To SQL or not to SQL

SQL 2000 post SP4 Hotfix 8.00.2162

A SQL Server 2000 Post SP4 hotfix has just been released to the public. Bringing the SQL Server 2000 version number to 8.00.2162

This hotfix is a cumulative hotfix containing:

• Hotfixes that were built since SP4 shipped
• Hotfixes that were done for SP3 but did not make it into SP4 (because of the cutoff date for fixes that made it into service pack SP4)

This build has undergone more testing than a typical hotfix build but not as much as say a service pack.

The build is available at the following download locations:

Ia64 version - http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=920707DE-AAF0-412F-8B26-1074E91E494D&displaylang=en

X86 x64 version - http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=4773BF7E-21AE-4F1E-AD48-6CA739E10217&displaylang=en

The following KB articles have been published to help answer questions about this hotfix build:

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=904660

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=894905

VB 6.0 died, rightly so.

Visual Basic 6.0 support died 31 March 2005. Rightly so. Everyone is up in arms. http://classicvb.org/

<RANT ON>

There is far too much badly architected, badly developed and security-less VB v1.0-6.0 code out there. And it is a risk to every business that is using it.

Now how can a developer not want to move forward, improve on what he/she has written, and at the same time, keep up with the technology boom that put them where they are?

If a VB 6.0 developer can not handle the migration to VB.NET (or better c#), maybe the developer needs a LOT of re-training, or be re-evaluated if he/she is actually good enough for the position held. Developers generally earn a lot of money, but in most cases, they are not worth it.

Yes, a re-write will expose the security holes and the coding monstrosity that was created over the years, but maybe it is good for the IT industry. A good clean out will help drive down costs (those developers who are not productive and competent will be pushed out the industry) and at the same time, sort out all the security flaws that are lying around.

In my opinion, it is time to do a clean sweep. Developers who can not be multi-faceted, not willing to learn the newer languages like c# and Java have no place in this industry. A corporation needs someone who can work on code that runs on the Unix/Linux platforms, and at the same time, pretty and secure UI Windows desktop code (no, I don't believe that Java is the answer to everything, actually, far from that).

Microsoft kept everyone warm and cozy too long. The brutal reality is here. Java is mainstream, c# is getting there, VB has been left behind in the corporate environment. The large corporates have had too much trouble with mediocre VB applications that just don't work in a properly "locked-down" desktop environment.

What about the small company who runs on VB? Well, that same company is still running, now, unsupported Windows 95 and Windows 98. They still will in 2 years time (until the hardware dies and nothing new will run the old Windows). They are not spending 3-5% of turnover on IT. For them, they can wait out this round of development upgrades, and then in 2 years time, get something that works better, and is secure, and will run on Windows Vista/Longhorn.

Maybe Microsoft should not have made VB.NET, as it was trying to be too backward compatible to be really helpful to the average developer. It probably hurt the developer by extending their IT career when they should have left it a long time ago.

<RANT OFF>

VB 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0 and 6.0, I started out my career with you, I used your heavily over the years, but I outgrew you. So did Microsoft.

RIP.

Long live c# and SQL Server!

Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio Express - CTP - November 2005

Microsoft have been working on a free management tool for SQL Server 2005 Express, and what they were working on during the betas was mostly tossed away in the July timeframe.

Now, the CTP for the new tool, Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio Express is available.

Something that looks and works like the full Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio is really the right choice.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=82AFBD59-57A4-455E-A2D6-1D4C98D40F6E&displaylang=en

Scalable shared databases are supported by SQL Server 2005

Something that seems to have been added to SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition, very late in the development cycle, seems to be on of it's best features.

The ability to have one DB, located on SAN, available to multiple SQL Servers at the same time, as a read only DB is just incredible.

You can really scale out reporting, and might save you from having to flatten the data so that it is report friendly. Just throw more servers at the problem now. You need a bit of effort to update it, but it is really worth the while for those scenarios where data is loaded on a daily or weekly basis.

As long as your SAN can handle the throughput, it think it is a great feature.

The documentation in not in the SQL Server 2005 RTM BOL, but is available as a KB article: http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=910378

SQL Server 2005 RTM Released to MSDN

The files just went up for RTM SQL Server 2005 and Visual Studio 2005 on MSDN Subscribers Downloads.

A big 2747 MB download for SQL Server.

:)

SQL Server 2005 row level security

Ok, so Microsoft removed row level security from SQL Server 2005 early in the development cycle. Pity, but looks like it was just one of those trade-offs that needed to be made.

A bunch of guys from Microsoft Consulting has produced a paper on how to implement "Row and Cell" level security in SQL Server 2005.

"Implementing Row and Cell Level Security in Classified Databases Using SQL Server 2005" http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/multisec.mspx

I like the idea of keeping it simple, yet still powerful though roles. It is a bit of work, but compared to what we have in SQL Server 2000, it is a workable and maintainable solution.

