I have a Azure SQL database serverless.
I want to change compatibility level from 120 to 130 :
ALTER DATABASE DP300 SET COMPATIBILITY_LEVEL = 130;
What strategy previous to execute ALTER should do?
you can change the compatibility level of database using below command
ALTER DATABASE db
SET COMPATIBILITY_LEVEL = 150;
GO
The strategies before change the compatibility level of Azure SQL database are:
Export backup files of databases before changing the compatibility level.
Have a rollback plan in place in case the update causes any issues.
Test the update on non-production environment to confirm there is no issue with existing applications and scripts.
check the documentations to know your SQL server version to confirm there is no issue with current configuration.
Check the impact of the update on third-parties or applications which are connected to your SQL Server.
Monitor the performance of your SQL Server after the update to confirm there are no unexpected issues.
For more clarification you can check here.
Related
Brief background info
We´re moving a database from Windows Server 2012 to 2016 in a critical production environment and are experiencing problems where the database on the new server gets set to Restricted user after the restore is done.
This is the order things are done:
2012 db is manually set to restricted user
Backup is made from 2012 db
2016 db is restored using backup in step 2
2016 db is unwillingly set to restricted user
The reason that we set the 2012 db in restricted user in the first place is to force logged in users to a stand-by environment while the 2016 db is being set-up.
The team that is doing this backup and restore claims that the database state is included in the backup as well and that that's the reason the new database get's set into restricted user as soon as the restore is done.
The new database being set to restricted user is not a huge problem since it's possible to manually change it back to multi user, but since this environment is of such critical nature, we don't want to risk having our users on the backup system any longer then necessary
So here's the actuall question:
When restoring a database from a backup, is the database state included in the backup and brought to the newly restored database? And if so, is it possible to exclude this?
Thanks in advance! :)
The RESTORE documentation states:
During a restore, most of the database options that are settable using
ALTER DATABASE are reset to the values in force at the time of the end
of backup.
So if the source database is in RESTRICTED_USER, the database will be set to that mode during the restore. You can, however, specify the WITH RESTRICTED_USER option during the restore to set the restored database to RESTRICTED_USER if the source database was backed up with a different option.
But there is no RESTORE option to specify WITH MULTI_USER so you'll need to execute ALTER DATABASE after the RESTORE to change the option.
I don't have much experience on SQL replication(SQL Server 2014). My client have a replication process which was created by his previous contractor. It worked well and suddenly it stopped replicating DDL statements couple of days ago. We have not done any change related to replication. When I checked data, subscriber has received up to date data. Only DDL statements have the problem. It uses transactional replication.
When I searched on web it says that the "Replicate schema changes" option need to set as true on Publication Properties.In my case it was already set to true.
Is there anyway for me to fix this and again have DDL statements to replicate as earlier?
Thank you
SQL Server Replication does support schema changes, but not all of them. In your case, CREATE PROCEDURE is not a supported schema change. Why? It's not an article yet, and not marked for replication, thus it cannot be replicated - replication has no way of knowing whether or not you would want that object replicated.
However, if you create the stored proc, then create an article for it, then issue an ALTER PROCEDURE, you will see the change replicated.
Please see article Make Schema Changes on Publication Databases:
Replication supports a wide range of schema changes to published objects. When you make any of the following schema changes on the appropriate published object at a Microsoft SQL Server Publisher, that change is propagated by default to all SQL Server Subscribers:
ALTER TABLE
ALTER TABLE SET LOCK ESCALATION should not be used if schema change replication is enabled and a topology includes SQL Server 2005 or SQL Server Compact 3.5 Subscribers.
ALTER VIEW
ALTER PROCEDURE
ALTER FUNCTION
ALTER TRIGGER
ALTER TRIGGER can be used only for data manipulation language [DML] triggers because data definition language [DDL] triggers cannot be replicated.
Please ensure you read the whole article, to be fully aware of what can be replicated, and under what circumstances.
I have a database from a 3rd party. They supply a tool to update the database data weekly. The tool is pretty old and uses ODBC. Updates can either be incremental or can delete all database data then recreate the data. The update can take several hours. In order to have high availability, it was suggested to have 2 SQL databases, and store a "active database" setting in another database to determine which of the two databases applications should use (while the other could be being updated).
One issue we are running into is: How to do reference the active database in stored procedures in other databases?
Is this the right approach? Is there a simple, perhaps-infrastructure-based approach? (Should this be posted on ServerFault?)
Note: Databases are read-only besides the update tool.
