Consistency error in sql2000

Hi,
I just found a lot of these errors in the errorlog and eventlog:
2006-04-01 20:55:13.84 spid83 Error: 605, Severity: 21, State: 1
2006-04-01 20:55:13.84 spid83 Attempt to fetch logical page (1:420416)
in database 'confirm' belongs to object '6488161', not to object 'XXXXX'..
I did as the BOL suggests and ran a dbcc checktable ('XXXXX') (with no
repair option). This returned:
There are 4889992 rows in 70072 pages for object 'XXXXX'.
CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 1 consistency errors in table
'XXXXX' (object ID 1781581385).
repair_allow_data_loss is the minimum repair level for the errors found by
DBCC CHECKTABLE (XXXXXX ).
Not looking good at all.
Then I ran a dbcc checkdb ('yyyyy') with this result
...
...
CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
'yyyyy'.
A new dbcc checktable reported no errors.
How could this be. Was this a transient error after all?
Any insight is appreciated.
TIA
It is quite possible to run into transient DBCC errors in SQL2000, though
it's pretty rare. If your database is not huge, I'd re-run DBCC CHECKDB when
there isn't much activity. If that returns clean, you are probably okay.
Transient errors are more lickly when there are heavy activities.
Linchi
"Gurba" wrote:

> Hi,
> I just found a lot of these errors in the errorlog and eventlog:
> 2006-04-01 20:55:13.84 spid83 Error: 605, Severity: 21, State: 1
> 2006-04-01 20:55:13.84 spid83 Attempt to fetch logical page (1:420416)
> in database 'confirm' belongs to object '6488161', not to object 'XXXXX'..
> I did as the BOL suggests and ran a dbcc checktable ('XXXXX') (with no
> repair option). This returned:
> There are 4889992 rows in 70072 pages for object 'XXXXX'.
> CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 1 consistency errors in table
> 'XXXXX' (object ID 1781581385).
> repair_allow_data_loss is the minimum repair level for the errors found by
> DBCC CHECKTABLE (XXXXXX ).
> Not looking good at all.
> Then I ran a dbcc checkdb ('yyyyy') with this result
> ...
> ...
> CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
> 'yyyyy'.
> A new dbcc checktable reported no errors.
> How could this be. Was this a transient error after all?
> Any insight is appreciated.
> TIA
>

Consistency error in sql2000

Hi,
I just found a lot of these errors in the errorlog and eventlog:
2006-04-01 20:55:13.84 spid83 Error: 605, Severity: 21, State: 1
2006-04-01 20:55:13.84 spid83 Attempt to fetch logical page (1:420416)
in database 'confirm' belongs to object '6488161', not to object 'XXXXX'..
I did as the BOL suggests and ran a dbcc checktable ('XXXXX') (with no
repair option). This returned:
There are 4889992 rows in 70072 pages for object 'XXXXX'.
CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 1 consistency errors in table
'XXXXX' (object ID 1781581385).
repair_allow_data_loss is the minimum repair level for the errors found by
DBCC CHECKTABLE (XXXXXX ).
Not looking good at all.
Then I ran a dbcc checkdb ('yyyyy') with this result
...
...
CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
'yyyyy'.
A new dbcc checktable reported no errors.
How could this be. Was this a transient error after all?
Any insight is appreciated.
TIAIt is quite possible to run into transient DBCC errors in SQL2000, though
it's pretty rare. If your database is not huge, I'd re-run DBCC CHECKDB when
there isn't much activity. If that returns clean, you are probably okay.
Transient errors are more lickly when there are heavy activities.
Linchi
"Gurba" wrote:

> Hi,
> I just found a lot of these errors in the errorlog and eventlog:
> 2006-04-01 20:55:13.84 spid83 Error: 605, Severity: 21, State: 1
> 2006-04-01 20:55:13.84 spid83 Attempt to fetch logical page (1:420416)
> in database 'confirm' belongs to object '6488161', not to object 'XXXXX'..
> I did as the BOL suggests and ran a dbcc checktable ('XXXXX') (with no
> repair option). This returned:
> There are 4889992 rows in 70072 pages for object 'XXXXX'.
> CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 1 consistency errors in table
> 'XXXXX' (object ID 1781581385).
> repair_allow_data_loss is the minimum repair level for the errors found by
> DBCC CHECKTABLE (XXXXXX ).
> Not looking good at all.
> Then I ran a dbcc checkdb ('yyyyy') with this result
> ...
> ...
> CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
> 'yyyyy'.
> A new dbcc checktable reported no errors.
> How could this be. Was this a transient error after all?
> Any insight is appreciated.
> TIA
>

Consistency error in sql2000

Hi,
I just found a lot of these errors in the errorlog and eventlog:
2006-04-01 20:55:13.84 spid83 Error: 605, Severity: 21, State: 1
2006-04-01 20:55:13.84 spid83 Attempt to fetch logical page (1:420416)
in database 'confirm' belongs to object '6488161', not to object 'XXXXX'..
I did as the BOL suggests and ran a dbcc checktable ('XXXXX') (with no
repair option). This returned:
There are 4889992 rows in 70072 pages for object 'XXXXX'.
CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 1 consistency errors in table
'XXXXX' (object ID 1781581385).
repair_allow_data_loss is the minimum repair level for the errors found by
DBCC CHECKTABLE (XXXXXX ).
Not looking good at all.
Then I ran a dbcc checkdb ('yyyyy') with this result
...
...
CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
'yyyyy'.
A new dbcc checktable reported no errors.
How could this be. Was this a transient error after all?
Any insight is appreciated.
TIAIt is quite possible to run into transient DBCC errors in SQL2000, though
it's pretty rare. If your database is not huge, I'd re-run DBCC CHECKDB when
there isn't much activity. If that returns clean, you are probably okay.
Transient errors are more lickly when there are heavy activities.
Linchi
"Gurba" wrote:
> Hi,
> I just found a lot of these errors in the errorlog and eventlog:
> 2006-04-01 20:55:13.84 spid83 Error: 605, Severity: 21, State: 1
> 2006-04-01 20:55:13.84 spid83 Attempt to fetch logical page (1:420416)
> in database 'confirm' belongs to object '6488161', not to object 'XXXXX'..
> I did as the BOL suggests and ran a dbcc checktable ('XXXXX') (with no
> repair option). This returned:
> There are 4889992 rows in 70072 pages for object 'XXXXX'.
> CHECKTABLE found 0 allocation errors and 1 consistency errors in table
> 'XXXXX' (object ID 1781581385).
> repair_allow_data_loss is the minimum repair level for the errors found by
> DBCC CHECKTABLE (XXXXXX ).
> Not looking good at all.
> Then I ran a dbcc checkdb ('yyyyy') with this result
> ...
> ...
> CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
> 'yyyyy'.
> A new dbcc checktable reported no errors.
> How could this be. Was this a transient error after all?
> Any insight is appreciated.
> TIA
>sqlsql

Connections Timing Out

I am running an application on MS SQL2000 SP4. I have 5 clients connecting to
the SQL server. Almost every night between 5pm and 6:30pm, I lose the
connection to the server from the clients and I get a message about my
database possibly being compromised. Everything locks up and I must reboot
the client.
Has any one experienced this?
Fini2549
Check to see if there are any scheduled jobs running at that time. Sounds
like someone is running a DBCC CHECKDB and placing the db in single user
mode.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Fini2549" <Fini2549@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9990B03B-CE13-4CEB-9EF8-E4FFB68E0A10@.microsoft.com...
>I am running an application on MS SQL2000 SP4. I have 5 clients connecting
>to
> the SQL server. Almost every night between 5pm and 6:30pm, I lose the
> connection to the server from the clients and I get a message about my
> database possibly being compromised. Everything locks up and I must reboot
> the client.
> Has any one experienced this?
> Fini2549

