Viewing 15 posts - 736 through 750 (of 994 total)
Why did you detach the database and delete the transaction log? That's not going to fix the corruption. See this post on why trashing your log is not good http://www.sqlskills.com/blogs/paul/2007/09/15/CorruptionLastResortsThatPeopleTryFirst.aspx
sp_resetstatus...
March 13, 2008 at 10:10 am
DINESH (3/11/2008)
1. open master database
2. open table sysdatabases
3. change the 'status' value of ur database to 32768
4. refresh the sql server
5....
March 11, 2008 at 8:36 am
pmohan (3/4/2008)
March 6, 2008 at 10:40 am
🙂 I tend to get a little riled when people post links that aren't terribly useful or pertinent. Many people (I'm not saying it's the case this time) just post...
March 6, 2008 at 9:32 am
This isn't a SQL Server error message - it's a message from Microsoft Dynamics. I recommend you post this (but post a *link* to your bitmap, not the actual bitmap)...
February 27, 2008 at 4:25 pm
faheemlatif (2/26/2008)
Hi,Please visit this :
http://www.simple-talk.com/sql/backup-and-recovery/pop-rivett-and-the-suspect-database/
That would be a bit useful if they were on SS2000, but they're not. Please check which forum you're in before posting inappropriate links - thanks!
February 26, 2008 at 10:58 am
I don't recall any issues in index rebuild that could show this - but it's possible there was one with parallel index rebuild plans. It could also be a stale...
February 25, 2008 at 3:49 pm
No - it will never show differently than what it logs - both outputs are driven from the same set of zero-or-more errors.
It could be that something went wrong between...
February 25, 2008 at 3:36 pm
What was the sequence of events here - what time did the index rebuild job fail and what time was the CHECKDB start and finish?
February 25, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Sean - having tempdb on the same array as the user DBs is going to be a problem, and not just for CHECKDB. For CHECKDB, it's going to be reading...
February 25, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Sean - no, the switch is called DBCC CHECKDB 🙂 - it does a CHECKALLOC and then batches of CHECKTABLES in parallel. Sounds like its the 64bit limitation on Standard...
February 25, 2008 at 11:54 am
It's really more to do with the number of data files in the database being checked - the way I wrote the read-ahead algorithm in CHECKDB was based on...
February 25, 2008 at 11:32 am
Stanislas,
When you say that it 'failed' - what exactly do you mean? It seemed to hang? It complained that it didn't have enough disk space? Or some other error?
Your tempdb...
February 25, 2008 at 10:48 am
One solution that I recommend as a way for customers to offload the CPU and IO workload of CHECKDB from production servers is to restore your backups on another system...
February 22, 2008 at 6:08 pm
Not that CHECKDB gets itself in a loop, just that because it effectively cycles the buffer pool and uses lots of memory, it could cause lots of paging depending on...
February 22, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 736 through 750 (of 994 total)