Bulk copy out of table error

I had to restore my msdb and distribution databases at my DRP site because
they went SUSPECT on me. I had scripts to create and delete the subscriptions
to three of my database. I ran the scripts and all but one is working. The
snapshot error message I receive is "The process could not bulk copy out of
table '[dbo].[syscobj_0x3534373544363843]'. Of course I do not have a table
with that name. I am very new to SQL world and any help will be greatly
apprecitaed. I have tried reinitializing the subscription and also deleted
and recreated the subscription but nothing is working.
this is not a table but a view. It is a view of the underlying table. The
best way to try to resolve this problem is to try to query the view
directly, i.e.
select * from syscobj_0x3534373544363843
Also can you do this
sp_helptext syscobj_0x3534373544363843
and post what you see back here?
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"golfnut" <golfnut@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5B547AEB-0B57-4200-8814-DE8CA253A5F5@.microsoft.com...
> I had to restore my msdb and distribution databases at my DRP site because
> they went SUSPECT on me. I had scripts to create and delete the
subscriptions
> to three of my database. I ran the scripts and all but one is working. The
> snapshot error message I receive is "The process could not bulk copy out
of
> table '[dbo].[syscobj_0x3534373544363843]'. Of course I do not have a
table
> with that name. I am very new to SQL world and any help will be greatly
> apprecitaed. I have tried reinitializing the subscription and also deleted
> and recreated the subscription but nothing is working.
|||Hi Hilary,
When I ran select * from syscobj_0x3534373544363843 the error message was
Invaild object name.
When I ran sp_helptext the errror message was The object does not exist in
database
Also, I went to agent history of the snapshot and there is another error
message the says Another snap shot agent is running but there is not another
agent running that I can see.
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> this is not a table but a view. It is a view of the underlying table. The
> best way to try to resolve this problem is to try to query the view
> directly, i.e.
>
> select * from syscobj_0x3534373544363843
> Also can you do this
> sp_helptext syscobj_0x3534373544363843
> and post what you see back here?
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> "golfnut" <golfnut@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5B547AEB-0B57-4200-8814-DE8CA253A5F5@.microsoft.com...
> subscriptions
> of
> table
>
>
|||Thanks for letting me know that number is a view. I went into my production
database and saw that the view was created on 1/11/05. This database at my
DRP site was restored in December. If I restore the latest copy of the
database should make this replication work properly.
Thank you very much for your reply but now I have another problem on a
different server at my DRP site.
If I click on the publication and look at the subscriber column the
subscriber name has changed to REPL_DISTRIBUTOR.
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> this is not a table but a view. It is a view of the underlying table. The
> best way to try to resolve this problem is to try to query the view
> directly, i.e.
>
> select * from syscobj_0x3534373544363843
> Also can you do this
> sp_helptext syscobj_0x3534373544363843
> and post what you see back here?
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> "golfnut" <golfnut@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5B547AEB-0B57-4200-8814-DE8CA253A5F5@.microsoft.com...
> subscriptions
> of
> table
>
>

Building a Recovery/Test SQL Server

We have a production SQL 2000 Server and we want to build
an offline-recovery server where we can install
applications, restore databases, and test client
connectivity. I would build this server exactly like our
production server, restore the msdb, model databases,
etc. Would I be better off having this server on a test
lan seperate from my production server, or can I have
both these servers(different names and IPs or course)on
the same network. What would be a better way of
introducing this recovery server, and is this even
possible?
Thanks,
Alex
Hi Alex,
You can have Two separate SQL Servers on the network.
If you are using SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition, then you can use the
Log Shipping Feature of the SQL Server to create a Warm Backup. This backup
Server can be used for reports. The users would have read only access to
the Warm Standby Server.
Please refer to the following white paper that has steps to setup Log
Shipping and steps to convert a standby server to a production server, in
case the Production server crashes.
http://support.microsoft.com/default...l%2fcontent%2f
2000papers%2fLogShippingFinal.asp
HTH
Ashish
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Building a Recovery/Test SQL Server

We have a production SQL 2000 Server and we want to build
an offline-recovery server where we can install
applications, restore databases, and test client
connectivity. I would build this server exactly like our
production server, restore the msdb, model databases,
etc. Would I be better off having this server on a test
lan seperate from my production server, or can I have
both these servers(different names and IPs or course)on
the same network. What would be a better way of
introducing this recovery server, and is this even
possible?
Thanks,
AlexHi Alex,
You can have Two separate SQL Servers on the network.
If you are using SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition, then you can use the
Log Shipping Feature of the SQL Server to create a Warm Backup. This backup
Server can be used for reports. The users would have read only access to
the Warm Standby Server.
Please refer to the following white paper that has steps to setup Log
Shipping and steps to convert a standby server to a production server, in
case the Production server crashes.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=%2fsupport%2fsql%2fcontent%2f
2000papers%2fLogShippingFinal.asp
HTH
Ashish
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Building a Recovery/Test SQL Server

We have a production SQL 2000 Server and we want to build
an offline-recovery server where we can install
applications, restore databases, and test client
connectivity. I would build this server exactly like our
production server, restore the msdb, model databases,
etc. Would I be better off having this server on a test
lan seperate from my production server, or can I have
both these servers(different names and IPs or course)on
the same network. What would be a better way of
introducing this recovery server, and is this even
possible?
Thanks,
AlexHi Alex,
You can have Two separate SQL Servers on the network.
If you are using SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition, then you can use the
Log Shipping Feature of the SQL Server to create a Warm Backup. This backup
Server can be used for reports. The users would have read only access to
the Warm Standby Server.
Please refer to the following white paper that has steps to setup Log
Shipping and steps to convert a standby server to a production server, in
case the Production server crashes.
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...ql%2fcontent%2f
2000papers%2fLogShippingFinal.asp
HTH
Ashish
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Build numbers

I am trying to restore a master database after a server rebuild and need to
get the build number back to 8.00.818. I have installed (or so I thought) t
he SP3a and the 8-11-03 patch to get it to that build number but when I chec
k the build number in Enter
prise Manager it still shows 8.00.194. Help?How are you getting the build number from Enterprise Manager? You should
connect to your SQL Server using Query Analyzer and run the following
command to get the SQL Server's build number:
SELECT @.@.VERSION
GO
May be you haven't installed the service pack on the client machines.
This might be helpful: http://vyaskn.tripod.com/sqlsps.htm
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
Is .NET important for a database professional?
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/poll.htm
"Chad" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:819D85D5-070C-4150-87FB-B9A0C5A2B2FB@.microsoft.com...
I am trying to restore a master database after a server rebuild and need to
get the build number back to 8.00.818. I have installed (or so I thought)
the SP3a and the 8-11-03 patch to get it to that build number but when I
check the build number in Enterprise Manager it still shows 8.00.194. Help?|||I have done that as well to get the build number but under properties of the
sql instance name is where I was getting the information from Enterprise Ma
nager (is that wrong?). And after applying SP3a and the 8-11-03 patch it ha
sn't changed the build info
rmation. I have taken the defaults for installation of the SP and patch. I
Have completely rebuilt the machine and reinstalled SQL so there souldn't b
e anything strange with the installation (all default).|||I wouldn't use Enterprise Manager for this. As I posted earlier, query the
server directly. What do you get when you run SELECT @.@.VERSION?
--
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
Is .NET important for a database professional?
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/poll.htm
"Chad" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D18A75A7-4AC6-4917-9334-F056D3E0159F@.microsoft.com...
I have done that as well to get the build number but under properties of the
sql instance name is where I was getting the information from Enterprise
Manager (is that wrong?). And after applying SP3a and the 8-11-03 patch it
hasn't changed the build information. I have taken the defaults for
installation of the SP and patch. I Have completely rebuilt the machine and
reinstalled SQL so there souldn't be anything strange with the installation
(all default).|||I get the original build number of the system (8.00.194). The patches don't
seem to be applying or at least don't seem to be affecting the number at al
l and so the restore of the Master Database failes.|||Can't be right :-) I did this on various servers and I see updated build
numbers. You either applied the service pack to the wrong server, or you
haven't applied the service pack at all.
When you run the service pack exe first it extracts itself into a folder.
Many people mistake that and think they've applied the service pack, just by
extracting the service pack. Hope that's not the case with you. If it is,
you have to run the setup from the extracted folder.
--
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
Is .NET important for a database professional?
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/poll.htm
"Chad" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E97EEE10-091F-4DD8-99EB-B9513B38F1B5@.microsoft.com...
I get the original build number of the system (8.00.194). The patches don't
seem to be applying or at least don't seem to be affecting the number at all
and so the restore of the Master Database failes.|||Narayana Vyas Kondreddi wrote:

>Can't be right :-) I did this on various servers and I see updated build
>numbers. You either applied the service pack to the wrong server, or you
>haven't applied the service pack at all.
>When you run the service pack exe first it extracts itself into a folder.
>Many people mistake that and think they've applied the service pack, just b
y
>extracting the service pack. Hope that's not the case with you. If it is,
>you have to run the setup from the extracted folder.
>
Vyas,
Whether or not this is what happened, it never hurts to remind people
how easy it is not to install the update:
How *not* to install sp3a for Microsoft SQL Server 2000
1. Download the service pack file, SQL2KSP3.exe, from Microsoft
2. Run the service pack file SQL2KSP3.exe
3. Click OK when you see the message "the package has been successfully
delivered"
Guess what? The service pack has not been installed! The download page
says you just need to "Install Database Components SP3a (SQL2KSP3.exe),"
so what's going on?
Youi wouldn't know it from the download page, but you now have to go to
the location where you extracted the files and run setup (and if I
recall, there are many files containing the word setup).
SK

