DaVinciVShowSQLVersionWarning@.@.YXGPAUHWND_@.@.@.Z could not be located in the dynamic link library mdt2fw.dll
The second error:An unexpected error happened during this operation. [MS Design Tools] - The specified procedure could not be found.
Any assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated.it could be a problem with a dll not being registered proplery. Try
registering that dll again using regsrv. However, you also might want to
read your sqlstp.log to check for any error messages duirng the install.
You'll find this in your WinNT folder.
Vikram Jayaram
Microsoft, SQL Server
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Subscribe to MSDN & use http://msdn.microsoft.com/newsgroups.|||Thanks!
I will give it a try on Monday. Hopefully this will fix the problem.
Ray
"Ray" wrote:
> I am having an SQL Server problem. I installed the Standard Edition of SQL Server 7 on a new server (Windows 2000 Server). When I open the SQL Server Enterprise Manager, I get errors when trying to open a database table.
> The first error: The procedure entry point ? DaVinciVShowSQLVersionWarning@.@.YXGPAUHWND_@.@.@.Z could not be located in the dynamic link library mdt2fw.dll
> The second error:An unexpected error happened during this operation. [MS Design Tools] - The specified procedure could not be found.
> Any assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Enterprise Vs standard edition

Can anyone tell me the difference between Enterprise
Edition and Standard Edition of SQL Server?
Thanks.Have you looked at this topic in Books Online?
Features Supported by the Editions of SQL Server 2000
--
Brian Moran
Principal Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
SQL Server MVP
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Billy" <billya@.yahoo.com.uk> wrote in message
news:07a201c38ecd$b26e7890$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Can anyone tell me the difference between Enterprise
> Edition and Standard Edition of SQL Server?
> Thanks.|||These links should help
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/features/choosing.asp
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/planning/SQLResKChooseEd.asp
HTH
--
Ray Higdon MCSE, MCDBA, CCNA
--
"Billy" <billya@.yahoo.com.uk> wrote in message
news:07a201c38ecd$b26e7890$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Can anyone tell me the difference between Enterprise
> Edition and Standard Edition of SQL Server?
> Thanks.

Enterprise vs Standard edition

Hello,
I installed sql server 2000 Enterprise edition on one of
my servers. It is currently being used. I found out today
that I was supposed to use Standard edition due to
licensing.
Is there any way to back down to Standard edition without
uninstalling and reinstalling?
Thanks
SteveHi,
No , you cant. Only way is to remove Enterprise edition and install Standard
edition. But the other way is possible.
THanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Steve" <ee07@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cfcb01c48aa7$f19e4730$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I installed sql server 2000 Enterprise edition on one of
> my servers. It is currently being used. I found out today
> that I was supposed to use Standard edition due to
> licensing.
> Is there any way to back down to Standard edition without
> uninstalling and reinstalling?
> Thanks
> Steve|||Nope. You can upgrade from Standard to Enterprise, but you can't downgrade.
Uninstall and reinstall is the only way unfortunately. You can backup your
databases from Enterprise and restore them on Standard though.
--
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Steve" <ee07@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cfcb01c48aa7$f19e4730$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I installed sql server 2000 Enterprise edition on one of
> my servers. It is currently being used. I found out today
> that I was supposed to use Standard edition due to
> licensing.
> Is there any way to back down to Standard edition without
> uninstalling and reinstalling?
> Thanks
> Steve

Enterprise vs Standard edition

Hello,
I installed sql server 2000 Enterprise edition on one of
my servers. It is currently being used. I found out today
that I was supposed to use Standard edition due to
licensing.
Is there any way to back down to Standard edition without
uninstalling and reinstalling?
Thanks
Steve
Hi,
No , you cant. Only way is to remove Enterprise edition and install Standard
edition. But the other way is possible.
THanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Steve" <ee07@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cfcb01c48aa7$f19e4730$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I installed sql server 2000 Enterprise edition on one of
> my servers. It is currently being used. I found out today
> that I was supposed to use Standard edition due to
> licensing.
> Is there any way to back down to Standard edition without
> uninstalling and reinstalling?
> Thanks
> Steve
|||Nope. You can upgrade from Standard to Enterprise, but you can't downgrade.
Uninstall and reinstall is the only way unfortunately. You can backup your
databases from Enterprise and restore them on Standard though.
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Steve" <ee07@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cfcb01c48aa7$f19e4730$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I installed sql server 2000 Enterprise edition on one of
> my servers. It is currently being used. I found out today
> that I was supposed to use Standard edition due to
> licensing.
> Is there any way to back down to Standard edition without
> uninstalling and reinstalling?
> Thanks
> Steve
sql

