Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase «««123

Replication Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Wednesday, December 30, 2009 7:35 AM
Hall of Fame

Hall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of Fame

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, May 9, 2014 12:47 AM
Points: 3,448, Visits: 4,407
skjoldtc (12/30/2009)

Is this a bug in SQL Server? Why would an instance that is not part of replication cause this behavior when removed?

The referenced article applies to SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition (see http://support.microsoft.com/kb/811008#appliesto). It looks like a bug in that edition. I hope there's no such bug in 2005 and 2008
Post #840315
Posted Wednesday, December 30, 2009 8:42 AM
SSC Eights!

SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 8:16 AM
Points: 945, Visits: 1,018
I did not answer the question because I did not fully understand it. After reading the explanation on what was meant I would have missed it any way. I never would have thought having three instances of SQL Server with Instance 1(default) & 2 set up for replication then the process of uninstalling instance 3 would cause replication between 1 & 2 to fail. Interesting. Thank you for sharing your experience.

David



Post #840382
Posted Thursday, December 31, 2009 12:07 AM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, July 21, 2014 2:56 AM
Points: 2,603, Visits: 2,061
I also go wrong...

I also think that there are only two instances. But actually it’s Total 3 instance including default.

If we think logically nothing should be affected. But I still doubts if it's bug or not and thinking how it's affect to the other instance???


---------------------------------------------------
"Thare are only 10 types of people in the world:
Those who understand binary, and those who don't."
Post #840689
Posted Thursday, December 31, 2009 8:25 AM
Right there with Babe

Right there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with BabeRight there with Babe

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, October 23, 2014 10:20 AM
Points: 787, Visits: 360
I agree that some proofreading/editing seems to be needed on submissions - even with some of the featured articles I've had to strain to reconstruct sentences into proper English syntax as I read them. This question was very difficult to understand and most certainly misworded - unless the word is uninstall, the question makes no sense at all.
Post #840833
Posted Tuesday, January 5, 2010 7:23 AM
Valued Member

Valued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued Member

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, March 5, 2013 2:20 PM
Points: 61, Visits: 106
I want a refund on my point.
Post #842080
Posted Friday, March 19, 2010 3:35 PM


SSCertifiable

SSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiable

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 4:21 PM
Points: 7,928, Visits: 9,653
Steve Jones - Editor (12/29/2009)
The grammar has been corrected. Apologies for any issues.


It would have been useful also to alter the question to make it clear it was talking about SQL 2000, and not about SQL 2008. (Actually, I don't know for sure whether that particular bug has been fixed or not, but I imagine MS will have fixed it as they haven't updated the list of products to which the bug applies to include SQL 2005 or SQL 2008).


Tom
Post #886752
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase «««123

Permissions Expand / Collapse