Dear SQL Server experts,
I'm in a little pickle here, and hope I can avoid trashing many hours of
work. Here's the scenario:
I was running SQL Server 7 on Win2K Server, with several database projects
in development . I installed the 120-day trial version of SQL2000 with the
intention of installing Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium (which
includes licensed SQL2000) before the end of the trial period. Well, the 120
days came and went, and the SQL2000 installation will, of course, no longer
run. The databases that had been converted to SQL2000 and further developed
were not detached or recently backed up prior to the expiration.
I fear that just installing the new OS with SQL2000 may result in the
permanent loss of the work since last backup. If there's a way to
re-activate the existing SQL2000 installation, hopefully without purchasing
the standard stand-alone SQL2000, my work may be saved. Any recommendations
for a course of action would be appreciated.
Thank you.Hi,
I think you should not use trial versions for business purposes. I know
most of us do it but you should not say it in public. try to keep it a
secret...|||Hi,
i would suggest you to uninstall the SQL Server trial version and purchase a
licensed copy.
you just need to install the licensed copy of SQL Server.
After that, you may need to locate your data file (for your previous database)
(For example: C:\program files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data)
Then, open your Enterprise Manager, attach the database file.
hope this will help.
Leo
"Paul Deneen" wrote:
> Dear SQL Server experts,
> I'm in a little pickle here, and hope I can avoid trashing many hours of
> work. Here's the scenario:
> I was running SQL Server 7 on Win2K Server, with several database projects
> in development . I installed the 120-day trial version of SQL2000 with the
> intention of installing Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium (which
> includes licensed SQL2000) before the end of the trial period. Well, the 120
> days came and went, and the SQL2000 installation will, of course, no longer
> run. The databases that had been converted to SQL2000 and further developed
> were not detached or recently backed up prior to the expiration.
> I fear that just installing the new OS with SQL2000 may result in the
> permanent loss of the work since last backup. If there's a way to
> re-activate the existing SQL2000 installation, hopefully without purchasing
> the standard stand-alone SQL2000, my work may be saved. Any recommendations
> for a course of action would be appreciated.
> Thank you.
>
>|||Mr. Leong,
Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
uninstall the trial SQL2000?
Thanks again.
"Leo Leong" wrote:
> Hi,
> i would suggest you to uninstall the SQL Server trial version and purchase a
> licensed copy.
> you just need to install the licensed copy of SQL Server.
> After that, you may need to locate your data file (for your previous database)
> (For example: C:\program files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data)
> Then, open your Enterprise Manager, attach the database file.
> hope this will help.
> Leo
> "Paul Deneen" wrote:
> >
> > Dear SQL Server experts,
> >
> > I'm in a little pickle here, and hope I can avoid trashing many hours of
> > work. Here's the scenario:
> > I was running SQL Server 7 on Win2K Server, with several database projects
> > in development . I installed the 120-day trial version of SQL2000 with the
> > intention of installing Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium (which
> > includes licensed SQL2000) before the end of the trial period. Well, the 120
> > days came and went, and the SQL2000 installation will, of course, no longer
> > run. The databases that had been converted to SQL2000 and further developed
> > were not detached or recently backed up prior to the expiration.
> >
> > I fear that just installing the new OS with SQL2000 may result in the
> > permanent loss of the work since last backup. If there's a way to
> > re-activate the existing SQL2000 installation, hopefully without purchasing
> > the standard stand-alone SQL2000, my work may be saved. Any recommendations
> > for a course of action would be appreciated.
> >
> > Thank you.
> >
> >
> >|||Hi,
Since your MDF file is still there, you should be able to attach it after
installation.
I have tried once with no problem at all. unless those user logins in my MDF
didn't exist in the database server that I attached to.
May be you have other input. Would you like to share? thanks.
Uninstallation of your current trial version is neccesary. For development,
normally I will get a Developer Edition of SQL Server.
Leo
"Paul Deneen" wrote:
> Mr. Leong,
> Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
> Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
> sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
> detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
> You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
> uninstall the trial SQL2000?
> Thanks again.
>
>
>
>
> "Leo Leong" wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > i would suggest you to uninstall the SQL Server trial version and purchase a
> > licensed copy.
> > you just need to install the licensed copy of SQL Server.
