I have inherited a Network and Server environment recently. I have SQL Server 18 on one server, at the moment reports are very slow to be created, I went to the server instance and noticed that the memory has maxxed out, my logic is telling me to clear the SQL cache, however I am not sure where to go next (I am not an SQL expert) Details below,
SQL Server Management Studio 15.0.18384.0
SQL Server Management Objects (SMO) 16.100.46367.54
Microsoft Analysis Services Client Tools 15.0.19535.0
Microsoft Data Access Components (MDAC) 10.0.17763.1
Microsoft MSXML 3.0 6.0
Microsoft .NET Framework 4.0.30319.42000
Operating System 10.0.17763
Memory Info Link below
Fortunately, SQL Server provides us with the undocumented stored procedures to do the job.
To clear the cache, run the set of following commands as below:
DBCC FREEPROCCACHE
DBCC DROPCLEANBUFFERS
Related
In our company we have to support a large legacy system built on Microsoft Access 2010 as frontend and SQL Server 2008 R2 as backend. The backend SQL server runs on Windows Server 2008 R2. Currently our users works on Terminal Server sessions on a Windows Server 2008 R2. A couple of days ago we started to test Windows Server 2019 and Notebooks with the latest version of Windows 10. We recognized a big performance difference while executing the same Access databases on the different environments.
For instance the creation of a report takes 27 seconds (new environment) instead of 7 seconds (old environment). The database.accdb is identical, the backend is identical (still Windows 2008 R2 Server with SQL Server 2008 R2 and SP2), only the execution environment (Windows) changed.
Does anyone of you have an idea how to explain this?
In Access 2010 the SQL server tables are linked using System-DSN data sources. On the old environment ODBC is used (Driver: SQL Server, Version: 6.01.7601.17514).
On the new environment I tested the following drivers:
ODBC Driver 11 for SQL Server (2014.120.5543.11)
ODBC Driver 17 for SQL Server (2017.173.01.01)
SQL Server (10.00.17763.01)
SQL Server Native Client 10.0 (2009.100.4000.00)
SQL Server Native Client 11.0 (2011.110.5058.00)
I created a new System-DSN using the different drivers and updated the linked tables in Access. But in any case the performance is still bad. I also tested the latest version of Access which comes with Office 2019, but again it is slow.
Sounds like your terminal sessions are getting throttled. Despite the fact that you have a SQL Server back end, Access is still doing a fair bit of thunking with the result sets, so any resource throttling differences between your Server 2008 and Server 2019 policies could be choking Access in the new server.
I think your answer is going to be found in Windows System Resource Manager. The page says it's not being maintained, but following the "Recommended Version" link leads to a generic Server 2019 page. Here's another article about how WSRM might be throttling sessions: Using WSRM to control RDS Dynamic Fair Share Scheduling.
Compare the Weighted_Remote_Sessions policy in 2008 and 2019 servers. There's either been a change to the default settings or behavior or the 2008 server policy was modified in the past to get to the current performance level.
Ok, a number of things to check.
First thing to check:
Launch the ODBC manager and check if SQL log tracing is on. I don’t know why, but I see sql logging turned on.
You NEED to be 100% sure it is turned off.
You MUST launch the ODBC manager from the command line or start menu, since the one in the control panel is for the x64 bit version, and you are using Access x32 (I assume).
So launch this version:
c:\Windows\SysWOW64\odbcad32.exe
So VERY important to launch the x32. It is assumed you are using a FILE dsn. So check these two settings:
(Make sure they are un-checked).
Next up?
Link access using the IP address of the sql server.
So, place of say:
myServer\SQLEXPRESS
Use:
10.50.10.101\SQLEXPRESS
(Of course use the IP address of sql server, not the above “example” IP).
The above things are quite easy to check.
Still no performance fix?
Then disable the fire wall on your new Terminal server (I seen this REALLY cause havoc).