Enterprise vs Standard edition

Hello,
I installed sql server 2000 Enterprise edition on one of
my servers. It is currently being used. I found out today
that I was supposed to use Standard edition due to
licensing.
Is there any way to back down to Standard edition without
uninstalling and reinstalling?
Thanks
SteveHi,
No , you cant. Only way is to remove Enterprise edition and install Standard
edition. But the other way is possible.
THanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Steve" <ee07@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cfcb01c48aa7$f19e4730$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I installed sql server 2000 Enterprise edition on one of
> my servers. It is currently being used. I found out today
> that I was supposed to use Standard edition due to
> licensing.
> Is there any way to back down to Standard edition without
> uninstalling and reinstalling?
> Thanks
> Steve|||Nope. You can upgrade from Standard to Enterprise, but you can't downgrade.
Uninstall and reinstall is the only way unfortunately. You can backup your
databases from Enterprise and restore them on Standard though.
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Steve" <ee07@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cfcb01c48aa7$f19e4730$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I installed sql server 2000 Enterprise edition on one of
> my servers. It is currently being used. I found out today
> that I was supposed to use Standard edition due to
> licensing.
> Is there any way to back down to Standard edition without
> uninstalling and reinstalling?
> Thanks
> Steve

Enterprise versus Standard edition (2000 or 2005)

Hi All
I am a little puzzled now
Simple (or maybe not so simple) question
Is the Enterprise versions more "stable" or "usable" than the Standard
versions?
I got an email today stating this:
" (...) runs on the standard edition they may well run into problems down
the line with performance and usability"
Obviously Enterprise versions scales much better than standard versions and
the Enterprise versions has some features not supported in Standard versions
But consider a small server with max 2 cpu's and max 4Gb mem and max eg 50
users and only light load
Nothing special like data replication etc is used, you could use eg PostGRE
instead and you'll be fine
Any comments? - please :)
- Peter
--
Hi! I'm a .signature *virus*!
Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!No difference regarding stability. As for usability, well, that can only mean that EE has features
that SE don't. If you don't need those features, then go for SE.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Peter Lykkegaard" <plykkegaard@.nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:%23Ka01e7OHHA.2232@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi All
> I am a little puzzled now
> Simple (or maybe not so simple) question
> Is the Enterprise versions more "stable" or "usable" than the Standard versions?
> I got an email today stating this:
> " (...) runs on the standard edition they may well run into problems down the line with
> performance and usability"
> Obviously Enterprise versions scales much better than standard versions and the Enterprise
> versions has some features not supported in Standard versions
> But consider a small server with max 2 cpu's and max 4Gb mem and max eg 50 users and only light
> load
> Nothing special like data replication etc is used, you could use eg PostGRE instead and you'll be
> fine
> Any comments? - please :)
> - Peter
> --
> Hi! I'm a .signature *virus*!
> Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!
>|||Hi,
for the reference see the feature list on the MS website:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/compare-features.mspx
HTH, jens K. Suessmeyer.
--
http://www.sqlserver2005.de
--|||Peter Lykkegaard wrote:
> Hi All
> I am a little puzzled now
> Simple (or maybe not so simple) question
> Is the Enterprise versions more "stable" or "usable" than the Standard
> versions?
> I got an email today stating this:
> " (...) runs on the standard edition they may well run into problems down
> the line with performance and usability"
> Obviously Enterprise versions scales much better than standard versions and
> the Enterprise versions has some features not supported in Standard versions
> But consider a small server with max 2 cpu's and max 4Gb mem and max eg 50
> users and only light load
> Nothing special like data replication etc is used, you could use eg PostGRE
> instead and you'll be fine
> Any comments? - please :)
> - Peter
>
I've never heard any claims that one is more/less stable than the other.
Standard is limited in the amount of memory it can use, thus *may* not
perform as well as Enterprise under the right conditions. Enterprise
also offers some tools and features that Standard doesn't, but certainly
nothing affecting stability.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Jens wrote:
> for the reference see the feature list on the MS website:
Thanks :)
Online Restore and Fast Recovery could be of interest in some cases but only
as nice to have
- Peter
--
Hi! I'm a .signature *virus*!
Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!

Enterprise versus Standard edition (2000 or 2005)

Peter Lykkegaard wrote:
> Hi All
> I am a little puzzled now
> Simple (or maybe not so simple) question
> Is the Enterprise versions more "stable" or "usable" than the Standard
> versions?
> I got an email today stating this:
> " (...) runs on the standard edition they may well run into problems down
> the line with performance and usability"
> Obviously Enterprise versions scales much better than standard versions and
> the Enterprise versions has some features not supported in Standard versions
> But consider a small server with max 2 cpu's and max 4Gb mem and max eg 50
> users and only light load
> Nothing special like data replication etc is used, you could use eg PostGRE
> instead and you'll be fine
> Any comments? - please
> - Peter
>
I've never heard any claims that one is more/less stable than the other.
Standard is limited in the amount of memory it can use, thus *may* not
perform as well as Enterprise under the right conditions. Enterprise
also offers some tools and features that Standard doesn't, but certainly
nothing affecting stability.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com
Hello Tracy,
Standard is only limited to the memory supported by the OS. With 64 bit edition
the max is 32TB. Thats not very limiting.
I really stuggle to find a reason to use Enterprise
Given cost of hardware, its probably cheaper to have 2 standard edition boxes
that you load balance than 1 enterprise edition. With this you can do maintenance
on one whilst the other is still up.
I just but an order in for a 4 way dual core server with 32Gb of ram and
almost 1Tb of storage for 12k, thats 3k per proc which is much less than
the difference between Ent and standard
Simon Sabin
SQL Server MVP
http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/simons