> > After that, you may need to locate your data file (for your previous database)
> > (For example: C:\program files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data)
> > Then, open your Enterprise Manager, attach the database file.
> >
> > hope this will help.
> >
> > Leo
> >
> > "Paul Deneen" wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Dear SQL Server experts,
> > >
> > > I'm in a little pickle here, and hope I can avoid trashing many hours of
> > > work. Here's the scenario:
> > > I was running SQL Server 7 on Win2K Server, with several database projects
> > > in development . I installed the 120-day trial version of SQL2000 with the
> > > intention of installing Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium (which
> > > includes licensed SQL2000) before the end of the trial period. Well, the 120
> > > days came and went, and the SQL2000 installation will, of course, no longer
> > > run. The databases that had been converted to SQL2000 and further developed
> > > were not detached or recently backed up prior to the expiration.
> > >
> > > I fear that just installing the new OS with SQL2000 may result in the
> > > permanent loss of the work since last backup. If there's a way to
> > > re-activate the existing SQL2000 installation, hopefully without purchasing
> > > the standard stand-alone SQL2000, my work may be saved. Any recommendations
> > > for a course of action would be appreciated.
> > >
> > > Thank you.
> > >
> > >
> > >|||It is correct that you are not guaranteed to be able to attach if you don't detach first. Books
Online also states this explicitly. In most cases it will work, but we regularly see posts here from
people where it doesn't work. To play safe, also do backup of those databases, so you then have an
option to restore, if attach doesn't work.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Paul Deneen" <PaulDeneen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:858AD928-3B01-4B56-BB31-4B06E270D41E@.microsoft.com...
> Mr. Leong,
> Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
> Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
> sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
> detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
> You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
> uninstall the trial SQL2000?
> Thanks again.
>
>
>
>
> "Leo Leong" wrote:
>> Hi,
>> i would suggest you to uninstall the SQL Server trial version and purchase a
>> licensed copy.
>> you just need to install the licensed copy of SQL Server.
>> After that, you may need to locate your data file (for your previous database)
>> (For example: C:\program files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data)
>> Then, open your Enterprise Manager, attach the database file.
>> hope this will help.
>> Leo
>> "Paul Deneen" wrote:
>> >
>> > Dear SQL Server experts,
>> >
>> > I'm in a little pickle here, and hope I can avoid trashing many hours of
>> > work. Here's the scenario:
>> > I was running SQL Server 7 on Win2K Server, with several database projects
>> > in development . I installed the 120-day trial version of SQL2000 with the
>> > intention of installing Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium (which
>> > includes licensed SQL2000) before the end of the trial period. Well, the 120
>> > days came and went, and the SQL2000 installation will, of course, no longer
>> > run. The databases that had been converted to SQL2000 and further developed
>> > were not detached or recently backed up prior to the expiration.
>> >
>> > I fear that just installing the new OS with SQL2000 may result in the
>> > permanent loss of the work since last backup. If there's a way to
>> > re-activate the existing SQL2000 installation, hopefully without purchasing
>> > the standard stand-alone SQL2000, my work may be saved. Any recommendations
>> > for a course of action would be appreciated.
>> >
>> > Thank you.
>> >
>> >
>> >|||Thank you Mr. Karaszi and Mr. Leong,
I'll have to uninstall SQL2000 and hope for the best on re-attaching the DB,
since I can't backup using the expired trial installation.
Again, thank you for your advice.
-Paul
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> It is correct that you are not guaranteed to be able to attach if you don't detach first. Books
> Online also states this explicitly. In most cases it will work, but we regularly see posts here from
> people where it doesn't work. To play safe, also do backup of those databases, so you then have an
> option to restore, if attach doesn't work.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "Paul Deneen" <PaulDeneen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:858AD928-3B01-4B56-BB31-4B06E270D41E@.microsoft.com...
> > Mr. Leong,
> >
> > Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
> > Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
> > sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
> > detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
> >
> > You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
> > uninstall the trial SQL2000?
> >
> > Thanks again.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Leo Leong" wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> i would suggest you to uninstall the SQL Server trial version and purchase a
> >> licensed copy.
> >> you just need to install the licensed copy of SQL Server.
> >> After that, you may need to locate your data file (for your previous database)
> >> (For example: C:\program files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data)
> >> Then, open your Enterprise Manager, attach the database file.
> >>
> >> hope this will help.
