April 16, 2013 at 12:55 pm
We single node cluster running SQL 2008 R2 SP2. We noticed the Application Even Log contianing thousands of messages like
Information DateTime SQLAgent$Name 53 Failover "[sqagtres] LooksAlive request."
Information DateTime SQLAgent$Name 53 Failover "[sqagtres] CheckServiceAlive: returning TRUE (success)"
I found KB2718920 which recomends installing Cunulative Update 3 for SQL 2008 R2 SP2. The Install reports that it failed. But when I restarted SQL serivce, it went into script update mode, and minutes later came online and reports that it is now version 10.50.4266.0.
The end of the summary.txt file contains the following
2013-04-16 06:56:17 Slp: Attempting to run patch request for instance: MSSQLSERVER
2013-04-16 07:11:30 Slp: Error: Failed to run patch request for instance: MSSQLSERVER (exit code: -595541211)
2013-04-16 07:11:41 Slp: Error result: -595541211
2013-04-16 07:11:41 Slp: Result facility code: 1152
2013-04-16 07:11:41 Slp: Result error code: 49957
Much earlier in the file...
2013-04-16 06:52:44 Slp: Package ID sql_fulltext_ctp6_Cpu64: Discovery: Package version data are " Installed Version: 10.52.4000.0 MinVersion: 10.0.1400 MaxVersion: 10.50.1599.1"
2013-04-16 06:52:44 Slp: Package ID sql_fulltext_ctp6_Cpu64: Discovery: Package version data are " Installed Version: 10.52.4000.0 MinVersion: 10.0.1400 MaxVersion: 10.50.1599.1"
.....
013-04-16 06:52:51 Slp: Patch Id KB2754552_sql_engine_core_shared_Cpu64 - NotInstalled on the baseline msi package sql_engine_core_shared_Cpu64. Detail description of this patch package is: PatchId=KB2754552_sql_engine_core_shared_Cpu64 PatchVersion=10.52.4266.0 BaselinePackageId=sql_engine_core_shared_Cpu64 BaselineVersion=10.52.4000.0; PatchFileName=sql_engine_core_shared.msp PatchCode={A9F26DCE-10E2-4224-AC5F-2F78F1321DDD}
2013-04-16 06:52:51 Slp: Patch Id: KB2754552_sql_as_Cpu64 - The baseline msi is not installed. The patch package is ignored.
There seems to be a mismatch between the version of SQL installed and the version this installer was expecting, though I checked the links and the files I downloaded should be correct.
Is anyone not confused by this? And is the instance I tried to install to trustworthy?
April 16, 2013 at 1:19 pm
Please post the result of this query:
select @@version
April 16, 2013 at 1:48 pm
Microsoft SQL Server 2008 R2 (SP2) - 10.50.4266.0 (X64) Sep 26 2012 17:08:07 Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation Enterprise Edition (64-bit) on Windows NT 6.1 <X64> (Build 7601: Service Pack 1)
April 17, 2013 at 5:19 am
And the issue described in the KB article linked above? Still occurring.
April 17, 2013 at 7:03 am
uninstall the cu and reboot then try re applying
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ya can't make an omelette without breaking just a few eggs" 😉
April 18, 2013 at 7:34 am
Honestly it is probalby best to open a case with Microsoft Support on this. You might have the CU applied via into SQL Server as far as the database thinks but maybe not all of the binaries that run SQLServer are updated. They can decipher those codes pretty well.
April 18, 2013 at 3:49 pm
Might uninstalling the CU break the instance? Since the instance was in Script Update mode when it was restarted following the failed install, it appears that the databases, including master, were updated from 10.4000 to 10.4266. I'm concerned that an uninstall may revert the binaries back to 10.4000, preventing SQL Server from starting when trying to open with a 50.4266 Master DB. My understanding has been that once you upgrade a SQL database to a newer version, there is no going back without loss of data created since the upgrade.
April 18, 2013 at 3:52 pm
BTW, the most recent CU for MSQQL 2008 R2 SP2 is CU 5. Would installing CU4 or 5 be a likely fix or would I be digging a deeper hole?
Dan
April 23, 2013 at 9:32 am
Uninstalled the CU, rebooted, verified ALL SQL services were off, ran the update again - same result.
Going to Microsoft now.
Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply