Showing posts with label instances. Show all posts
Showing posts with label instances. Show all posts

Thursday, March 29, 2012

Enumerating instances without DMO

Can anyone suggest a method of enumerating instances of MSDE 2000 without
using DMO ?

Using C++, MFC, and ADO.

ThanksSee questions 12 and 13:

http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...6&Product=sql2k

If you need to enumerate instances externally (ie without access to the
server's registry), then SQLDMO may still be the best option - see the
ListAvailableSQLServers method. Also see here:

http://www.sqldev.net/misc/ListSQLSvr.htm

Simon|||Simon,

Many thanks. I feel a bit foolish as I trawled through that document,
although it was a few years ago...

I have not got satisfactory results from 'ListAvailableSQLServers'. Function
returns OK but the resulting loop yields only 1 server, I have two
instances. Never mind, the registry is fine for my needs and a lot simpler.

Cheers

Jon.

"Simon Hayes" <sql@.hayes.ch> wrote in message
news:1118213082.991451.13250@.f14g2000cwb.googlegro ups.com...
> See questions 12 and 13:
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...6&Product=sql2k
> If you need to enumerate instances externally (ie without access to the
> server's registry), then SQLDMO may still be the best option - see the
> ListAvailableSQLServers method. Also see here:
> http://www.sqldev.net/misc/ListSQLSvr.htm
> Simonsql

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

enumerate the list of MSDE instances

Hi All,
I want to enumerate the list of MSDE instances on LAN using VB6.I
cannot use SQLDMO or SMO library.
I am using NetServerEnum API but it displays only SQL servers and
default MSDE instance.
Is there any API or other means to get the list of named instance of
MSDE in VB6.
Please advice.
Nidhi Sharma
Thanks for your response!
SuperSockets Network Protocols were enabled during installation of
MSDE2000.
I am able to connect successfully using <Computer Name>/
<InstanceName>. But the problem is that i am unable to get the list of
MSDE instances on the LAN.It displays the default instance if present.
Could you guide me how to broadcast UDP on port 1434 in VB6?
Nidhi Sharma

EnumAvailableSqlServers does not return version numbers correctly

Hi,
I have a machine that has just SQL2005 (as default instance with no instance
name.) I am trying to list all SQL 2005 server instances on the network usin
g
SmoApplication.EnumAvailableSqlServers( ) and trying to filter the servers
based on version information. This machine shows up in the list, but does no
t
have version information. I saw another post on Sql Server Programming
newgroup without any response. Is this a known bug in SMO? If it is, does
anyone know how I can list SQL2005 servers only on a network that has both
SQL2005 and SQL2000 servers?
Any help is geratly appreciated.SMO in its current implementation uses
SqlDataSourceEnumerator.GetDataSources under the cover (
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/li...
etdatasources(VS.80).aspx)
Can you try writing calling this instead and see if you get the version?
This can help us isolate the problem.
Thanks,
--
Ciprian Gerea
SDE, SqlServer
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Raghu" <Raghu@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7EB858DE-22E5-41B3-B46A-1D8229406630@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I have a machine that has just SQL2005 (as default instance with no
> instance
> name.) I am trying to list all SQL 2005 server instances on the network
> using
> SmoApplication.EnumAvailableSqlServers( ) and trying to filter the servers
> based on version information. This machine shows up in the list, but does
> not
> have version information. I saw another post on Sql Server Programming
> newgroup without any response. Is this a known bug in SMO? If it is, does
> anyone know how I can list SQL2005 servers only on a network that has both
> SQL2005 and SQL2000 servers?
> Any help is geratly appreciated.

EnumAvailableSqlServers does not return all instances

Hello All,

When I execute

SmoApplication.EnumAvailableSqlServers("AServerNameHere"), passing in the hostname of a system I know to be running multiple instances (2x 2000 and 1 x 2005), it only returns/finds the default unnamed instance. I thought this could have been some form of security issue as per http://blogs.msdn.com/sql_protocols/archive/2005/09/24/473502.aspx, however this is not the case because:

1. When I execute SmoAppliction.EnumAvailableSqlServers() (ie - without passing in a servername) ALL instances are discovered on the above hostname.

2. If i maunally execute SmoApplication.EnumAvailableSqlServers("AServernamehere\Instance") it successfully returns/discovers the instance I explicitly pass it.

Isn't this method supposed to return all instances running on the hostname that is specified? If so, in what manner are you to pass in the hostname ("Hostname\%" or "Hostname\*")?

Cheers

Rob

Have you tried passing in the hostname only without the instance name?|||

Hi Michiel,

Absolutely; this is the issue as when I pass in the hostname, EnumAvailableSqlServers only returns the default unnamed instance and not the other n named instances.