> Peter Lykkegaard wrote:
> I've never heard any claims that one is more/less stable than the
> other.
> Standard is limited in the amount of memory it can use, thus *may*
> not
> perform as well as Enterprise under the right conditions. Enterprise
> also offers some tools and features that Standard doesn't, but
> certainly nothing affecting stability.
>
|||IMO, online index rebuilds is enough reason to go with Enterprise if
you're in a high-availability environment.
-Dave
Simon Sabin wrote:

> Hello Tracy,
> Standard is only limited to the memory supported by the OS. With 64 bit
> edition the max is 32TB. Thats not very limiting.
> I really stuggle to find a reason to use Enterprise
> Given cost of hardware, its probably cheaper to have 2 standard edition
> boxes that you load balance than 1 enterprise edition. With this you can
> do maintenance on one whilst the other is still up.
> I just but an order in for a 4 way dual core server with 32Gb of ram and
> almost 1Tb of storage for 12k, thats 3k per proc which is much less
> than the difference between Ent and standard
>
> Simon Sabin
> SQL Server MVP
> http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/simons
>
>
|||Simon Sabin wrote:
> Hello Tracy,
> Standard is only limited to the memory supported by the OS. With 64 bit
> edition the max is 32TB. Thats not very limiting.
>
This is true with SQL 2005, but not with SQL 2000.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com

Enterprise versus Standard edition (2000 or 2005)

Hi All
I am a little puzzled now
Simple (or maybe not so simple) question
Is the Enterprise versions more "stable" or "usable" than the Standard
versions?
I got an email today stating this:
" (...) runs on the standard edition they may well run into problems down
the line with performance and usability"
Obviously Enterprise versions scales much better than standard versions and
the Enterprise versions has some features not supported in Standard versions
But consider a small server with max 2 cpu's and max 4Gb mem and max eg 50
users and only light load
Nothing special like data replication etc is used, you could use eg PostGRE
instead and you'll be fine
Any comments? - please
- Peter
Hi! I'm a .signature *virus*!
Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!No difference regarding stability. As for usability, well, that can only mea
n that EE has features
that SE don't. If you don't need those features, then go for SE.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Peter Lykkegaard" <plykkegaard@.nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:%23Ka01e7OHHA.2232@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi All
> I am a little puzzled now
> Simple (or maybe not so simple) question
> Is the Enterprise versions more "stable" or "usable" than the Standard ver
sions?
> I got an email today stating this:
> " (...) runs on the standard edition they may well run into problems down
the line with
> performance and usability"
> Obviously Enterprise versions scales much better than standard versions an
d the Enterprise
> versions has some features not supported in Standard versions
> But consider a small server with max 2 cpu's and max 4Gb mem and max eg 50
users and only light
> load
> Nothing special like data replication etc is used, you could use eg PostGR
E instead and you'll be
> fine
> Any comments? - please
> - Peter
> --
> Hi! I'm a .signature *virus*!
> Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!
>|||Hi,
for the reference see the feature list on the MS website:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodin...e-features.mspx
HTH, jens K. Suessmeyer.
http://www.sqlserver2005.de
--|||Peter Lykkegaard wrote:
> Hi All
> I am a little puzzled now
> Simple (or maybe not so simple) question
> Is the Enterprise versions more "stable" or "usable" than the Standard
> versions?
> I got an email today stating this:
> " (...) runs on the standard edition they may well run into problems down
> the line with performance and usability"
> Obviously Enterprise versions scales much better than standard versions an
d
> the Enterprise versions has some features not supported in Standard versio
ns
> But consider a small server with max 2 cpu's and max 4Gb mem and max eg 50
> users and only light load
> Nothing special like data replication etc is used, you could use eg PostGR
E
> instead and you'll be fine
> Any comments? - please
> - Peter
>
I've never heard any claims that one is more/less stable than the other.
Standard is limited in the amount of memory it can use, thus *may* not
perform as well as Enterprise under the right conditions. Enterprise
also offers some tools and features that Standard doesn't, but certainly
nothing affecting stability.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Jens wrote:
> for the reference see the feature list on the MS website:
Thanks
Online Restore and Fast Recovery could be of interest in some cases but only
as nice to have
- Peter
Hi! I'm a .signature *virus*!
Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!|||Hello Tracy,
Standard is only limited to the memory supported by the OS. With 64 bit edit
ion
the max is 32TB. Thats not very limiting.
I really stuggle to find a reason to use Enterprise
Given cost of hardware, its probably cheaper to have 2 standard edition boxe
s
that you load balance than 1 enterprise edition. With this you can do mainte
nance
on one whilst the other is still up.
I just but an order in for a 4 way dual core server with 32Gb of ram and
almost 1Tb of storage for 12k, thats 3k per proc which is much less than
the difference between Ent and standard
Simon Sabin
SQL Server MVP
http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/simons

> Peter Lykkegaard wrote:
>
> I've never heard any claims that one is more/less stable than the
> other.
> Standard is limited in the amount of memory it can use, thus *may*
> not
> perform as well as Enterprise under the right conditions. Enterprise
> also offers some tools and features that Standard doesn't, but
> certainly nothing affecting stability.
>|||Simon Sabin wrote:
> Standard is only limited to the memory supported by the OS. With 64
> bit edition the max is 32TB. Thats not very limiting.
>
For 2005 Std there's no limit on memory - I can't recall if 2000 Std has a
limit?

> I really stuggle to find a reason to use Enterprise
Absolutely

> Given cost of hardware, its probably cheaper to have 2 standard
> edition boxes that you load balance than 1 enterprise edition. With
> this you can do maintenance on one whilst the other is still up.
>
2005 Std supports 2 node failover clustering
For 2000 you needed the Enterprise to do the clustering tango
Btw number of CPU's?
Is this number of processors or physical CPU's?
4 Xeon with HT gives you 8 processors in task manager
Thanks/Peter
Hi! I'm a .signature *virus*!
Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!|||IMO, online index rebuilds is enough reason to go with Enterprise if
you're in a high-availability environment.
-Dave
Simon Sabin wrote:

> Hello Tracy,
> Standard is only limited to the memory supported by the OS. With 64 bit
> edition the max is 32TB. Thats not very limiting.
> I really stuggle to find a reason to use Enterprise
> Given cost of hardware, its probably cheaper to have 2 standard edition
> boxes that you load balance than 1 enterprise edition. With this you can
> do maintenance on one whilst the other is still up.
> I just but an order in for a 4 way dual core server with 32Gb of ram and
> almost 1Tb of storage for 12k, thats 3k per proc which is much less
> than the difference between Ent and standard
>
> Simon Sabin
> SQL Server MVP
> http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/simons
>
>|||Dave Markle" wrote:

> IMO, online index rebuilds is enough reason to go with Enterprise if
> you're in a high-availability environment.
>
Online indexing also has some negative sideeffects
http://www.databasejournal.com/feat...cle.php/3447711
- Peter
Hi! I'm a .signature *virus*!
Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!|||> Btw number of CPU's?
> Is this number of processors or physical CPU's?
It is number pf sockets. So, you can have (for instance) 4 dual core hyperth
readed, which would give
you 16 logical processors but still only pay for 4 "processors".
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Peter Lykkegaard" <plykkegaard@.nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:eh4ja9BPHHA.4820@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Simon Sabin wrote:
> For 2005 Std there's no limit on memory - I can't recall if 2000 Std has a
limit?
>
> Absolutely
>
> 2005 Std supports 2 node failover clustering
> For 2000 you needed the Enterprise to do the clustering tango
> Btw number of CPU's?
> Is this number of processors or physical CPU's?
> 4 Xeon with HT gives you 8 processors in task manager
> Thanks/Peter
> --
> Hi! I'm a .signature *virus*!
> Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!
>sql

Enterprise to Standard downgrade

We have a SQL 2000 server running Enterprise Edition. We also have a separate machine running SQL 2000, Standard edition. We then detached the database from the Enterprise server, copied the MDF and LDF files to the Standard server and reattached. Currently, a program running on the Standard Edition server is returning an error message when trying to access "systables". The questions are as follows:
1) is this error a result of the copy process?
2) is this a recoverable error, and if so, how?
3) are there any other problems and side-effects of which we need to be aware?I have moved databases between Standard and Enterprise several times before, and not had this issue, so it can be done. Without any other information, I can only guess as to why this is happening, but here is my guess:

The user-account being used by the program that is throwing the error probably has a different default database setting than on the Enterprise version. In other words, UserX on the Enterprise server probably has a default database pointing to the application database, and on the Standard edition has a default database of something like Master.

This would cause a problem in implicit database references. If the program issues a command like SELECT * FROM systables, thinking it is going to automatically be pointing to the application database, but is actually pointing to something else, it will not be able to find systables. The proper syntax for the query would explicitly state the table name SELECT * FROM [dbname].dbo.systables, in which case the default database setting of the user would not affect the code.|||The default database for the user is the same on both servers. Any other ideas? Is there any other information I could give that might be of assistance?

Originally posted by bpdWork
I have moved databases between Standard and Enterprise several times before, and not had this issue, so it can be done. Without any other information, I can only guess as to why this is happening, but here is my guess:

The user-account being used by the program that is throwing the error probably has a different default database setting than on the Enterprise version. In other words, UserX on the Enterprise server probably has a default database pointing to the application database, and on the Standard edition has a default database of something like Master.

This would cause a problem in implicit database references. If the program issues a command like SELECT * FROM systables, thinking it is going to automatically be pointing to the application database, but is actually pointing to something else, it will not be able to find systables. The proper syntax for the query would explicitly state the table name SELECT * FROM [dbname].dbo.systables, in which case the default database setting of the user would not affect the code.|||1) Are you sure the database you moved has the table systables, and that it is not in a different database?