> >>
> >> Leo
> >>
> >> "Paul Deneen" wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Dear SQL Server experts,
> >> >
> >> > I'm in a little pickle here, and hope I can avoid trashing many hours of
> >> > work. Here's the scenario:
> >> > I was running SQL Server 7 on Win2K Server, with several database projects
> >> > in development . I installed the 120-day trial version of SQL2000 with the
> >> > intention of installing Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium (which
> >> > includes licensed SQL2000) before the end of the trial period. Well, the 120
> >> > days came and went, and the SQL2000 installation will, of course, no longer
> >> > run. The databases that had been converted to SQL2000 and further developed
> >> > were not detached or recently backed up prior to the expiration.
> >> >
> >> > I fear that just installing the new OS with SQL2000 may result in the
> >> > permanent loss of the work since last backup. If there's a way to
> >> > re-activate the existing SQL2000 installation, hopefully without purchasing
> >> > the standard stand-alone SQL2000, my work may be saved. Any recommendations
> >> > for a course of action would be appreciated.
> >> >
> >> > Thank you.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
>
Showing posts with label experts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label experts. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
recovering database from expired trial version
Dear SQL Server experts,
I'm in a little pickle here, and hope I can avoid trashing many hours of
work. Here's the scenario:
I was running SQL Server 7 on Win2K Server, with several database projects
in development . I installed the 120-day trial version of SQL2000 with the
intention of installing Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium (which
includes licensed SQL2000) before the end of the trial period. Well, the 120
days came and went, and the SQL2000 installation will, of course, no longer
run. The databases that had been converted to SQL2000 and further developed
were not detached or recently backed up prior to the expiration.
I fear that just installing the new OS with SQL2000 may result in the
permanent loss of the work since last backup. If there's a way to
re-activate the existing SQL2000 installation, hopefully without purchasing
the standard stand-alone SQL2000, my work may be saved. Any recommendations
for a course of action would be appreciated.
Thank you.
Hi,
I think you should not use trial versions for business purposes. I know
most of us do it but you should not say it in public. try to keep it a
secret...
|||Hi,
i would suggest you to uninstall the SQL Server trial version and purchase a
licensed copy.
you just need to install the licensed copy of SQL Server.
After that, you may need to locate your data file (for your previous database)
(For example: C:\program files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data)
Then, open your Enterprise Manager, attach the database file.
hope this will help.
Leo
"Paul Deneen" wrote:
> Dear SQL Server experts,
> I'm in a little pickle here, and hope I can avoid trashing many hours of
> work. Here's the scenario:
> I was running SQL Server 7 on Win2K Server, with several database projects
> in development . I installed the 120-day trial version of SQL2000 with the
> intention of installing Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium (which
> includes licensed SQL2000) before the end of the trial period. Well, the 120
> days came and went, and the SQL2000 installation will, of course, no longer
> run. The databases that had been converted to SQL2000 and further developed
> were not detached or recently backed up prior to the expiration.
> I fear that just installing the new OS with SQL2000 may result in the
> permanent loss of the work since last backup. If there's a way to
> re-activate the existing SQL2000 installation, hopefully without purchasing
> the standard stand-alone SQL2000, my work may be saved. Any recommendations
> for a course of action would be appreciated.
> Thank you.
>
>
|||Mr. Leong,
Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
uninstall the trial SQL2000?
Thanks again.
"Leo Leong" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> i would suggest you to uninstall the SQL Server trial version and purchase a
> licensed copy.
> you just need to install the licensed copy of SQL Server.
> After that, you may need to locate your data file (for your previous database)
> (For example: C:\program files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data)
> Then, open your Enterprise Manager, attach the database file.
> hope this will help.
> Leo
> "Paul Deneen" wrote:
|||Hi,
Since your MDF file is still there, you should be able to attach it after
installation.
I have tried once with no problem at all. unless those user logins in my MDF
didn't exist in the database server that I attached to.
May be you have other input. Would you like to share? thanks.
Uninstallation of your current trial version is neccesary. For development,
normally I will get a Developer Edition of SQL Server.
Leo
"Paul Deneen" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Mr. Leong,
> Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
> Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
> sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
> detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
> You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
> uninstall the trial SQL2000?
> Thanks again.
