|
|
|
SSChampion
        
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, May 18, 2007 3:36 PM
Points: 10,040,
Visits: 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
SSC Veteran
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 8:17 AM
Points: 277,
Visits: 404
|
|
This is good information to know. Thank you for the question.
In the URL given in the explanation, the phrase "The resource database (mssqlsystemresource)" appears four times. MS thoroughly emphasizes the outcome of restoring system databases.
|
|
|
|
|
SSCommitted
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, May 16, 2013 7:30 AM
Points: 1,566,
Visits: 600
|
|
Interesting (I got it wrong ). But what happens to the exe's (etc) that were patched?
|
|
|
|
|
Ten Centuries
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 1:48 AM
Points: 1,252,
Visits: 3,367
|
|
|
|
|
|
SSCarpal Tunnel
       
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 1:35 AM
Points: 4,789,
Visits: 1,336
|
|
Good topic selection. Good one. :P
|
|
|
|
|
Ten Centuries
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 3:09 AM
Points: 1,085,
Visits: 1,163
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ten Centuries
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, February 04, 2013 10:00 AM
Points: 1,329,
Visits: 803
|
|
| Definitely good to know. It seems like Microsoft needs to put a little more thought into this. Since this has to be done from the original media, it should be smart enough to detect you are not running at the same patch level of the media and provide instructions to accomomdate for that.
|
|
|
|
|
SSC-Addicted
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, April 19, 2013 7:59 AM
Points: 424,
Visits: 389
|
|
I didn't think I knew this, but I got it right! When I saw the possible answers, I realized I'd seen this symptom before and was able to deduce the correct answer.
I was working on a customer's databases with which I was unfamiliar. They had a two servers, a primary and secondary (the app server handled failover). The primary was RTM while the secondary had service packs. Not only that, but the server net libraries on the primary were later service pack versions! I applied service packs, but had been left wondering how that could have happened. Now I know what might have happened to cause the discrepancy!
|
|
|
|
|
SSC-Enthusiastic
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 3:29 PM
Points: 171,
Visits: 24
|
|
Good Question. :)
I just joined yesterday, and have been going through some of the old QotD's. Seeing a question like this that makes you think and do some research is much better than some of the stuff I have seen in here. ;)
What is: SELECT 35 / 5 - 2
That doesn't do much to stimulate brain activity. ;)
Thanks,
-Dark Jester
|
|
|
|
|
Ten Centuries
      
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, May 13, 2013 2:04 AM
Points: 1,342,
Visits: 1,946
|
|
This is something I didn't know and which is probably quite important.
MS does mention that service packs and hotfixes should be reapplied Important The resource database (mssqlsystemresource) is restored from SQL Server 2005 distribution media. When you rebuild the resource database from distribution media, all Service Packs and QFE updates are lost, and therefore must be reapplied. Before you proceed, see [REBUILDDATABASE] for more information. However under the [REBUILDDATABASE] entry, there's no further mention of this, so I suspect a lot of DBAs who have to rebuild the master database don't get back to where they should be!
Of course, it does say that the most recent backup of the master database should be restored as soon as possible would would have the effect of updating it, but there is still great scope for error here.
Derek
|
|
|
|