Multiple instances in a virtual server

We want to create another named instance of SQL Server 2000 (sp 3a) in a SQL
2000 active/active cluster virtual server. We are finding evidence in
several forums (including this one) that we cannot do that : we would need a
new virtual server with its own instance instead. (The problem is our
bespoke software supplier doesn't support that!) Does anybody have any
DEFINITE proof (eg. from Microsoft themselves) that this is the case?
Cheers,
Colin
From BOL. Topic header "Creating a Failover Cluster"
Last bulleted item. 'One Instance...
--SNIP
Elements of a Virtual Server
A virtual server contains:
a.. A combination of one or more disks in a Microsoft Cluster Service
(MSCS) cluster group.
Each MSCS cluster group can contain at most one virtual SQL Server.
b.. A network name for each virtual server. This network name is the
virtual server name.
c.. One or more IP addresses that are used to connect to each virtual
server.
d.. One instance of SQL Server 2000, including a SQL Server resource, a
SQL Server Agent resource, and a full-text resource.
If an administrator uninstalls the instance of SQL Server 2000 within a
virtual server, the virtual server, including all IP addresses and the
network name, is also removed from the MSCS cluster group
--SNIP
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Colin Bunting" <ColinBunting@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4F3951C7-E521-4FDB-95F0-4C07E2B380E0@.microsoft.com...
> We want to create another named instance of SQL Server 2000 (sp 3a) in a
SQL
> 2000 active/active cluster virtual server. We are finding evidence in
> several forums (including this one) that we cannot do that : we would
need a
> new virtual server with its own instance instead. (The problem is our
> bespoke software supplier doesn't support that!) Does anybody have any
> DEFINITE proof (eg. from Microsoft themselves) that this is the case?
> --
> Cheers,
> Colin
>

multiple database publications

I'm using merge replication with sql2000 and sqlserverce. All is working
well for now.
My customer now wants my ppc app to utilize data from multiple databases. Is
it possible for a single publication to contain data from multiple databases
and if so will it merge correctly?
This is probably a stupid question, but it would be nice if it works
I'd have to try this out, but I don't think so. You replicate to SQL CE
using an ActiveX control on the PPC which will pull the subscription to the
PPC.
One option you may have is to use RDA to do parts of your sync, and a merge
publication to do other tables.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
Now available for purchase at:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"mgarner1980" <mgarner@.kbsi.com> wrote in message
news:OOYLbvPzEHA.804@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I'm using merge replication with sql2000 and sqlserverce. All is working
> well for now.
> My customer now wants my ppc app to utilize data from multiple databases.
> Is
> it possible for a single publication to contain data from multiple
> databases
> and if so will it merge correctly?
> This is probably a stupid question, but it would be nice if it works
>

Multiple connections from IIS on 1433 causing problems

I have SQL2000 with 8 databases running on the LAN. In our DMZ we have
a web server [IIS5] which connects to the SQL on 1433 through the
DMZ/LAN port. Up until last Tuesday everything seemed OK with approx 10
connections form DMZ>>LAN on port 1433 whenever the site was opened.
However now I am seeing 50-60 connections even though there are only a
max of 10 users connected.
As a test I closed the website to the WAN [0 connections] and opened
one occurrence of the website . It immediately, created 2 IIS
connections and 10 SQL connections. After 20-30 seconds the SQL dropped
to 2 connections until I clicked an internal link, & then it rose back
to 10 again.
Does this make sense, I dont know what the developers may have done to
trigger this and not sure where to go next. Connection pooling is
enabled & we use DSNs to make the IIS>>>SQL connections.
Thanx for your time
G> Does this make sense, I dont know what the developers may have done to
> trigger this and not sure where to go next. Connection pooling is
> enabled & we use DSNs to make the IIS>>>SQL connections.
Basically, the high-water mark should reflect the number of concurrent open
connections needed by the application. Keep in mind that when concurrent
queries are executed, each requires a separate connection and ADO will
dynamically create additional connection objects as needed. You might try a
Profiler Trace including Batch Starting, RPC Starting, Batch Completed and
RPC Completed events to help identify the cause.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"gstar" <gary.brett@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1168856615.584379.217420@.l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I have SQL2000 with 8 databases running on the LAN. In our DMZ we have
> a web server [IIS5] which connects to the SQL on 1433 through the
> DMZ/LAN port. Up until last Tuesday everything seemed OK with approx 10
> connections form DMZ>>LAN on port 1433 whenever the site was opened.
> However now I am seeing 50-60 connections even though there are only a
> max of 10 users connected.
> As a test I closed the website to the WAN [0 connections] and opened
> one occurrence of the website . It immediately, created 2 IIS
> connections and 10 SQL connections. After 20-30 seconds the SQL dropped
> to 2 connections until I clicked an internal link, & then it rose back
> to 10 again.
> Does this make sense, I dont know what the developers may have done to
> trigger this and not sure where to go next. Connection pooling is
> enabled & we use DSNs to make the IIS>>>SQL connections.
> Thanx for your time
> G
>|||I have see this problem before. If you are running IIS, I am assuming
asp or aspx (.net). If you have more connections than users, it is
probably that the application is not closing connections properly. In
"classic ASP" you had a command to open the connection - often at the
top of the web page, ran your query and then closed it at the bottom of
the page as the code was interpreted. Maybe this will help give the
developers some ideas. Same sort of concept can happen with .NET.
KR
Dan Guzman wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Basically, the high-water mark should reflect the number of concurrent ope
n
> connections needed by the application. Keep in mind that when concurrent
> queries are executed, each requires a separate connection and ADO will
> dynamically create additional connection objects as needed. You might try
a
> Profiler Trace including Batch Starting, RPC Starting, Batch Completed and
> RPC Completed events to help identify the cause.
>
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Dan Guzman
> SQL Server MVP
> "gstar" <gary.brett@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1168856615.584379.217420@.l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Multiple connections from IIS on 1433 causing problems