And, disable windows defender on the new TS server if running.
The above tips should fix your issues.
If above don’t work, then next would be to check the priority settings for the TS server (GUI over server).
However, I am betting the above checks should restore your performance.
We have a sql2k8 database that uses sp_xml_preparedocument, a master db system extended stored procedure, that needs to go to Azure. The migration tools (SSMS2016 wizard) give a validation error: SQL71501 that [dbo].[sp_xml_preparedocument] is a missing reference, when validating the export.
I can't see any way to reference the sp so it can be migrated. Intellisense always shows an error too.
Could you first verify that your code works fine on Azure SQL when you manually execute the scripts? When I execute queries with sp_xml_preparedocument from MSDN on my Azure SQL Database it works fine.
If your code works, then it is a problem in SSMS migration assistant, so in that case you should report bug on SQL Server Connect site, with some minimized repro script, so SQL Server team can fix it.
Use SQL Server 2016 Enterprise with Service Pack 1 (x64) . The SP1 should support Azure DB . The 2012 version of Sql server might do iT.
I am trying to move my rapidly growing MS Access 2016 database to a SQL Server back end and build an asp.net front end. I am trying to migrate data from the Access database to an instance of SQL server 2014 but this is not going so well. I tried to migrate it using the MS Migration Assistant but this is not supported for versions after 2010. Does anyone know an easy way to convert Access tables to SQL Server?
Thanks in advance.
The only migration assistant that was depreciated was the one built into Access. So you are correct that after Access 2010, the migration system is removed.
However, there is a SQL Migration Assistant for Access that can be used here:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=54255
The above SSMA for Access is better than the old migration assent and is designed for upgrading Access to SQL server.
NOTE CAREFULLY that the shortcut on the desktop is for office x64 which FEW have, so make sure you launch the x32 bit version of SSMA – you find the shortcut to x32 in the programs folder (or just type I SSMA in windows 10 and select the x32 version.
AGAIN:
Make sure you follow above to launch the x32 version else it will not work.
Create your database in SQLServer
In Management studio, Right click on your database. Go to
Tasks
Import data
This should bring up the SQL Server Import and Export Wizard
In Data source, choose Microsoft Access. I have 3 choices in my test server. I'm not sure what one to use, so it might pay to play around.
Follow the Wizard, which should get you to were you want to be
To automate migration from Microsoft Access database(s) to SQL Server
SQL Server Migration Assistant (SSMA) is a free supported tool
A video tutorial and all procedure I posted on the blog:
https://www.imran.xyz/convert-microsoft-access-database-to-sql-server-database/
You can download it from Microsoft
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=54255
In his excellent and popular comparision chart, ErikEJ draws a distinction between SQL Server Express 2012, and SQL Server 2012 LocalDB. However, I can't find such a distinction anywhere else in the MSDN documentation ("LocalDB" isn't even mentioned in the official MS SS12 book or on the MSDN SQL Edition comparison page.) This leads me to suspect that Express and LocalDB aren't really two separate products as ErikEJ suggests, but rather just two different terms for the same thing (which would explain why, on this MSDN page, it is called "SQL Server 2012 Express LocalDB").
If there really is a difference between the products, can anyone point me to some official documentation comparing them?
OK, I think I have found the answer to my own question. (It was buried under the tabs on the SS Express product page.)
Here is a summary of the distinctives of LocalDB I found on that page:
LocalDB is a lightweight deployment option for SQL Server Express Edition with fewer prerequisites and quicker installation.
LocalDB has all of the same programmability features as SQL Express, but runs in "user mode"* with applications and not as a service.
LocalDB is not intended for multi-user scenarios or to be used as a server. (If you need to accept remote connections or administer remotely, you need SQL Server Express.)
"Express with Tools" (which includes SS Management Studio Express, Azure, etc) can be used with LocalDB or without. (The same goes for "Express with Advanced Services".)