If the databases are on different servers, you can create an alias for the server which will redirect to the other server in SQL Server Configuration Manager. Under SQLNative Client 10.0 Configuration (or 9.0 if you're in SQL Server 2005) you can add a new alias.
Otherwise, you can always rename the databases using sp_dbrename so thata your client applications are always using database1 while you are updating database2.
If you want to use different databases inside a stored procedure you either need to:
Duplicate all the calls. Ugly. You would end with a lot of:
if #firstDatabase=1
select * from database1..ExampleTable where ...
else
select * from database2..ExampleTable where ...
Use dynamic queries. Less ugly:
set #sqlQuery='select * from '+#currentDatabase+'..ExampleTable where...'
exec sp_executesql #sqlQuery
I admit that neither solution is perfect...
I'd take the approach of having the stored procedures in both databases with some sort of automatic trigger to update the stored procedures in the other database if a stored procedure is changed.
We're having a problem with a merge replication. Our publisher runs SQL Server 2008, while our two subscribers run 2005. Our publisher is trying to send an ALTER TABLE Foo SET (LOCK_ESCALATION) command out to our subscribers. I think I remember reading that this command is new in SQL Server 2008, and if so, it makes sense that the command would fail on our 2005 servers. Our merge replication is set up for 2005 compatibility, however.
The schema script 'if object_id(N'[dbo].[Users]') is not null exec('ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Users] SET (LOCK_ESCALATION = TABLE)
')' could not be propagated to the subscriber.
Any ideas on why our publisher would be trying to do this?
Edit: Our 2008 server's compatibility level is set to "Sql Server 2005 (90)"
Its a new feature in sql 2008 so not supported in 2005. Depending on how complex your setup is you may want to consider have your database run in compatibility 90 (sql 2005) to make sure you dont add sql 2008 features to your database. Have had big issues with replication of schema data ever since it came about so always a bit reticent. I always try and make it act dumb and just manage data - had to support a merge system with 32 subscribers with merge replication and had big schema issues constantly when we pushed schema changes.
That said if it works as documented it shouldn't be trying to push your lock change. Check the subscriptions are marked as sql 2005 compatible. Its likely they haven't created an auto map of the setting from 2008 to 2005 in the way they did for data types (for example)
One of the SQL dev guys blogged on the new locking types a while back
This occurs because the incompatibility of this instruction with sql server 2005 and aparently when I do a schema change in a table that is replicating puts this instruction in the schema changes.
There are two ways: Remove and create again the suscription, not applicable when It's in production server. Second way is go to sysmergeschemachange table in the database and delete the row that has something like this:
The schema script 'if
object_id(N'[dbo].[Users]') is not
null exec('ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Users]
SET (LOCK_ESCALATION = TABLE) ')'
could not be propagated to the
subscriber.
I hope this helps.
Is there a built in way in SQL Server 2005 to audit things specifically like deleting a stored procedure? Is there a history table that I can query? We have a mystery sproc that has disappeared a few times now.
You can build this using DDL triggers:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190989.aspx
Only if you use DDL triggers or use profiler to trace text "%DROP%PROC%procname%"
Note that in SQL Server 2008 they also now have AUDIT to replace Profiler Traces for auding activities. It is similar but has its own configuration UI and UI to view results
You can setup a profiler trace to capture the Audit Schema Object Management event and filter based on the database name you care about. Any time an object in the schema is created, dropped, edited it will fire an event in profiler that includes the person who did the change and the name of the stored procedure.
You will want at least these profiler columns:
ApplicationName - name of app user was running when they made change
DatabaseName - Databse containing the object changed
EventSubClass - Type of action shows Alter, Modify, Drop, Create etc
LoginName - user making change
ObjectName - object affected
[late one but adds details on how to see who made the change even before auditing system is put into place]
Others have already covered different ways you can start auditing data in order to monitor future changes but if you originally didn’t have any auditing system in place then it’s very difficult to find out who did what and when historically.
Only option is to try reading transaction log assuming database is in full recovery mode. Problem is that this is not supported by default. Options are:
Third party tools such as ApexSQL Log or Quest Toad
Undocumented functions such as DBCC LOG or fn_dblog
See these topics for more details:
How to view transaction log in SQL Server 2008
SQL Server Transaction Log Explorer/Analyzer
How to see query history in SQL Server Management Studio
I agree. It can be the SQL Server profiler with filters. The DDL triggers existed in SQL Server.
You could create something like this:
CREATE TRIGGER ddl_drop_procedure
ON DATABASE
FOR DROP_PROCEDURE
AS
RAISERROR ('You deleted a stored procedure',10, 1)
GO
The other option is to use third party tools like Auto Audit from codeplex, or apexSQL trigger.