I've created a
Monitor html template that includes all the above performance counters. To
use the template, save
to your computer. You can import it into Performance Monitor by right clicking
Counter Logs and choosing
New Counter Settings From. Remember to re-add the Physical Disk counters for
the drive that TempDB resides on.
If while trying to setup a new subscription for SQL Server 2005 Replication
using Management Studio you receive this error:
TITLE: New Subscription Wizard
Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio is unable to access replication
components because replication is not installed on this instance of SQL
Server. For information about installing replication, see the topic
Installing Replication in SQL Server Books Online.
SQL Server replication requires the actual server name to make a
connection to the server. Connections through a server alias, IP address, or
any other alternate name are not supported. Specify the actual server name,
It seems to happen from time to time: your network engineers decide on a new
network topology or naming scheme and they want to rename one or more of your
SQL Server machines or worse your desktop machine!
Renaming a SQL Server instance is not as simple as renaming the computer in
My Computer Properties.
After you've restarted windows, you will find that while the instance is now
available on the network with the new machine name, internally @@SERVERNAME will
probably still be using the old name. This will upset a number of features
within SQL Server and Management Studio and some 3rd party tools.
Using the following sql, you can see if @@SERVERNAME has the incorrect value:
SELECT @@SERVERNAME As [@@SERVERNAME],
CAST(SERVERPROPERTY('MACHINENAME') AS VARCHAR(128)) + COALESCE('' +
CAST(SERVERPROPERTY('INSTANCENAME') AS VARCHAR(128)), '') As RealInstanceName
Both @@SERVERNAME and RealInstanceName should be identical. After a recent
name change my results looked like this:
Going through my
reading material today, I came across
this post by the Microsoft SQL Server Development Customer Advisory Team on
using SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition to
load 1TB (yes terabyte) in less than an hour. Mind you they did have an a HP
Itanium2 Superdome with 64 CPUs, 256GB RAM and a SAN rated with 14GB per second
throughput. Wow! Its interesting to note that the bottleneck in their processing
Run as many BULK INSERT processes as you have CPUs
The number and size of files they processed are very different to what I
process, but I agree with the best practices that Kevin suggests: run as many
BULK INSERT processes as you have CPUs. SQL Server will attempt to distribute
the load across your available CPUs as it will consume one CPU per BULK INSERT
thread. If you are bulk loading thousands of smaller files, I've found the same
is still true. Running more BULK INSERTs than CPUs does not appear to increase
While tracing through my search history today, I came across the Google
Trends tool. Its interesting to see the comparison of searches for
SQL Server 2000 verses SQL Server 2005. It will be interesting to see if in
the coming months just how many more searches will be for 2005 as there are more
installations and developers undergoing the learning curve.
Most developers I know are already working in mixed environments, and as the
chart might indicate, there's hasn't been a wholesale conversion to SQL Server
2005 just yet.