2) Does the user account being used by the application have SELECT (etc) permissions for the table?

The exact error message might be helpful.|||check the service pack level|||We've found the issue. Basically, an error was made during the installation of the software. To everyone, thanks for the help.

enterprise to standard

dear all,

if one has purchased enterprise edition of sql server, could he install the standard version instead of the enterprise one without violating software license?

regards

My suggestion would be to contact the vendor that you purchased the licenese through and check with them.

Thanks,
Sam Lester (MSFT)

enterprise to standard

dear all,

if one has purchased enterprise edition of sql server, could he install the standard version instead of the enterprise one without violating software license?

regards

My suggestion would be to contact the vendor that you purchased the licenese through and check with them.

Thanks,
Sam Lester (MSFT)

Enterprise Reporting Services with Standard Edition SQL 2000

Hi
I am implementing Reporting Services and SQL Server on different servers ->
Server1: Reporting Services Enterprise Edition
Server2: SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition SP3a
Can I still use the Enterprise features of Reporting Services (specifically Data Driven Subscriptions), if the ReportServer database is implemented on a standard edition of SQL 2000?
Thanks,
MarkYou need an additional license for the additional server. In this case you
need SQL Server enterprise edition.
Erik
"Mark Barker" <MarkBarker@.discussions.microsoft.com> schreef in bericht
news:318E8A09-3241-4566-B3D7-85A2C93109FB@.microsoft.com...
> Hi
> I am implementing Reporting Services and SQL Server on different
servers ->
> Server1: Reporting Services Enterprise Edition
> Server2: SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition SP3a
> Can I still use the Enterprise features of Reporting Services
(specifically Data Driven Subscriptions), if the ReportServer database is
implemented on a standard edition of SQL 2000?
> Thanks,
> Mark
>|||Thanks Erik
I understand the licensing implications - What i was concerned about was functionality at the database layer - ie Will a ReportServer database implemented on standard edition (SQL Server) support data driven subscriptions from an enterprise edition of Reporting Services?
Thanks,
Mark
"Erik Tamminga" wrote:
> You need an additional license for the additional server. In this case you
> need SQL Server enterprise edition.
> Erik
> "Mark Barker" <MarkBarker@.discussions.microsoft.com> schreef in bericht
> news:318E8A09-3241-4566-B3D7-85A2C93109FB@.microsoft.com...
> > Hi
> >
> > I am implementing Reporting Services and SQL Server on different
> servers ->
> >
> > Server1: Reporting Services Enterprise Edition
> >
> > Server2: SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition SP3a
> >
> > Can I still use the Enterprise features of Reporting Services
> (specifically Data Driven Subscriptions), if the ReportServer database is
> implemented on a standard edition of SQL 2000?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mark
> >
>
>|||Yes, SQL and Reporting Services standard and enterprise SKUs can be mixed /
matched.
--
Brian Welcker
Group Program Manager
SQL Server Reporting Services
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Mark Barker" <MarkBarker@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8B46132E-78D8-43F8-B0F0-AE70AF707A34@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks Erik
> I understand the licensing implications - What i was concerned about was
> functionality at the database layer - ie Will a ReportServer database
> implemented on standard edition (SQL Server) support data driven
> subscriptions from an enterprise edition of Reporting Services?
> Thanks,
> Mark
> "Erik Tamminga" wrote:
>> You need an additional license for the additional server. In this case
>> you
>> need SQL Server enterprise edition.
>> Erik
>> "Mark Barker" <MarkBarker@.discussions.microsoft.com> schreef in bericht
>> news:318E8A09-3241-4566-B3D7-85A2C93109FB@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > I am implementing Reporting Services and SQL Server on different
>> servers ->
>> >
>> > Server1: Reporting Services Enterprise Edition
>> >
>> > Server2: SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition SP3a
>> >
>> > Can I still use the Enterprise features of Reporting Services
>> (specifically Data Driven Subscriptions), if the ReportServer database is
>> implemented on a standard edition of SQL 2000?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Mark
>> >
>>

Enterprise or Standard edition !