>--
>HTH,
>Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
>http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
>Is .NET important for a database professional?
>http://vyaskn.tripod.com/poll.htm
>
>
>"Chad" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>news:E97EEE10-091F-4DD8-99EB-B9513B38F1B5@.microsoft.com...
>I get the original build number of the system (8.00.194). The patches don'
t
>seem to be applying or at least don't seem to be affecting the number at al
l
>and so the restore of the Master Database failes.
>
>

Build numbers

I am trying to restore a master database after a server rebuild and need to get the build number back to 8.00.818. I have installed (or so I thought) the SP3a and the 8-11-03 patch to get it to that build number but when I check the build number in Enterprise Manager it still shows 8.00.194. Help?How are you getting the build number from Enterprise Manager? You should
connect to your SQL Server using Query Analyzer and run the following
command to get the SQL Server's build number:
SELECT @.@.VERSION
GO
May be you haven't installed the service pack on the client machines.
This might be helpful: http://vyaskn.tripod.com/sqlsps.htm
--
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
Is .NET important for a database professional?
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/poll.htm
"Chad" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:819D85D5-070C-4150-87FB-B9A0C5A2B2FB@.microsoft.com...
I am trying to restore a master database after a server rebuild and need to
get the build number back to 8.00.818. I have installed (or so I thought)
the SP3a and the 8-11-03 patch to get it to that build number but when I
check the build number in Enterprise Manager it still shows 8.00.194. Help?|||I have done that as well to get the build number but under properties of the sql instance name is where I was getting the information from Enterprise Manager (is that wrong?). And after applying SP3a and the 8-11-03 patch it hasn't changed the build information. I have taken the defaults for installation of the SP and patch. I Have completely rebuilt the machine and reinstalled SQL so there souldn't be anything strange with the installation (all default).|||I wouldn't use Enterprise Manager for this. As I posted earlier, query the
server directly. What do you get when you run SELECT @.@.VERSION?
--
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
Is .NET important for a database professional?
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/poll.htm
"Chad" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D18A75A7-4AC6-4917-9334-F056D3E0159F@.microsoft.com...
I have done that as well to get the build number but under properties of the
sql instance name is where I was getting the information from Enterprise
Manager (is that wrong?). And after applying SP3a and the 8-11-03 patch it
hasn't changed the build information. I have taken the defaults for
installation of the SP and patch. I Have completely rebuilt the machine and
reinstalled SQL so there souldn't be anything strange with the installation
(all default).|||I get the original build number of the system (8.00.194). The patches don't seem to be applying or at least don't seem to be affecting the number at all and so the restore of the Master Database failes.|||Can't be right :-) I did this on various servers and I see updated build
numbers. You either applied the service pack to the wrong server, or you
haven't applied the service pack at all.
When you run the service pack exe first it extracts itself into a folder.
Many people mistake that and think they've applied the service pack, just by
extracting the service pack. Hope that's not the case with you. If it is,
you have to run the setup from the extracted folder.
--
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
Is .NET important for a database professional?
http://vyaskn.tripod.com/poll.htm
"Chad" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E97EEE10-091F-4DD8-99EB-B9513B38F1B5@.microsoft.com...
I get the original build number of the system (8.00.194). The patches don't
seem to be applying or at least don't seem to be affecting the number at all
and so the restore of the Master Database failes.|||Narayana Vyas Kondreddi wrote:
>Can't be right :-) I did this on various servers and I see updated build
>numbers. You either applied the service pack to the wrong server, or you
>haven't applied the service pack at all.
>When you run the service pack exe first it extracts itself into a folder.
>Many people mistake that and think they've applied the service pack, just by
>extracting the service pack. Hope that's not the case with you. If it is,
>you have to run the setup from the extracted folder.
>
Vyas,
Whether or not this is what happened, it never hurts to remind people
how easy it is not to install the update:
How *not* to install sp3a for Microsoft SQL Server 2000
1. Download the service pack file, SQL2KSP3.exe, from Microsoft
2. Run the service pack file SQL2KSP3.exe
3. Click OK when you see the message "the package has been successfully
delivered"
Guess what? The service pack has not been installed! The download page
says you just need to "Install Database Components SP3a (SQL2KSP3.exe),"
so what's going on?
Youi wouldn't know it from the download page, but you now have to go to
the location where you extracted the files and run setup (and if I
recall, there are many files containing the word setup).
SK
>--
>HTH,
>Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)
>http://vyaskn.tripod.com/
>Is .NET important for a database professional?
>http://vyaskn.tripod.com/poll.htm
>
>
>"Chad" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>news:E97EEE10-091F-4DD8-99EB-B9513B38F1B5@.microsoft.com...
>I get the original build number of the system (8.00.194). The patches don't
>seem to be applying or at least don't seem to be affecting the number at all
>and so the restore of the Master Database failes.
>
>