>
>
>
>
> "Leo Leong" wrote:
|||It is correct that you are not guaranteed to be able to attach if you don't detach first. Books
Online also states this explicitly. In most cases it will work, but we regularly see posts here from
people where it doesn't work. To play safe, also do backup of those databases, so you then have an
option to restore, if attach doesn't work.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Paul Deneen" <PaulDeneen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:858AD928-3B01-4B56-BB31-4B06E270D41E@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Mr. Leong,
> Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
> Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
> sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
> detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
> You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
> uninstall the trial SQL2000?
> Thanks again.
>
>
>
>
> "Leo Leong" wrote:
|||Thank you Mr. Karaszi and Mr. Leong,
I'll have to uninstall SQL2000 and hope for the best on re-attaching the DB,
since I can't backup using the expired trial installation.
Again, thank you for your advice.
-Paul
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> It is correct that you are not guaranteed to be able to attach if you don't detach first. Books
> Online also states this explicitly. In most cases it will work, but we regularly see posts here from
> people where it doesn't work. To play safe, also do backup of those databases, so you then have an
> option to restore, if attach doesn't work.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "Paul Deneen" <PaulDeneen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:858AD928-3B01-4B56-BB31-4B06E270D41E@.microsoft.com...
>
I'm in a little pickle here, and hope I can avoid trashing many hours of
work. Here's the scenario:
I was running SQL Server 7 on Win2K Server, with several database projects
in development . I installed the 120-day trial version of SQL2000 with the
intention of installing Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium (which
includes licensed SQL2000) before the end of the trial period. Well, the 120
days came and went, and the SQL2000 installation will, of course, no longer
run. The databases that had been converted to SQL2000 and further developed
were not detached or recently backed up prior to the expiration.
I fear that just installing the new OS with SQL2000 may result in the
permanent loss of the work since last backup. If there's a way to
re-activate the existing SQL2000 installation, hopefully without purchasing
the standard stand-alone SQL2000, my work may be saved. Any recommendations
for a course of action would be appreciated.
Thank you.
Hi,
I think you should not use trial versions for business purposes. I know
most of us do it but you should not say it in public. try to keep it a
secret...
|||Hi,
i would suggest you to uninstall the SQL Server trial version and purchase a
licensed copy.
you just need to install the licensed copy of SQL Server.
After that, you may need to locate your data file (for your previous database)
(For example: C:\program files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data)
Then, open your Enterprise Manager, attach the database file.
hope this will help.
Leo
"Paul Deneen" wrote:
> Dear SQL Server experts,
> I'm in a little pickle here, and hope I can avoid trashing many hours of
> work. Here's the scenario:
> I was running SQL Server 7 on Win2K Server, with several database projects
> in development . I installed the 120-day trial version of SQL2000 with the
> intention of installing Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium (which
> includes licensed SQL2000) before the end of the trial period. Well, the 120
> days came and went, and the SQL2000 installation will, of course, no longer
> run. The databases that had been converted to SQL2000 and further developed
> were not detached or recently backed up prior to the expiration.
> I fear that just installing the new OS with SQL2000 may result in the
> permanent loss of the work since last backup. If there's a way to
> re-activate the existing SQL2000 installation, hopefully without purchasing
> the standard stand-alone SQL2000, my work may be saved. Any recommendations
> for a course of action would be appreciated.
> Thank you.
>
>
|||Mr. Leong,
Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
uninstall the trial SQL2000?
Thanks again.
"Leo Leong" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> i would suggest you to uninstall the SQL Server trial version and purchase a
> licensed copy.
> you just need to install the licensed copy of SQL Server.
> After that, you may need to locate your data file (for your previous database)
> (For example: C:\program files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data)
> Then, open your Enterprise Manager, attach the database file.
> hope this will help.
> Leo
> "Paul Deneen" wrote:
|||Hi,
Since your MDF file is still there, you should be able to attach it after
installation.
I have tried once with no problem at all. unless those user logins in my MDF
didn't exist in the database server that I attached to.
May be you have other input. Would you like to share? thanks.
Uninstallation of your current trial version is neccesary. For development,
normally I will get a Developer Edition of SQL Server.
Leo
"Paul Deneen" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Mr. Leong,
> Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
> Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
> sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
> detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
> You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
> uninstall the trial SQL2000?
> Thanks again.