Hello,
Is there any exact database size limitation for standard edition? My
database is almost 5 GB and it's getting too slow. Do i have to switch to
enterprise?
Is there any way to check the database to see it's certainly tuned and
optimized and the only problem is the edition of SQL Server I use?
Thanks in advance,
MathewThere is no database size limitation for Standard Edition.
Have you tried running the Database Tuning Advisor and see if you can create
some additional/better indexes to support your larger database? That's
probably the first thing you should try... You might also investigate
looking at some performance counters to determine where your performance
bottlenecks are.
Adam Machanic
Pro SQL Server 2005, available now
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=457
--
"Mathew" <Mathew@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:EBA743F5-E065-4857-9976-3B1A37CB4AD2@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> Is there any exact database size limitation for standard edition? My
> database is almost 5 GB and it's getting too slow. Do i have to switch to
> enterprise?
> Is there any way to check the database to see it's certainly tuned and
> optimized and the only problem is the edition of SQL Server I use?
> Thanks in advance,
> Mathew|||update the statistics in the database, defrag your indexes (set the fill
ratio to 100%)
Defrag your disk
Identify the bottleneck (CPU, Memory, disk...)
How many disks have you and what is the Raid level?
"Mathew" <Mathew@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:EBA743F5-E065-4857-9976-3B1A37CB4AD2@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> Is there any exact database size limitation for standard edition? My
> database is almost 5 GB and it's getting too slow. Do i have to switch to
> enterprise?
> Is there any way to check the database to see it's certainly tuned and
> optimized and the only problem is the edition of SQL Server I use?
> Thanks in advance,
> Mathew|||Hi Mathew,
sql server, like any relational database, should be kept tuned up and
properly indexed.....there are lots and lots of books on the topic.
I don't recommend you try and learn how to tune a database one question
at a time on a newsgroup.
5GB is a small database and unless you are doing something strange you
should see good performance from it.
Peter
www.peternolan.com

Enterprise Or Express Edition?

Hello. Through something called the MSDN Academic Alliance (MSDNAA), I installed what what they told me was going to be SQL Server 2005 Developer Edition. However, using the shared directory on their server, the installation program read "Enterprise Edition." Using a method found at KB article 321185, "How to identify your SQL Server version and edition," I finally figured out that I was using 9.00.1399.06/RTM/Express Edition.

Express Edition? The downloadable file at Microsoft is 55MB. My installation is over 500MB. Is there any way I can quickly check whether I have the Enterprise Edition? I have a feeling something in the installation was warped.

Example: How can I quickly do something that requires FULL-TEXT SEARCH?

Thanks.

Alex

If you do a select @.@. version it will tell your the SKU that you have installed.

Michelle

|||

Hello. Where would you do this? I did the following,

SELECT SERVERPROPERTY('productversion'), SERVERPROPERTY ('productlevel'), SERVERPROPERTY ('edition')

...under New Query and ran it. It gives me EXPRESS EDITION. Where would you type in your line -- and what exactly is it you want me to type?

Thanks!

Alex

|||

Can someone answer my question precisely, please? I really need this to get started. If it is the Express Edition I am working with, I have to uninstall and return the product; if the 500+ MB sitting in the directory are in fact the Enterprise Edition, then I can get to work.

|||

Yes the query you ran works fine. The alternative method is In a tsql window when you are connected to the server you would exectue "select @.@.version" which also gives you all the properties back in one string.

Yes you have Express Edition installed.

sql

Enterprise Manger CLOSES!

Hello everyone,
I have SQL server 2000 installed on Windows 2003 std
edition. The first time I opened E manager I was able to
right click on any database and go to properties to set
the location of transaction logs and so forth! The second
time I went into it I tried the same thing and now E
manager shuts down. It does the same thing to all the
databases. Does anyone know why this is happening. I have
sp3 installed...
GiacomoI don't know what happening but my be able to supply
information for you to find out.
The 2003 should contain logs of programs / services that
have started an stopped including SQL Server, so have a
chat to your 2003 Administrator to see if you can have a
look at them.
SQL Server also keeps a log, under the server - Managment -
SQL Server Logs have a look at that and see if it helps.
Run a trace and see what the server was doing before the
shut down.
J
>--Original Message--
>Hello everyone,
>I have SQL server 2000 installed on Windows 2003 std
>edition. The first time I opened E manager I was able to
>right click on any database and go to properties to set
>the location of transaction logs and so forth! The second
>time I went into it I tried the same thing and now E
>manager shuts down. It does the same thing to all the
>databases. Does anyone know why this is happening. I have
>sp3 installed...
>Giacomo
>.
>