I have SQL2000 with 8 databases running on the LAN. In our DMZ we have
a web server [IIS5] which connects to the SQL on 1433 through the
DMZ/LAN port. Up until last Tuesday everything seemed OK with approx 10
connections form DMZ>>LAN on port 1433 whenever the site was opened.
However now I am seeing 50-60 connections even though there are only a
max of 10 users connected.
As a test I closed the website to the WAN [0 connections] and opened
one occurrence of the website . It immediately, created 2 IIS
connections and 10 SQL connections. After 20-30 seconds the SQL dropped
to 2 connections until I clicked an internal link, & then it rose back
to 10 again.
Does this make sense, I dont know what the developers may have done to
trigger this and not sure where to go next. Connection pooling is
enabled & we use DSNs to make the IIS>>SQL connections.
Thanx for your time
G> Does this make sense, I dont know what the developers may have done to
> trigger this and not sure where to go next. Connection pooling is
> enabled & we use DSNs to make the IIS>>SQL connections.
Basically, the high-water mark should reflect the number of concurrent open
connections needed by the application. Keep in mind that when concurrent
queries are executed, each requires a separate connection and ADO will
dynamically create additional connection objects as needed. You might try a
Profiler Trace including Batch Starting, RPC Starting, Batch Completed and
RPC Completed events to help identify the cause.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"gstar" <gary.brett@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1168856615.584379.217420@.l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I have SQL2000 with 8 databases running on the LAN. In our DMZ we have
> a web server [IIS5] which connects to the SQL on 1433 through the
> DMZ/LAN port. Up until last Tuesday everything seemed OK with approx 10
> connections form DMZ>>LAN on port 1433 whenever the site was opened.
> However now I am seeing 50-60 connections even though there are only a
> max of 10 users connected.
> As a test I closed the website to the WAN [0 connections] and opened
> one occurrence of the website . It immediately, created 2 IIS
> connections and 10 SQL connections. After 20-30 seconds the SQL dropped
> to 2 connections until I clicked an internal link, & then it rose back
> to 10 again.
> Does this make sense, I dont know what the developers may have done to
> trigger this and not sure where to go next. Connection pooling is
> enabled & we use DSNs to make the IIS>>SQL connections.
> Thanx for your time
> G
>|||I have see this problem before. If you are running IIS, I am assuming
asp or aspx (.net). If you have more connections than users, it is
probably that the application is not closing connections properly. In
"classic ASP" you had a command to open the connection - often at the
top of the web page, ran your query and then closed it at the bottom of
the page as the code was interpreted. Maybe this will help give the
developers some ideas. Same sort of concept can happen with .NET.
KR
Dan Guzman wrote:
> > Does this make sense, I dont know what the developers may have done to
> > trigger this and not sure where to go next. Connection pooling is
> > enabled & we use DSNs to make the IIS>>SQL connections.
> Basically, the high-water mark should reflect the number of concurrent open
> connections needed by the application. Keep in mind that when concurrent
> queries are executed, each requires a separate connection and ADO will
> dynamically create additional connection objects as needed. You might try a
> Profiler Trace including Batch Starting, RPC Starting, Batch Completed and
> RPC Completed events to help identify the cause.
>
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Dan Guzman
> SQL Server MVP
> "gstar" <gary.brett@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1168856615.584379.217420@.l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >I have SQL2000 with 8 databases running on the LAN. In our DMZ we have
> > a web server [IIS5] which connects to the SQL on 1433 through the
> > DMZ/LAN port. Up until last Tuesday everything seemed OK with approx 10
> > connections form DMZ>>LAN on port 1433 whenever the site was opened.
> > However now I am seeing 50-60 connections even though there are only a
> > max of 10 users connected.
> >
> > As a test I closed the website to the WAN [0 connections] and opened
> > one occurrence of the website . It immediately, created 2 IIS
> > connections and 10 SQL connections. After 20-30 seconds the SQL dropped
> > to 2 connections until I clicked an internal link, & then it rose back
> > to 10 again.
> >
> > Does this make sense, I dont know what the developers may have done to
> > trigger this and not sure where to go next. Connection pooling is
> > enabled & we use DSNs to make the IIS>>SQL connections.
> >
> > Thanx for your time
> >
> > G
> >