UPDATE: I just found this useful description in Windows IT Pro (Jul '12, p.23):
LocalDB isn’t SQL Server Express, nor is it SQL Server Compact.
LocalDB uses the same sqlservr.exe engine as the other editions of
SQL Server, but it runs in user mode—not as a service. LocalDB is
used for offline development by tools such as SSDT to ensure that the
code you develop is 100-percent compatible with your production
SQL Server database.
If I am reading this correctly, LocalDB seems to be more like a configuration option of Express than an entirely separate product. So apparently if I download Express (or Express w/ Tools), I will have the option to install the LocalDB version, which is supposedly easier ("zero-configuration") than the full Express. (Update: with VS2012, LocalDB comes installed by default.)
One other important distinction, according to this post, is that "currently Visual Studio 2010 doesn't really work with LocalDB." (We have to use SS Management Studio instead, at least for now.)
*(The concept of "User Mode" or "User Instances" is a key distinctive of LocalDB. In fact, according to this post, "LocalDB can be seen as an upgrade of the User Instances feature of SQL Server Express." For more about User Instances, refer to the MSDN blogpost "What is a RANU?")
UPDATE - Feb 2021
LocalDB is SQL Server Express edition
From official documentation
Express edition is the entry-level, free database and is ideal for
learning and building desktop and small server data-driven
applications. It is the best choice for independent software vendors,
developers, and hobbyists building client applications. If you need
more advanced database features, SQL Server Express can be seamlessly
upgraded to other higher end versions of SQL Server. SQL Server
Express LocalDB is a lightweight version of Express that has all of
its programmability features, runs in user mode and has a fast,
zero-configuration installation and a short list of prerequisites.
The docs provides a very detailed comparison of features between editions.
I use a table from ErikEJ, which shows: the features and differences between SQL CE 3.5, SQL CE 4, Local DB and SQL Server 2012. According to this table the differences between Local DB and SQL Server 2012 are:
Installation size:
SQL Server 2012: 120 MB download size; 300 MB expanded on disk
Local DB: 32 MB download size; 160 MB on disk
Runs as Service
SQL Server 2012: Yes
Local DB: No (runs as process started by app)
FILESTREAM support
SQL Server 2012: Yes
Local DB: No
Subscriber for merge replication
SQL Server 2012: Yes
Local DB: No
Number of concurrent connections
SQL Server 2012: Unlimited
Local DB: Unlimited (but only local)
NB: Sorry this isn't "official documentation", but hope it's useful to the next bod as it answers the underlying query about the differences.
The major difference are Server Express run as a service while LocalDB doesn't need any server or intensive processing to run.
I tried to turn on the Activity Monitor using SQL Server 2008 Management Studio (SSMS) through the options window of the application (Tools | Options | Environment | General | At Startup).
I restarted SSMS and I am getting the following message:
"This operation does not support connections to Microsoft SQL Server Standard Edition version 8.00.2249."
I need to be able to monitor the processes and activities inside the database since I am investigating a particular application which takes a lot of time in its database data retrieval access and I am thinking it may be due to some locks or some processes.
How do I resolve this? Inputs highly appreciated. Thanks.
The Activity Monitor relies on DMVs that were introduced in SQL Server 2005. You cannot monitor a SQL 2000 instance. Your version number (8.00.2249) is for a SQL Server 2000, a product no longer supported (mainstream support retired 4/8/2008). Upgrade the instance to SQL Server 2008.
If you want to investigate a SQL 2000 instance, you'll have to rely on the old views and procedures: sysprocesses, sp_who, sp_lock. See INF: Understanding and resolving SQL Server blocking problems.
SQL 2000 does not have Dynamic management views that feed this info to the activity monitor
Run sp_who2 instead, it is not as rich as the activity monitor but it will tell you who is connected and who is blocking. You can then also run something like DBCC INPUTBUFFER (SPID) to get the first 255 characters of the statement executed by the sql connection