Some basic rules have to be followed, but once everyone on the development team understand them, it gets very easy. Developing with security as a base, and doing most of the DB architecture up front in still a foreign concept for most developers, even those in corporates. With the added complexity of the new features in SQL Server 2005, you can really end up in trouble if the implementation is not though through first.

MVP again

Microsoft has decided to re-award me my MVP status again. Good. 3rd year running.

I must be doing something right. The joke among the Germans is that MVP stands for “Muss Viel Posten” (translated: “must post a lot“). True, the presence in the newsgroups does influence the re-nomination.

I am happy. My time has been well spent.

Back from Basta!/SQLCon05

It was great. The sleepy town of Mainz in Germany, then 600 .NET and SQL Server geeks arrive.

My 2 sessions went well, and had great fun presenting them. I did not get much time to see the others, pity.

I did see Ingo Rammer's “Migrating .NET to Indigo”. Awesome.

Then there was Meinrad Weiss' “SQL Server 2005 Business Intelligence”. He had the audience in awe by showing the new features in SQL Server 2005 and a great product called DeltaMiner. Jaws dropped when this BI tool from Bissantz & Company was shown. I have never seen such a simple UI and the graphic rednering technology to look at data was just best of the best. 

All in all, a good conference.

SQL Server 2005 - Database Mirroring off the cards for RTM.

So, Database Mirroring will not be "on" in SQL Server 2005 when it releases.

From what I have read, it looks like it is not performing up to expectations. You can still enable it, but it's probably going to be one of those "we told you so" scenarios.

I do not doubt that it is robust and won't trash your data, but I do think it is a bit too slow for production use.

I just thought it was the June CTP that made it slow. I have not been able to crash it yet.

Paragraph 5.1.2 from the September CTP shows how to enable it

http://download.microsoft.com/download/9/7/e/97e4c6e8-18e6-4c61-b1df-bdf4a66b146b/ReadmeSQL2005.htm

The updated letter from Paul Flessner's really raises the point

http://www.microsoft.com/sql/2005/productinfo/letter.mspx

Pity, my presentation for this Wednesday at SQLCon 05 in Germany has just been blown out the water.

Swiss Vodka - xellent

A Russian Colleague living here in Switzerland told me about Swiss produced Xellent Vodka 6 weeks ago. She swore by it.

So, the next day I went and bought a bottle, went to friends for dinner, put it in their freezer and 4 hours later, I took the bottle in my grip and promptly finished half of it over dinner (I was greedy and would not share). The next morning I had no hangover and promptly had a bit more. I swear by the stuff, it is very good. Pity it is not available as a small bottle for me to keep on me during those long meetings or when I am getting cold whilst waiting for the tram here in Zurich.

It is not cheep, but it is very good. I rather pay with my wallet than pay with a hangover and since I am really only a vodka drinker (ok, under duress a beer will do, or a very decent Cognac), I think the best will only do.

Have a look at their site http://www.xellent.ch

Windows Task Scheduler (a.k.a Task Scheduler) and SQL Server 2000/2005

After the problems on the SQL Server 2000 cluster with the new hotfix installer, a case was opened with Microsoft Support engineer allocated to us (see article prior to this).

Well, after some more looking, SQL Server 2005 will use Windows Task Scheduler for setup on Clusters too.

OK, but Microsoft recommends that you disable Task Scheduler as a security precaution. Great.

According to the SQL Development team, the use of Task Scheduler is here to stay. In some respect I see where they are coming from as they can then use the "Run As" on the remote host to launch the process under the correct account.

Currently, if things fail, the task is left on the remote machine, but the directory the task refers to is deleted.

We have now opened a DCR (Change request) that Microsoft either documents this feature and process very well, including updating their security lockdown documentation, or make the hotfix installer/Setup clever enough to start the task scheduler on the remote hosts, run the processes required and shut it down again.

SQL Server 2000 post SP4 hotfixes don't install on all nodes of a cluster

I recently installed a new Windows 2003, SQL Server 2000 cluster.

Then added SQL Server 2000 SP4 and applied hotfix 2040 (KB 899761 FIX: Not all memory is available when AWE is enabled on a computer that is running a 32-bit version of SQL Server 2000 SP4)

By chance I looked at the sqlservr.exe file and noticed it was still 2039 on all non-active nodes for the instance, whilst the node I installed the hotfix from was at 2040.

I looked at the SQL2000-KB8997618.00.2040-x86-ENU.log log file that 2040 creates.

3.781: SQL DLL: Successfully transferred payload to remote product instance target \\NodeB
3.781: SQL DLL: Successfully transferred payload to remote product instance target \\NodeB
3.797: SQL DLL: Successfully created new scheduled task for product instance target \\NodeB
3.828: SQL DLL: Error, failed to save new scheduled task for product instance target \\NodeB
3.828: SQL DLL: Error, failed to create scheduled task for product instance target \\NodeB
4.000: SQL DLL: Successfully removed remote folder for product instance target \\NodeB
4.000: SQL DLL: Error, remote process failed for product instance target NodeB
5.031: SQL DLL: All remote clustered nodes have completed patch installation
5.031: SQL DLL: Checking that at least one remote clustered node was successful
5.047: SQL DLL: Remote clustered node NodeB was successfully patched
5.047: SQL DLL: One or more remote clustered nodes were successfully patched

What?
On step 3.828 it fails, but then still claims on 5.047 to have checked that the hotfix was there.