Enterprise Manager very slow on XP Pro

Hi,
I have SQL 2000 Personal Edition / SP3 on XP Pro, P4/HT. I also have the
same version of SQL installed on W2K / P3. The Enterprise Manager seems to
run much slower on XP than on W2K. A simple click in the left pane (e.g. on
'databases') results in 20-30 second wait (the disk led is lit solid during
that time).
Could anyone please give me any suggestions as to what I should be looking
for on the XP machine?
Thanks,
Bogdan
> I have SQL 2000 Personal Edition / SP3 on XP Pro, P4/HT. I also have the
> same version of SQL installed on W2K / P3. The Enterprise Manager seems
to
> run much slower on XP than on W2K. A simple click in the left pane (e.g.
on
> 'databases') results in 20-30 second wait (the disk led is lit solid
during
> that time).
Do please check if your databases have the autoclose option turned on. This
is default for Personal edition, and it takes time to open all databases.
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Associate Mentor
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
|||Also verify that you have no ODBC tracing turned on.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Dejan Sarka" <dejan_please_reply_to_newsgroups.sarka@.avtenta.si > wrote in message
news:u2kKHRKRFHA.3704@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> to
> on
> during
> Do please check if your databases have the autoclose option turned on. This
> is default for Personal edition, and it takes time to open all databases.
> --
> Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
> Associate Mentor
> www.SolidQualityLearning.com
>
|||Neither of the databases had auto-close enabled. The ODBC tracing was not
enabled (although I'm not using ODBC to connect to any of the databases and
I hope that Enterprise Manager does not use it either).
What seemed to work was SP3a. I applied it last night and things appear to
be 'normal' now.
Dejan, Tibor: thanks for your responses.
Bogdan
"Bogdan" <someone@.domain.com> wrote in message
news:%237JkLWIRFHA.1416@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have SQL 2000 Personal Edition / SP3 on XP Pro, P4/HT. I also have the
> same version of SQL installed on W2K / P3. The Enterprise Manager seems
> to run much slower on XP than on W2K. A simple click in the left pane
> (e.g. on 'databases') results in 20-30 second wait (the disk led is lit
> solid during that time).
> Could anyone please give me any suggestions as to what I should be looking
> for on the XP machine?
> Thanks,
> Bogdan
>
|||> I hope that Enterprise Manager does not use it either).
Both EM and QA uses ODBC.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Bogdan" <someone@.domain.com> wrote in message news:e3FUs4URFHA.3944@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Neither of the databases had auto-close enabled. The ODBC tracing was not enabled (although I'm
> not using ODBC to connect to any of the databases and I hope that Enterprise Manager does not use
> it either).
> What seemed to work was SP3a. I applied it last night and things appear to be 'normal' now.
> Dejan, Tibor: thanks for your responses.
> Bogdan
>
> "Bogdan" <someone@.domain.com> wrote in message news:%237JkLWIRFHA.1416@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||Dejan Sarka wrote:
> Do please check if your databases have the autoclose option turned
> on. This is default for Personal edition, and it takes time to open
> all databases.
I've had a laptop that's been slow for months with QA and SQL EM and
it's been driving me crazy. Even pressing the Cancel button from the
Database properties in SQL EM caused undue database and disk activity.
Checked the databases, and sure enough, there was one user database that
mysteriously had Auto Close turned on. Probably turned it on for testing
and forgot to turn it off.
You fixed me. Thanks.
David Gugick
Imceda Software
www.imceda.com
|||If you want fast access to your database try SQL Admin Studio from
www.simego.com as this tool is just amazingly fast at connecting and
browsing SQL Server Databases.
"Bogdan" <someone@.domain.com> wrote in message
news:%237JkLWIRFHA.1416@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I have SQL 2000 Personal Edition / SP3 on XP Pro, P4/HT. I also have the
> same version of SQL installed on W2K / P3. The Enterprise Manager seems
> to run much slower on XP than on W2K. A simple click in the left pane
> (e.g. on 'databases') results in 20-30 second wait (the disk led is lit
> solid during that time).
> Could anyone please give me any suggestions as to what I should be looking
> for on the XP machine?
> Thanks,
> Bogdan
>
|||Another way that I've seen autoclose turned on is when
moving a database from MSDE to MSSQL.
MSDE, IIRC, defaults to autoclose on.
jg

Quote:

Originally posted by David Gugick
Dejan Sarka wrote:
> Do please check if your databases have the autoclose option turned
> on. This is default for Personal edition, and it takes time to open
> all databases.
I've had a laptop that's been slow for months with QA and SQL EM and
it's been driving me crazy. Even pressing the Cancel button from the
Database properties in SQL EM caused undue database and disk activity.
Checked the databases, and sure enough, there was one user database that
mysteriously had Auto Close turned on. Probably turned it on for testing
and forgot to turn it off.
You fixed me. Thanks.
David Gugick
Imceda Software
www.imceda.com

Enterprise Manager Stops Responding

I'm running SQL 2000 Server Standard Edition, SP4 (hotfix - 8.00.2187) on
Windows 2003 Server Standard x64 bit. Whenever I run SQL Enterprise Manager
on the server via RDP, the server stops responding. At this time, when IRDP
another session I dont get the windows login screen...all I get is grey
screen and mouse pointer....it is as if the server is hung. Most of the
times, I have no other option than hard rebooting the server.
What is wrong here?
"Rajan" wrote:

> I'm running SQL 2000 Server Enterprise Edition, SP4 (hotfix - 8.00.2187) on
> Windows 2003 Server Standard x64 bit. Whenever I run SQL Enterprise Manager
> on the server via RDP, the server stops responding. At this time, when IRDP
> another session I dont get the windows login screen...all I get is grey
> screen and mouse pointer....it is as if the server is hung. Most of the
> times, I have no other option than hard rebooting the server.
> What is wrong here?
|||When you reboot the server, do you see anything in the event log or SQL
Server error logs?
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
"Rajan" <Rajan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E79E49FB-AEC5-42ED-A296-96DBB92A9944@.microsoft.com...
> I'm running SQL 2000 Server Standard Edition, SP4 (hotfix - 8.00.2187) on
> Windows 2003 Server Standard x64 bit. Whenever I run SQL Enterprise
> Manager
> on the server via RDP, the server stops responding. At this time, when
> IRDP
> another session I dont get the windows login screen...all I get is grey
> screen and mouse pointer....it is as if the server is hung. Most of the
> times, I have no other option than hard rebooting the server.
> What is wrong here?
|||This can happen on SQL 2000 servers with lots of (large)tables (it has to
load all tables in memory) in combination with minimal availability of
resources and a very bussy database.
This can lead to a time- out in enterprise manager.
after you made the rdp session.Use query analyzer to connect to the database