Cheers

Rob

|||Sorry to BTT, but does anyone have any info on this?sql

EnumAvailableSqlServers does not return all instances

Hello All,

When I execute

SmoApplication.EnumAvailableSqlServers("AServerNameHere"), passing in the hostname of a system I know to be running multiple instances (2x 2000 and 1 x 2005), it only returns/finds the default unnamed instance. I thought this could have been some form of security issue as per http://blogs.msdn.com/sql_protocols/archive/2005/09/24/473502.aspx, however this is not the case because:

1. When I execute SmoAppliction.EnumAvailableSqlServers() (ie - without passing in a servername) ALL instances are discovered on the above hostname.

2. If i maunally execute SmoApplication.EnumAvailableSqlServers("AServernamehere\Instance") it successfully returns/discovers the instance I explicitly pass it.

Isn't this method supposed to return all instances running on the hostname that is specified? If so, in what manner are you to pass in the hostname ("Hostname\%" or "Hostname\*")?

Cheers

Rob

Have you tried passing in the hostname only without the instance name?|||

Hi Michiel,

Absolutely; this is the issue as when I pass in the hostname, EnumAvailableSqlServers only returns the default unnamed instance and not the other n named instances.

Cheers

Rob

|||Sorry to BTT, but does anyone have any info on this?

Entreprise Manager behaviour

Dear all,
I've got the following scenario:
-Got two EM instances running at the same time. The same view on the right
for both, this is, Tables.
From EM1 I create a table called T. After that I'm going to EM2 and refresh.
Fine because I am seeing the same object.
-Come back to EM1 and drop T object and create again another T object but
different, with more fields. When this time I'm going to EM2 and I do drop
action I've dropped the most new object not the old one when I was waiting a
messagebox or something like that warning me that I am deleting an object
which is different than I though.
Jezz, how can I do for to change this behaviour?
Any help or comment woud be very appreciated.
Current location: Alicante (ES)The behaviour you describe is exactly os should be expected.
When you drop a table in EM, EM actually executes a T-SQL drop table
statement.
"Enric" <vtam13@.terra.es.(donotspam)> wrote in message
news:633618A6-5345-4F82-B27F-4C362546AA93@.microsoft.com...
> Dear all,
> I've got the following scenario:
> -Got two EM instances running at the same time. The same view on the right
> for both, this is, Tables.
> From EM1 I create a table called T. After that I'm going to EM2 and
> refresh.
> Fine because I am seeing the same object.
> -Come back to EM1 and drop T object and create again another T object but
> different, with more fields. When this time I'm going to EM2 and I do drop
> action I've dropped the most new object not the old one when I was waiting
> a
> messagebox or something like that warning me that I am deleting an object
> which is different than I though.
> Jezz, how can I do for to change this behaviour?
> Any help or comment woud be very appreciated.
> --
> Current location: Alicante (ES)|||Hi Stephany,
Yes, I perfectly know it, but I was wondering myself how to change
thanks anyway
--
Current location: Alicante (ES)
"Stephany Young" wrote:

> The behaviour you describe is exactly os should be expected.
> When you drop a table in EM, EM actually executes a T-SQL drop table
> statement.
>
> "Enric" <vtam13@.terra.es.(donotspam)> wrote in message
> news:633618A6-5345-4F82-B27F-4C362546AA93@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||> Jezz, how can I do for to change this behaviour?
Stop using EM at all :-))
"Enric" <vtam13@.terra.es.(donotspam)> wrote in message
news:633618A6-5345-4F82-B27F-4C362546AA93@.microsoft.com...
> Dear all,
> I've got the following scenario:
> -Got two EM instances running at the same time. The same view on the right
> for both, this is, Tables.
> From EM1 I create a table called T. After that I'm going to EM2 and
> refresh.
> Fine because I am seeing the same object.
> -Come back to EM1 and drop T object and create again another T object but
> different, with more fields. When this time I'm going to EM2 and I do drop
> action I've dropped the most new object not the old one when I was waiting
> a
> messagebox or something like that warning me that I am deleting an object
> which is different than I though.
> Jezz, how can I do for to change this behaviour?
> Any help or comment woud be very appreciated.
> --
> Current location: Alicante (ES)|||What would you like to change? Do you want to drop objects without actually
dropping them?
What are you trying to achieve?
ML
http://milambda.blogspot.com/|||In fact, I hope that in early period of time EM will be living and sharing
time with Sql Management Studio
--
Current location: Alicante (ES)
"Uri Dimant" wrote:

> Stop using EM at all :-))
> "Enric" <vtam13@.terra.es.(donotspam)> wrote in message
> news:633618A6-5345-4F82-B27F-4C362546AA93@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||No, I hope that EM works fine. Did it make sense such scenario? I think so.
--
Current location: Alicante (ES)
"ML" wrote:

> What would you like to change? Do you want to drop objects without actuall
y
> dropping them?
> What are you trying to achieve?
> ML
> --
> http://milambda.blogspot.com/|||Great, trade in your Yugo for a Kia. Management Studio is certainly a
better tool than Enterprise Manager in general, but it still shares a lot of
its flaws and limitations.
Hopefully, at least, you'll learn commands like DROP TABLE and BEGIN TRAN /
COMMIT TRAN, instead of pointing and clicking yourself to inevitable
disaster.

> In fact, I hope that in early period of time EM will be living and sharing
> time with Sql Management Studio|||drop and commit? I unfortunately know them
--
Current location: Alicante (ES)
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:

> Great, trade in your Yugo for a Kia. Management Studio is certainly a
> better tool than Enterprise Manager in general, but it still shares a lot
of
> its flaws and limitations.
> Hopefully, at least, you'll learn commands like DROP TABLE and BEGIN TRAN
/
> COMMIT TRAN, instead of pointing and clicking yourself to inevitable
> disaster.
>
>
>
>
>
>|||> drop and commit? I unfortunately know them
Well, I should have said, learn to use them. I would much rather write DROP
TABLE and/or wrap my commands in transactions than blindly trust what some
GUI is going to do. Especially when I'm doing some backhanded thing like
just trying to see what will happen when I bounce quickly between two open
apps on the same machine...
A

Monday, March 19, 2012

Enterprise Manager Server Registrations

Has anyone discovered a way to be able to transfer all registered instances
within Enterprise Manager to another client(s) without having to re-register
them in each client?
thanksNo simple way. You used to be able to export the registry key(s), but not
anymore.
See http://tinyurl.com/6gf85
If you don't trust tinyurl links, then you can piece together this one:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&selm=F54D32AC-191D-42A0-8737-F6D87E4A3232%40microsoft.com&rnum=6
--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"tom frost" <tomfrost@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:32722264-3144-45B2-BB76-B47E01A123DE@.microsoft.com...
> Has anyone discovered a way to be able to transfer all registered
instances
> within Enterprise Manager to another client(s) without having to
re-register
> them in each client?
> thanks

Friday, February 24, 2012

Enterprise Manager Can Not Connect to a Named Instance

I installed a new named instance of sql server on a machine called faoweb2k04. There are three instances on this machine: default, afosrio, & afosrio2 (which I can not connect to).
Any suggestions? aforio2 does not show up in the enterprise manager when I select the option [New SQL Server Registration...]
Interesting...
Are the services associated with those other instances running?
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
|||"sjsnraets" wrote:

> I installed a new named instance of sql server on a machine called faoweb2k04. There are three instances on this machine: default, afosrio, & afosrio2 (which I can not connect to).
> Any suggestions? aforio2 does not show up in the enterprise manager when I select the option [New SQL Server Registration...]
Start the New SQL Server Registration wizard
Type server name inmediatelly to available servers field (server name\aforio2) and click on add button. Click next ...
If server instance is running, the registration will be completed. (not need visible in list)
Andras Jakus
MCDBA

Enterprise Manager Can Not Connect to a Named Instance

I installed a new named instance of sql server on a machine called faoweb2k0
4. There are three instances on this machine: default, afosrio, & afosrio2
(which I can not connect to).
Any suggestions? aforio2 does not show up in the enterprise manager when I
select the option [New SQL Server Registration...]Interesting...
Are the services associated with those other instances running?
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA|||"sjsnraets" wrote:

> I installed a new named instance of sql server on a machine called faoweb2
k04. There are three instances on this machine: default, afosrio, & afosrio
2 (which I can not connect to).
> Any suggestions? aforio2 does not show up in the enterprise manager when I select
the option [New SQL Server Registration...]
Start the New SQL Server Registration wizard
Type server name inmediatelly to available servers field (server name\aforio
2) and click on add button. Click next ...
If server instance is running, the registration will be completed. (not need
visible in list)
Andras Jakus
MCDBA

Enterprise Manager Can Not Connect to a Named Instance

I installed a new named instance of sql server on a machine called faoweb2k04. There are three instances on this machine: default, afosrio, & afosrio2 (which I can not connect to).
Any suggestions? aforio2 does not show up in the enterprise manager when I select the option [New SQL Server Registration...]Interesting...
Are the services associated with those other instances running?
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA

Sunday, February 19, 2012

Enterprise Manager and named instances

Hi, How to connect via internet to MSDE 2000 named instance using Enterprise
Manager?
On remote server (2K Server) there are installed MSDE 2000 default instance
and named instance. Named instance is using port 3077.
Adam,
in the Client Network utility define an alias which points to your
named instance and define the port number.
M

Friday, February 17, 2012

Enterprise Manager - Available Servers - remote instance not listed

When using the register available servers in Enterprise Manager, the
named instances on a remote machine are not listed. The unnamed
instance is listed and will register successfully.
I have tried manually typing the names of the remote NAMED instances;
then tried to authenticate and get the message "SQL server does not
exist or access denied".
Local machine; SQL Server 2000 SP4 (Developer Edition) installed.
2 Instances
Unnamed
DEV\DB1
On the remote machine SQL Server 2000 (MSDE Edition) installed
3 Instances;
Unnamed
REM\DB1
REM\DB2
Both machines are on the same domain. All SQL server instances are
running.
I have also used the svrnetcn.exe tool to make sure the Named Pipes
and TCP/IP protocols are enabled. The port on the TCP/IP protocol has
been changed to 1433 on all remote instances. (both machines were
rebooted)
What else can I check ?
Thanks
DOn Sep 18, 9:18 pm, do <dmc...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> When using the register available servers in Enterprise Manager, the
> named instances on a remote machine are not listed. The unnamed
> instance is listed and will register successfully.
> I have tried manually typing the names of the remote NAMED instances;
> then tried to authenticate and get the message "SQL server does not
> exist or access denied".
> Local machine; SQL Server 2000 SP4 (Developer Edition) installed.
> 2 Instances
> Unnamed
> DEV\DB1
> On the remote machine SQL Server 2000 (MSDE Edition) installed
> 3 Instances;
> Unnamed
> REM\DB1
> REM\DB2
Create an alias for the named instances on the client end & then try
registering...
> Both machines are on the same domain. All SQL server instances are
> running.
> I have also used the svrnetcn.exe tool to make sure the Named Pipes
> and TCP/IP protocols are enabled. The port on the TCP/IP protocol has
> been changed to 1433 on all remote instances. (both machines were
> rebooted)
> What else can I check ?
> Thanks
> D

Enterprise Manager - Available Servers - remote instance not listed

When using the register available servers in Enterprise Manager, the
named instances on a remote machine are not listed. The unnamed
instance is listed and will register successfully.
I have tried manually typing the names of the remote NAMED instances;
then tried to authenticate and get the message "SQL server does not
exist or access denied".
Local machine; SQL Server 2000 SP4 (Developer Edition) installed.
2 Instances
Unnamed
DEV\DB1
On the remote machine SQL Server 2000 (MSDE Edition) installed
3 Instances;
Unnamed
REM\DB1
REM\DB2
Both machines are on the same domain. All SQL server instances are
running.
I have also used the svrnetcn.exe tool to make sure the Named Pipes
and TCP/IP protocols are enabled. The port on the TCP/IP protocol has
been changed to 1433 on all remote instances. (both machines were
rebooted)
What else can I check ?
Thanks
DHow about trying adding aliases from SQL Server Client Network Utility?
Add Aliases for your named instances and try connecting then.
You may obtain more info about this from the following link:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa213780(SQL.80).aspx
You may want to have a look at the following article from BOL to learn more
about Browser Service of SQL Server 2005. This may be irrelevant however it
informs you about SS2000' s listening service too. It may give you an idea.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms181087.aspx
--
Ekrem Önsoy
"do" <dmcb73@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1190189984.640820.24640@.o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> When using the register available servers in Enterprise Manager, the
> named instances on a remote machine are not listed. The unnamed
> instance is listed and will register successfully.
> I have tried manually typing the names of the remote NAMED instances;
> then tried to authenticate and get the message "SQL server does not
> exist or access denied".
> Local machine; SQL Server 2000 SP4 (Developer Edition) installed.
> 2 Instances
> Unnamed
> DEV\DB1
> On the remote machine SQL Server 2000 (MSDE Edition) installed
> 3 Instances;
> Unnamed
> REM\DB1
> REM\DB2
> Both machines are on the same domain. All SQL server instances are
> running.
> I have also used the svrnetcn.exe tool to make sure the Named Pipes
> and TCP/IP protocols are enabled. The port on the TCP/IP protocol has
> been changed to 1433 on all remote instances. (both machines were
> rebooted)
> What else can I check ?
> Thanks
> D
>