>
>
>
>
> "Leo Leong" wrote:
|||It is correct that you are not guaranteed to be able to attach if you don't detach first. Books
Online also states this explicitly. In most cases it will work, but we regularly see posts here from
people where it doesn't work. To play safe, also do backup of those databases, so you then have an
option to restore, if attach doesn't work.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Paul Deneen" <PaulDeneen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:858AD928-3B01-4B56-BB31-4B06E270D41E@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Mr. Leong,
> Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
> Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
> sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
> detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
> You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
> uninstall the trial SQL2000?
> Thanks again.
>
>
>
>
> "Leo Leong" wrote:
|||Thank you Mr. Karaszi and Mr. Leong,
I'll have to uninstall SQL2000 and hope for the best on re-attaching the DB,
since I can't backup using the expired trial installation.
Again, thank you for your advice.
-Paul
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> It is correct that you are not guaranteed to be able to attach if you don't detach first. Books
> Online also states this explicitly. In most cases it will work, but we regularly see posts here from
> people where it doesn't work. To play safe, also do backup of those databases, so you then have an
> option to restore, if attach doesn't work.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "Paul Deneen" <PaulDeneen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:858AD928-3B01-4B56-BB31-4B06E270D41E@.microsoft.com...
>
recovering database from expired trial version
Dear SQL Server experts,
I'm in a little pickle here, and hope I can avoid trashing many hours of
work. Here's the scenario:
I was running SQL Server 7 on Win2K Server, with several database projects
in development . I installed the 120-day trial version of SQL2000 with the
intention of installing Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium (which
includes licensed SQL2000) before the end of the trial period. Well, the 120
days came and went, and the SQL2000 installation will, of course, no longer
run. The databases that had been converted to SQL2000 and further develope
d
were not detached or recently backed up prior to the expiration.
I fear that just installing the new OS with SQL2000 may result in the
permanent loss of the work since last backup. If there's a way to
re-activate the existing SQL2000 installation, hopefully without purchasing
the standard stand-alone SQL2000, my work may be saved. Any recommendations
for a course of action would be appreciated.
Thank you.Hi,
I think you should not use trial versions for business purposes. I know
most of us do it but you should not say it in public. try to keep it a
secret...|||Hi,
i would suggest you to uninstall the SQL Server trial version and purchase a
licensed copy.
you just need to install the licensed copy of SQL Server.
After that, you may need to locate your data file (for your previous databas
e)
(For example: C:\program files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data)
Then, open your Enterprise Manager, attach the database file.
hope this will help.
Leo
"Paul Deneen" wrote:
> Dear SQL Server experts,
> I'm in a little pickle here, and hope I can avoid trashing many hours of
> work. Here's the scenario:
> I was running SQL Server 7 on Win2K Server, with several database projects
> in development . I installed the 120-day trial version of SQL2000 with th
e
> intention of installing Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium (which
> includes licensed SQL2000) before the end of the trial period. Well, the 1
20
> days came and went, and the SQL2000 installation will, of course, no longe
r
> run. The databases that had been converted to SQL2000 and further develo
ped
> were not detached or recently backed up prior to the expiration.
> I fear that just installing the new OS with SQL2000 may result in the
> permanent loss of the work since last backup. If there's a way to
> re-activate the existing SQL2000 installation, hopefully without purchasi
ng
> the standard stand-alone SQL2000, my work may be saved. Any recommendatio
ns
> for a course of action would be appreciated.
> Thank you.
>
>|||Mr. Leong,
Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
uninstall the trial SQL2000?
Thanks again.
"Leo Leong" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> i would suggest you to uninstall the SQL Server trial version and purchase
a
> licensed copy.
> you just need to install the licensed copy of SQL Server.
> After that, you may need to locate your data file (for your previous datab
ase)
> (For example: C:\program files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data)
> Then, open your Enterprise Manager, attach the database file.
> hope this will help.
> Leo
> "Paul Deneen" wrote:
>|||Hi,
Since your MDF file is still there, you should be able to attach it after
installation.
I have tried once with no problem at all. unless those user logins in my MDF
didn't exist in the database server that I attached to.
May be you have other input. Would you like to share? thanks.
Uninstallation of your current trial version is neccesary. For development,
normally I will get a Developer Edition of SQL Server.