Cheers,
harry
|||Nope...nothing reported in either logs.
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:

> When you reboot the server, do you see anything in the event log or SQL
> Server error logs?
> --
> Aaron Bertrand
> SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Rajan" <Rajan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:E79E49FB-AEC5-42ED-A296-96DBB92A9944@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Well, it might just be that you are not waiting long enough, as another
poster suggested. Can you use Query Analyzer instead? Can you use
Enterprise Manager remotely instead of only within an RDP session?
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
"Rajan" <Rajan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8D2F17A5-2A89-418F-9980-38796783319C@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Nope...nothing reported in either logs.
> "Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:

Enterprise Manager Stops Responding

I'm running SQL 2000 Server Standard Edition, SP4 (hotfix - 8.00.2187) on
Windows 2003 Server Standard x64 bit. Whenever I run SQL Enterprise Manager
on the server via RDP, the server stops responding. At this time, when IRDP
another session I dont get the windows login screen...all I get is grey
screen and mouse pointer....it is as if the server is hung. Most of the
times, I have no other option than hard rebooting the server.
What is wrong here?"Rajan" wrote:
> I'm running SQL 2000 Server Enterprise Edition, SP4 (hotfix - 8.00.2187) on
> Windows 2003 Server Standard x64 bit. Whenever I run SQL Enterprise Manager
> on the server via RDP, the server stops responding. At this time, when IRDP
> another session I dont get the windows login screen...all I get is grey
> screen and mouse pointer....it is as if the server is hung. Most of the
> times, I have no other option than hard rebooting the server.
> What is wrong here?|||When you reboot the server, do you see anything in the event log or SQL
Server error logs?
--
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
"Rajan" <Rajan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E79E49FB-AEC5-42ED-A296-96DBB92A9944@.microsoft.com...
> I'm running SQL 2000 Server Standard Edition, SP4 (hotfix - 8.00.2187) on
> Windows 2003 Server Standard x64 bit. Whenever I run SQL Enterprise
> Manager
> on the server via RDP, the server stops responding. At this time, when
> IRDP
> another session I dont get the windows login screen...all I get is grey
> screen and mouse pointer....it is as if the server is hung. Most of the
> times, I have no other option than hard rebooting the server.
> What is wrong here?|||This can happen on SQL 2000 servers with lots of (large)tables (it has to
load all tables in memory) in combination with minimal availability of
resources and a very bussy database.
This can lead to a time- out in enterprise manager.
after you made the rdp session.Use query analyzer to connect to the database
:)
Cheers,
harry|||Nope...nothing reported in either logs.
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:
> When you reboot the server, do you see anything in the event log or SQL
> Server error logs?
> --
> Aaron Bertrand
> SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Rajan" <Rajan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:E79E49FB-AEC5-42ED-A296-96DBB92A9944@.microsoft.com...
> > I'm running SQL 2000 Server Standard Edition, SP4 (hotfix - 8.00.2187) on
> > Windows 2003 Server Standard x64 bit. Whenever I run SQL Enterprise
> > Manager
> > on the server via RDP, the server stops responding. At this time, when
> > IRDP
> > another session I dont get the windows login screen...all I get is grey
> > screen and mouse pointer....it is as if the server is hung. Most of the
> > times, I have no other option than hard rebooting the server.
> >
> > What is wrong here?
>
>|||Well, it might just be that you are not waiting long enough, as another
poster suggested. Can you use Query Analyzer instead? Can you use
Enterprise Manager remotely instead of only within an RDP session?
--
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
"Rajan" <Rajan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8D2F17A5-2A89-418F-9980-38796783319C@.microsoft.com...
> Nope...nothing reported in either logs.
> "Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:
>> When you reboot the server, do you see anything in the event log or SQL
>> Server error logs?
>> --
>> Aaron Bertrand
>> SQL Server MVP
>>
>>
>> "Rajan" <Rajan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:E79E49FB-AEC5-42ED-A296-96DBB92A9944@.microsoft.com...
>> > I'm running SQL 2000 Server Standard Edition, SP4 (hotfix - 8.00.2187)
>> > on
>> > Windows 2003 Server Standard x64 bit. Whenever I run SQL Enterprise
>> > Manager
>> > on the server via RDP, the server stops responding. At this time, when
>> > IRDP
>> > another session I dont get the windows login screen...all I get is grey
>> > screen and mouse pointer....it is as if the server is hung. Most of
>> > the
>> > times, I have no other option than hard rebooting the server.
>> >
>> > What is wrong here?
>>sql