Connection to SQLserver

We have a server running SQL2000 which I am trying to get access to via the
internet. I have used the port forwarding setup on our router/firewall to
transfer all traffic on port 1433 to the server 192.168.0.99. I cannot get a
connection as it states the server was not found or it was denied access.
I have a similar method of access to a couple of Personal Addition setups
off site and I can get a connection.
What is slightly unusual is that I have two connections to the internet one
leased line where I can't get access to the firewall and a broadband where I
do. Both are running NAT. Is this an area to check
Thanks for a pointers you can give me
Ian
"Ian Rudge" <Ian.Rudge@.shaw.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Opx2sOvmEHA.556@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> We have a server running SQL2000 which I am trying to get access to via
the
> internet. I have used the port forwarding setup on our router/firewall to
> transfer all traffic on port 1433 to the server 192.168.0.99. I cannot get
a
> connection as it states the server was not found or it was denied access.
> I have a similar method of access to a couple of Personal Addition setups
> off site and I can get a connection.
> What is slightly unusual is that I have two connections to the internet
one
> leased line where I can't get access to the firewall and a broadband where
I
> do. Both are running NAT. Is this an area to check
Maybe. There are a lot of variables in getting this to work properly. Check
this article along with links for troubleshooting this setup
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;287932
BTW, I hope that was only a fictitious external IP address for your
server...
Steve
|||Thank you for pointers and I will start my search from that.
The IP address is fictional but as it is internal in the 192.168... range I
thought you couldn't get to it or should I panic?
Thx
Ian
"Steve Thompson" <stevethompson@.nomail.please> wrote in message
news:OGpa1X0mEHA.3876@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "Ian Rudge" <Ian.Rudge@.shaw.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:Opx2sOvmEHA.556@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> the
> a
> one
> I
> Maybe. There are a lot of variables in getting this to work properly.
> Check
> this article along with links for troubleshooting this setup
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;287932
> BTW, I hope that was only a fictitious external IP address for your
> server...
> Steve
>
|||You're right, I should have recognized that range ;) No need to panic, it
goes without saying that you need a good firewall and isolation from the
"outside".
Steve
"Ian Rudge" <Ian.Rudge@.shaw.co.uk> wrote in message
news:%23rcxs97mEHA.3628@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thank you for pointers and I will start my search from that.
> The IP address is fictional but as it is internal in the 192.168... range
I[vbcol=seagreen]
> thought you couldn't get to it or should I panic?
> Thx
> Ian
> "Steve Thompson" <stevethompson@.nomail.please> wrote in message
> news:OGpa1X0mEHA.3876@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
to[vbcol=seagreen]
access.[vbcol=seagreen]
setups
>
|||I think I have found my answer. If I want to connect from outside, the
gateway for the SQLServer machine must point to the Broadband router not the
leased line one
Thx
for the help
"Steve Thompson" <stevethompson@.nomail.please> wrote in message
news:OEGQIECnEHA.1236@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> You're right, I should have recognized that range ;) No need to panic, it
> goes without saying that you need a good firewall and isolation from the
> "outside".
> Steve
> "Ian Rudge" <Ian.Rudge@.shaw.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:%23rcxs97mEHA.3628@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> I
> to
> access.
> setups
>

connection to SQL server

we want to convert our P4 database to a MS SQL2000 server database. A connection to the database is established, when you start to convert to a SQL2000 database, which isn't clustered. When you try to connect to a clustered database, I get following messages in the log
Initiating a Conversion of locatio
Mapping tables locatio
Creating SQL Tables for locatio
Issuing connect request to s2002
SQL Message 18456 Level 14 State 1: Login failed for user 'svc-00042'
SQL error handler entered with severity 2 dberr 10003 Login incorrect
Going to sleep for 15 seconds and try again to connec
Both database servers are on the same domain. They use the same Windows NT account to entry the database. Manually, a connection to the clustered database via an ODBC connection is made. I suppose that ServiceCenter doesn't use this connection.It is via 'Named Pipes' '
Only difference
In the sqldb parameter in the ini-file, the database server name is specified for a common database. For a clustered database, the virtual machine is mentoined
Our first assumption is that ServiceCenter has issues to connect to this virtual machine (' it has to be a physical machine ?'). Can anybody affirm or disprove this statement ? If so, with some explanation, please
You can always contact me
Thanks in advance
AnnIs svc-00042 a NT user or sql login ? It doesn't look like
a Domain, may be a local NT user ? Use a domain user who
has access to both servers, or create a sql login.
It will connect to a virtual machine, as long as the
virtual machine is configured right.
>--Original Message--
>we want to convert our P4 database to a MS SQL2000 server
database. A connection to the database is established,
when you start to convert to a SQL2000 database, which
isn't clustered. When you try to connect to a clustered
database, I get following messages in the log:
>Initiating a Conversion of location
>Mapping tables location
>Creating SQL Tables for location
>Issuing connect request to s20021
>SQL Message 18456 Level 14 State 1: Login failed for
user 'svc-00042'.
>SQL error handler entered with severity 2 dberr 10003
Login incorrect.
>Going to sleep for 15 seconds and try again to connect
>Both database servers are on the same domain. They use
the same Windows NT account to entry the database.
Manually, a connection to the clustered database via an
ODBC connection is made. I suppose that ServiceCenter
doesn't use this connection.It is via 'Named Pipes' ?
>Only difference:
>In the sqldb parameter in the ini-file, the database
server name is specified for a common database. For a
clustered database, the virtual machine is mentoined.
>Our first assumption is that ServiceCenter has issues to
connect to this virtual machine (' it has to be a physical
machine ?'). Can anybody affirm or disprove this
statement ? If so, with some explanation, please.
>You can always contact me.
>Thanks in advance,
>Anna
>.
>