Leo
"Paul Deneen" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Mr. Leong,
> Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
> Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
> sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
> detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
> You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
> uninstall the trial SQL2000?
> Thanks again.
>
>
>
>
> "Leo Leong" wrote:
>|||It is correct that you are not guaranteed to be able to attach if you don't
detach first. Books
Online also states this explicitly. In most cases it will work, but we regul
arly see posts here from
people where it doesn't work. To play safe, also do backup of those database
s, so you then have an
option to restore, if attach doesn't work.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Paul Deneen" <PaulDeneen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:858AD928-3B01-4B56-BB31-4B06E270D41E@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Mr. Leong,
> Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
> Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
> sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
> detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
> You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
> uninstall the trial SQL2000?
> Thanks again.
>
>
>
>
> "Leo Leong" wrote:
>|||Thank you Mr. Karaszi and Mr. Leong,
I'll have to uninstall SQL2000 and hope for the best on re-attaching the DB,
since I can't backup using the expired trial installation.
Again, thank you for your advice.
-Paul
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> It is correct that you are not guaranteed to be able to attach if you don'
t detach first. Books
> Online also states this explicitly. In most cases it will work, but we reg
ularly see posts here from
> people where it doesn't work. To play safe, also do backup of those databa
ses, so you then have an
> option to restore, if attach doesn't work.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "Paul Deneen" <PaulDeneen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:858AD928-3B01-4B56-BB31-4B06E270D41E@.microsoft.com...
>
I'm in a little pickle here, and hope I can avoid trashing many hours of
work. Here's the scenario:
I was running SQL Server 7 on Win2K Server, with several database projects
in development . I installed the 120-day trial version of SQL2000 with the
intention of installing Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium (which
includes licensed SQL2000) before the end of the trial period. Well, the 120
days came and went, and the SQL2000 installation will, of course, no longer
run. The databases that had been converted to SQL2000 and further develope
d
were not detached or recently backed up prior to the expiration.
I fear that just installing the new OS with SQL2000 may result in the
permanent loss of the work since last backup. If there's a way to
re-activate the existing SQL2000 installation, hopefully without purchasing
the standard stand-alone SQL2000, my work may be saved. Any recommendations
for a course of action would be appreciated.
Thank you.Hi,
I think you should not use trial versions for business purposes. I know
most of us do it but you should not say it in public. try to keep it a
secret...|||Hi,
i would suggest you to uninstall the SQL Server trial version and purchase a
licensed copy.
you just need to install the licensed copy of SQL Server.
After that, you may need to locate your data file (for your previous databas
e)
(For example: C:\program files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data)
Then, open your Enterprise Manager, attach the database file.
hope this will help.
Leo
"Paul Deneen" wrote:
> Dear SQL Server experts,
> I'm in a little pickle here, and hope I can avoid trashing many hours of
> work. Here's the scenario:
> I was running SQL Server 7 on Win2K Server, with several database projects
> in development . I installed the 120-day trial version of SQL2000 with th
e
> intention of installing Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium (which
> includes licensed SQL2000) before the end of the trial period. Well, the 1
20
> days came and went, and the SQL2000 installation will, of course, no longe
r
> run. The databases that had been converted to SQL2000 and further develo
ped
> were not detached or recently backed up prior to the expiration.
> I fear that just installing the new OS with SQL2000 may result in the
> permanent loss of the work since last backup. If there's a way to
> re-activate the existing SQL2000 installation, hopefully without purchasi
ng
> the standard stand-alone SQL2000, my work may be saved. Any recommendatio
ns
> for a course of action would be appreciated.
> Thank you.
>
>|||Mr. Leong,
Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
uninstall the trial SQL2000?
Thanks again.
"Leo Leong" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> i would suggest you to uninstall the SQL Server trial version and purchase
a
> licensed copy.
> you just need to install the licensed copy of SQL Server.
> After that, you may need to locate your data file (for your previous datab
ase)
> (For example: C:\program files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Data)
> Then, open your Enterprise Manager, attach the database file.
> hope this will help.
> Leo
> "Paul Deneen" wrote:
>|||Hi,
Since your MDF file is still there, you should be able to attach it after
installation.
I have tried once with no problem at all. unless those user logins in my MDF
didn't exist in the database server that I attached to.
May be you have other input. Would you like to share? thanks.
Uninstallation of your current trial version is neccesary. For development,
normally I will get a Developer Edition of SQL Server.