Not the case, it failed and 2040 is not on the other nodes.

As you may nor may not know, Microsoft has changed the hotfix installer for SQL Server. What they did not tell us is that it now relies on Windows Task Scheduler to do it's work on the other nodes of the cluster.

What it boils down to is that if Windows Task Scheduler is disabled or not running on the remote nodes, the hotfix install on those nodes fails, but fails very silently.
Most corporates disable Windows Task Scheduler as it is a potential security risk.

So, before you apply any SQL Server 2000 post SP 4 hotfixes on a cluster, enable and start Windows Task Scheduler on all the nodes of the cluster (stop and disable them once you are finished before your security team come and get you).

See you at SQLCON 05

I will be presenting at SQLCON 05 in Mainz, Germany, 20 and 21 September 2005.

2 sessions, “SQL Server 2005 High Availability“ and “SQL Server 2005 in a Secure Financial Environment“.

The first one is really focusing on Clustering, Mirroring and Log Shipping and the 2nd one on how to setup SQL Server 2005 so that it meets the stringent laws I need to adhere to...Swiss Banking Law. If I can adhere to those laws, it is good enough for anyone.

Lots of good sessions.....so hope to see you there.

The hoxfix is here for AWE!

At last! The hotfix for SQL Server 2000's 32 bit SP4 AWE issue has been released.

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=899761

It takes the build to 2040.

Microsoft SQL Server  2000 - 8.00.2040 (Intel X86)
 May 13 2005 18:33:17
 Copyright (c) 1988-2003 Microsoft Corporation

I like the new installer. It will do multiple instances on a server all together.

The week of 7 November 2005

Yes, it is now public, the week of 7th November 2005 will be the launch of SQL Server 2005 (with Visual Studio .NET 2005).

5 Months of beta testing......and with the June 2005 CTP of SQL Server 2005 on MSDN and Betaplace, if we don't find the bugs now....we have to live with them in production.

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/misc/06-07flessner-teched05.mspx

Will you be at SQL PASS Community Summit in September?

http://www.sqlpass.org/events/summit05/index.cfm

Make sure you get to THE SQL Server conference of the year.

Even CELKO will be there, a very rare occurrence, presenting a session. If you don't know who CELKO is, Google for his name in the newsgroups. He has a very, very strong opinion on ANSI standards, and does tell users who shame the standards where to go.

The cycle of SQL Server 2005

PASS European Conference last week in Munich brought some clarity.

The jist of the release cycle is that Microosft can not pass up Tech Ed in June to do a release of a CTP. And after that, there will be another CTP, and then, if everything goes right, RTM. CTP's are generally on a 2 month cycle, so June plus 4 months?

Time will only tell.

Time to write a book

I have been wondering, should I write a book on SQL Server 2005?

Not one of those that go on-and-on-and-on about how to learn to read 1'200 pages, with a bit of SQL Server thrown in to make the title valid..

Well, Jens Süßmeyer and I have begun the long road to wrist injuries and late nights. We seem to have the same ideas, with the plain writing, and honesty, as shown at the SQL PASS 2005 European Conference keynote by Gert Drapers.

Topic? Do we need one? Well yes. Think of it as being a lesson for DBA's on how to embrace the new SQL Server 2005. Too many things have changed to sit back, and it does not help to call SQL Server 2005 names like CLR Server 2005.

SQL Server 2000 SP4 problems with AWE

Looks to be a bit of a wild one.

SQL Server 2000 SP4 introduced a bug where only 1/2 the RAM can be accessed by SQL Server when AWE is enabled.

So, it you have 16GB, SQL Server will only use 8GB.

There is a Microsoft KB article #  899761 that describes the problem.

It's advice is to un-install SP4 and call PSS. A Hotfix for this is in progress.

The SP4 download site has now a warning about not installing SP4 on systems with AWE enabled. http://www.microsoft.com/sql/downloads/2000/sp4.asp

Now I wonder how SP4 got out the door with that problem!

Update 1: KB link is now available: http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=899761

Update 2 (16 May): The hotfix is in testing, and a release is expected in about 7 days. For the moment, it will be a hotfix and not a SP re-release.

SQL Server 2000 SP4

Service Pack 4 for SQL Server 2000 is now available.

It has been a long time in beta, but before you install it (especially on production), read the readme that comes with it. There are changes that may affect the way some of your applications behave.

If you used undocumented commands, Microsoft may have changed them or the security has been tightened. As they are un-documented, they will not be mentioned as having changed in the readme. They are undocumented for a reason, so Microsoft can change them at will. Read and Writing to/from the Registry is affected.

Get it here http://www.microsoft.com/sql/downloads/2000/sp4.asp