Connection Problems SQL2000 on Local Machine

This may be a stupid newbie question, but being that I'm not a DBA I'm going to ask it anyway.

We discovered a problem with a clients server (Windows 2003 SBS) when we tried to install Veritas Backup Exec. Backup Exec requires an instance of either SQLMSDE or full SQL. This server has full SQL 2000 sp3a installed on it with a working account application. When backup exec trys to create it's instance it fails.

Investigating further...when I go into Enterprise Manager (logged in as Domain Admin) I get an error when I select the local server.

I.E.
"A connection could not be established to (LOCAL).
Reason: Data source name not found and no default driver specified.
Please verify SQL Server is running and check your SQL Server registration properties. blah blah blah.

Okay the server is running. The accounting application (client/server) is still working. I right click on the server and select "New Server Registration" for the field "server" I click the browse button and the "Active Servers" box is empty..:shocked:

I went to check the "Data Sources" under drivers, that field is blank. (no drivers installed). I downloaded MS's component checker and it says "MDAC 2.8 on Windows server 2003 sp1" is installed.

At this point I have exhausted my knowledge of MS-SQL server. My goal is to get BackupExec installed and NOT break the existing accounting application.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Thanks
rogerbHi there,

i think the running instance on your server was not installed with the "Mixed Mode" authentication.
That's where the external application trying to connect on windows login account fials.

Hope this helps.

Regards.|||I think I've determined that there is a named instance of SQL running, but that the default instance is NOT running. How do I start the default instance and not mess up the named instance that is running? I tried "sqlservr.exe" at the command prompt but received a number of errors regard the log files being locked by another process?

Edit: Nope, my last statement is wrong there. There are two instances running. Which would explain the logfile errors. But...I still can't connect to the server with Enterprise Manger.

Edit 2: The authentication mode on the named instance was set to 2 (mixed), the default 1(windows), I set the default to 2 and restarted the service. I still can't connect with Enterprise Manager.|||Okay I fixed my own problem. Here's what I found. In the registry under HKLM\Software\ODBC there is an entry "odbcinst.ini". There are suppose to be a list of installed drivers here. In my case this key was empty. So I created the SQL Server key and the Text value"Driver" which equals, "c:\winnt\system32\sqlsrv32.dll.

And...I can get into the default instance now.

Connection problem with NT4

Ive installed SQL2000 in a NT4-SP6 server, but I cant connect from another machine.
I receive the following msg in Query analizer : "sql server does not exists or access denied"
Ive tried both authentications methods, created alias with IP and server name but nothing works.

If I use query analizer locally I can connect using the server name, but cant if use the ip.

Please, save me :)

thanks in advanceHi Felipe,

I faced a similiar problem when using a Business-Intelligence Client
to connect from a NT-Client to our cube located on a XP-PC with
MS SQL and MS OLAP.

I tried realy everthing:
At the end the following worked.

I added every user, who wants to connect locally(!) as an account.
I added a role to the MS OLAP cube and added the new user to this
role.