Leo
"Paul Deneen" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Mr. Leong,
> Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
> Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
> sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
> detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
> You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
> uninstall the trial SQL2000?
> Thanks again.
>
>
>
>
> "Leo Leong" wrote:
>|||It is correct that you are not guaranteed to be able to attach if you don't
detach first. Books
Online also states this explicitly. In most cases it will work, but we regul
arly see posts here from
people where it doesn't work. To play safe, also do backup of those database
s, so you then have an
option to restore, if attach doesn't work.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Paul Deneen" <PaulDeneen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:858AD928-3B01-4B56-BB31-4B06E270D41E@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Mr. Leong,
> Thank you. I didn't think that a database could be attached to a SQL
> Server installation unless it had previously been "detached" with
> sp_detach_db or had been backed up. I have always found it necessary to
> detach the db in order to make a MDF file portable.
> You don't have any reservations about recommending me to go ahead and
> uninstall the trial SQL2000?
> Thanks again.
>
>
>
>
> "Leo Leong" wrote:
>|||Thank you Mr. Karaszi and Mr. Leong,
I'll have to uninstall SQL2000 and hope for the best on re-attaching the DB,
since I can't backup using the expired trial installation.
Again, thank you for your advice.
-Paul
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> It is correct that you are not guaranteed to be able to attach if you don'
t detach first. Books
> Online also states this explicitly. In most cases it will work, but we reg
ularly see posts here from
> people where it doesn't work. To play safe, also do backup of those databa
ses, so you then have an
> option to restore, if attach doesn't work.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "Paul Deneen" <PaulDeneen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:858AD928-3B01-4B56-BB31-4B06E270D41E@.microsoft.com...
>
Monday, February 20, 2012
Record locking...
Hi Experts,
Here's the scenario of the case...
User1 does a retrieve of information, with the intention of updating it
later. At the same time, User2 does a retrieve of information, with the
intention of updating it later. User1 updates some of the row on the web
server, and then calls an update stored procedure.Then user2 updates some of
the row on the web server, and then calls an update stored procedure.
Some of user1s updates are lost because user2 had "stale" data.
So what a lot of applications do is to implement explicit locking, so that
when user1 did the retrieve, he had to say "I want to lock it cuz Im gonna
update it later". The rule is in that case that a locked record cannot also
be locked by someone else
and update can only be called if the record was locked by that user.
We can of course add a column to every table that has to support this
"locking", but I was wondering if SQL Serversystems support some kind of
"lock this record please"?Here's an old archive on this type of issue:
http://tinyurl.com/5qevd
-oj
"Lia" <Lia@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9A1DD01A-FA17-4785-B6F6-3869907C9DE9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi Experts,
> Here's the scenario of the case...
> User1 does a retrieve of information, with the intention of updating it
> later. At the same time, User2 does a retrieve of information, with the
> intention of updating it later. User1 updates some of the row on the web
> server, and then calls an update stored procedure.Then user2 updates some
> of
> the row on the web server, and then calls an update stored procedure.
> Some of user1s updates are lost because user2 had "stale" data.
> So what a lot of applications do is to implement explicit locking, so that
> when user1 did the retrieve, he had to say "I want to lock it cuz Im gonna
> update it later". The rule is in that case that a locked record cannot
> also
> be locked by someone else
> and update can only be called if the record was locked by that user.
> We can of course add a column to every table that has to support this
> "locking", but I was wondering if SQL Serversystems support some kind of
> "lock this record please"?|||Hi Experts,
What is usually the system? Is it the person who updates gets the priority
or the person who retrieves (for update) gets a priority.
I have been debating on this for some time and after reading a few books i
got the impression that LOCKING records was the practice in the olden days
and in the current situation ( adLockOptimistic ) the person who clicks
update first get a priority and the other person gets an ERROR! Which can be
trapped using ON Error GOTO statement
Please clarify and help me resolve this issue.
Thanks
Manish
"oj" wrote:
> Here's an old archive on this type of issue:
> http://tinyurl.com/5qevd
>
> --
> -oj
>
> "Lia" <Lia@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:9A1DD01A-FA17-4785-B6F6-3869907C9DE9@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||Hi Manish,
Thanks for your reply on my post. :-) The system will supposed to give the
priority to person who retrieves(for update) in such a way that upon
retrieving, the record will be locked. The lock will then be released after
updating the record or canceling the transaction. And if the other person
select the same record that intend to update it also, message will be given
to inform the person that the record can only be viewed and cannot be update
d
because it is locked for update by another user.
Your suggestions and comments will be highly appreciated.
Thanks,
Lia
"Manish Sawjiani" wrote:
> Hi Experts,
> What is usually the system? Is it the person who updates gets the priority
> or the person who retrieves (for update) gets a priority.
> I have been debating on this for some time and after reading a few books i
> got the impression that LOCKING records was the practice in the olden days
> and in the current situation ( adLockOptimistic ) the person who clicks
> update first get a priority and the other person gets an ERROR! Which can
be
> trapped using ON Error GOTO statement
> Please clarify and help me resolve this issue.
> Thanks
> Manish
> "oj" wrote:
>
Here's the scenario of the case...
User1 does a retrieve of information, with the intention of updating it
later. At the same time, User2 does a retrieve of information, with the
intention of updating it later. User1 updates some of the row on the web
server, and then calls an update stored procedure.Then user2 updates some of
the row on the web server, and then calls an update stored procedure.
Some of user1s updates are lost because user2 had "stale" data.
So what a lot of applications do is to implement explicit locking, so that
when user1 did the retrieve, he had to say "I want to lock it cuz Im gonna
update it later". The rule is in that case that a locked record cannot also
be locked by someone else
and update can only be called if the record was locked by that user.
We can of course add a column to every table that has to support this
"locking", but I was wondering if SQL Serversystems support some kind of
"lock this record please"?Here's an old archive on this type of issue:
http://tinyurl.com/5qevd
-oj
"Lia" <Lia@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9A1DD01A-FA17-4785-B6F6-3869907C9DE9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi Experts,
> Here's the scenario of the case...
> User1 does a retrieve of information, with the intention of updating it
> later. At the same time, User2 does a retrieve of information, with the
> intention of updating it later. User1 updates some of the row on the web
> server, and then calls an update stored procedure.Then user2 updates some
> of
> the row on the web server, and then calls an update stored procedure.
> Some of user1s updates are lost because user2 had "stale" data.
> So what a lot of applications do is to implement explicit locking, so that
> when user1 did the retrieve, he had to say "I want to lock it cuz Im gonna
> update it later". The rule is in that case that a locked record cannot
> also
> be locked by someone else
> and update can only be called if the record was locked by that user.
> We can of course add a column to every table that has to support this
> "locking", but I was wondering if SQL Serversystems support some kind of
> "lock this record please"?|||Hi Experts,
What is usually the system? Is it the person who updates gets the priority
or the person who retrieves (for update) gets a priority.
I have been debating on this for some time and after reading a few books i
got the impression that LOCKING records was the practice in the olden days
and in the current situation ( adLockOptimistic ) the person who clicks
update first get a priority and the other person gets an ERROR! Which can be
trapped using ON Error GOTO statement
Please clarify and help me resolve this issue.
Thanks
Manish
"oj" wrote:
> Here's an old archive on this type of issue:
> http://tinyurl.com/5qevd
>
> --
> -oj
>
> "Lia" <Lia@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:9A1DD01A-FA17-4785-B6F6-3869907C9DE9@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||Hi Manish,
Thanks for your reply on my post. :-) The system will supposed to give the
priority to person who retrieves(for update) in such a way that upon
retrieving, the record will be locked. The lock will then be released after
updating the record or canceling the transaction. And if the other person
select the same record that intend to update it also, message will be given
to inform the person that the record can only be viewed and cannot be update
d
because it is locked for update by another user.
Your suggestions and comments will be highly appreciated.
Thanks,
Lia
"Manish Sawjiani" wrote:
> Hi Experts,
> What is usually the system? Is it the person who updates gets the priority
> or the person who retrieves (for update) gets a priority.
> I have been debating on this for some time and after reading a few books i
> got the impression that LOCKING records was the practice in the olden days
> and in the current situation ( adLockOptimistic ) the person who clicks
> update first get a priority and the other person gets an ERROR! Which can
be
> trapped using ON Error GOTO statement
> Please clarify and help me resolve this issue.
> Thanks
> Manish
> "oj" wrote:
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)