Hint:
These users must be domain-users
(and in our case local users too )

hth

Michael|||thanks for your time Michael, but I cant connect with "sa"

Connection problem when registering a remote SQL2000

Hello,
I try to register a remote SQL Server 2000 installed in a W2003, but it
doesn't work. Afer 6 or 7 seconds, it says: Timeout expired.
In that network , port 1433 is open and what it really surpises me, is that
I can connect via ODBC to any database of that remote SQL Server2000 !!!
Any idea ?
If you can you use Enterprise Manager from the W2003 server, please check
the following:
Launch the Properties dialog from the server object of Enterprise Manager
Select the Network Configuration button on the General tab
Is TCP/IP enabled?
Select the Connections tab
Is the Query time-out value set too low?
Is the maximum concurrent user connections value set too low?
This posting is provided "AS IS" without express or implied warranty,
guarantee, or rights.
Keith Wilson
"Charles" <ccolell@.softeng.es> wrote in message
news:eGpQpjJHEHA.3576@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I try to register a remote SQL Server 2000 installed in a W2003, but it
> doesn't work. Afer 6 or 7 seconds, it says: Timeout expired.
> In that network , port 1433 is open and what it really surpises me, is
that
> I can connect via ODBC to any database of that remote SQL Server2000 !!!
> Any idea ?
>
|||Hello,
Yes , everything is ok. TCP/IP is enabled, and the rest values, the query
time is 600 (the default value), and the maximum users is (0, the default
value which means that are unlimited).
Any other idea ?
"Keith Wilson" <keithwi@.online.microsoft.com> escribi en el mensaje
news:4074336d$1@.news.microsoft.com...
> If you can you use Enterprise Manager from the W2003 server, please check
> the following:
> Launch the Properties dialog from the server object of Enterprise
Manager
> Select the Network Configuration button on the General tab
> Is TCP/IP enabled?
> Select the Connections tab
> Is the Query time-out value set too low?
> Is the maximum concurrent user connections value set too low?
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" without express or implied warranty,
> guarantee, or rights.
> Keith Wilson
>
> "Charles" <ccolell@.softeng.es> wrote in message
> news:eGpQpjJHEHA.3576@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> that
>

Connection problem when registering a remote SQL2000

Hello,
I try to register a remote SQL Server 2000 installed in a W2003, but it
doesn't work. Afer 6 or 7 seconds, it says: Timeout expired.
In that network , port 1433 is open and what it really surpises me, is that
I can connect via ODBC to any database of that remote SQL Server2000 !!!
Any idea ?If you can you use Enterprise Manager from the W2003 server, please check
the following:
Launch the Properties dialog from the server object of Enterprise Manager
Select the Network Configuration button on the General tab
Is TCP/IP enabled?
Select the Connections tab
Is the Query time-out value set too low?
Is the maximum concurrent user connections value set too low?
This posting is provided "AS IS" without express or implied warranty,
guarantee, or rights.
Keith Wilson
"Charles" <ccolell@.softeng.es> wrote in message
news:eGpQpjJHEHA.3576@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I try to register a remote SQL Server 2000 installed in a W2003, but it
> doesn't work. Afer 6 or 7 seconds, it says: Timeout expired.
> In that network , port 1433 is open and what it really surpises me, is
that
> I can connect via ODBC to any database of that remote SQL Server2000 !!!
> Any idea ?
>|||Hello,
Yes , everything is ok. TCP/IP is enabled, and the rest values, the query
time is 600 (the default value), and the maximum users is (0, the default
value which means that are unlimited).
Any other idea ?
"Keith Wilson" <keithwi@.online.microsoft.com> escribi en el mensaje
news:4074336d$1@.news.microsoft.com...
> If you can you use Enterprise Manager from the W2003 server, please check
> the following:
> Launch the Properties dialog from the server object of Enterprise
Manager
> Select the Network Configuration button on the General tab
> Is TCP/IP enabled?
> Select the Connections tab
> Is the Query time-out value set too low?
> Is the maximum concurrent user connections value set too low?
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" without express or implied warranty,
> guarantee, or rights.
> Keith Wilson
>
> "Charles" <ccolell@.softeng.es> wrote in message
> news:eGpQpjJHEHA.3576@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> that
>