Showing posts with label monitoring. Show all posts
Showing posts with label monitoring. Show all posts

Sunday, March 11, 2012

Bug in Visio?

I hope that MS ppl who are monitoring this newsgroup can comment on wether
this *is* a bug, and if so, what resolutions, work-arounds or patches might
be available:
Dejan Sarka reported a bug in visio to Microsoft in 2002.
The issue was reverse engineering a SQL database, with objects owned by
non-dbo users. visio would then give the following error:
Error! Cannot extract column definition for the table/view 'TestTable'. The
definition is not available or you may not have sufficient privileges.
Please check with your database administrator.
This happens, even though integrated security is used (or SA for that
matter). Privleges is not the issue (if we do a little *hrm* update of
sysusers, so that dbo owns the table, everything is fine).
Dejan (or others): Do you know of a resolution to this issue?
Here is a googleref:// to the specific post:
[url]http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=Xns92C05A65D23
20dussanemailcom%40207.46.239.39&rnum=2&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-
8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26q%3D%2522Error[/ url]!%2BCannot%2Bextract%2Bcolumn%2Bdefi
nition%2B
for%2Bthe%2Btab
le%252Fview%2522%2Bvisio%2B
Thank you!
-IngeHi Inge,
Thanks for your post. According to your description, I understand that you
want to verify if this issue is a BUG. The issue was reverse engineering a
SQL database, with objects owned by
non-dbo users. visio would then give the following error:
Error! Cannot extract column definition for the table/view 'TestTable'. The
definition is not available or you may not have sufficient privileges.
Please check with your database administrator.
If I have misunderstood, please feel free to let me know.
Based on my research, this is a known issue of Visio. The gist of this
known issue is the tables which are owned by objects other than the DBO
object are NOT Reverse Engineered by Visio. The resolution of this problem
is changing ownership of the Tables and other objects (Stored Procedures,
etc.) so that the DBO is the owner. The cause of this problem is that Visio
is unable to Reverse engineer Tables which are not owned by the DBO object.
Thanks for posting in the community.
Best wishes,
Michael Shao
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.|||Sorry, but Inge is right, this is a bug. If Vision can reverse engineer only
objects owned by dbo, then it should not give you the possibility to select
any objects not owned by dbo through UI. And this should be
documented.Otherwise it is simply a bug, which should be corrected. And a
simple hint: check the sp_MShelpcolumns system SP, which is called by Visio
during the reverse engineering. IMO visio is a produc good enough to
deserve proper care.
Thank,
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Please reply only to the newsgroups.
""Yuan Shao"" <v-yshao@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:a5ut15g5DHA.4028@.cpmsftngxa07.phx.gbl...
quote:

> Hi Inge,
> Thanks for your post. According to your description, I understand that you
> want to verify if this issue is a BUG. The issue was reverse engineering a
> SQL database, with objects owned by
> non-dbo users. visio would then give the following error:
> Error! Cannot extract column definition for the table/view 'TestTable'.

The
quote:

> definition is not available or you may not have sufficient privileges.
> Please check with your database administrator.
> If I have misunderstood, please feel free to let me know.
> Based on my research, this is a known issue of Visio. The gist of this
> known issue is the tables which are owned by objects other than the DBO
> object are NOT Reverse Engineered by Visio. The resolution of this problem
> is changing ownership of the Tables and other objects (Stored Procedures,
> etc.) so that the DBO is the owner. The cause of this problem is that

Visio
quote:

> is unable to Reverse engineer Tables which are not owned by the DBO

object.
quote:

> Thanks for posting in the community.
> Best wishes,
> Michael Shao
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
>
|||The bug is in Visio's use of the database stroed procedure
sp_MShelpcolumns.
A work around is to modify the stored procedure witht he following
code after the "as":
--Visio Bug Fix db(2/25/2004)
declare @.myTableOwner varchar(64)
select top 1 @.myTableOwner=u.name from sysobjects s, sysusers u where
s.uid=u.uid and s.name=@.tablename
set @.tablename = @.myTableOwner + '.' + @.tablename
--
Note that it will only work if table names are unique. Otherwise it
will only return information on the first instance of that table.
v-yshao@.online.microsoft.com ("Yuan Shao") wrote in message news:<a5ut15g5DHA.4028@.cpmsftng
xa07.phx.gbl>...
> Hi Inge,
> Thanks for your post. According to your description, I understand that you
> want to verify if this issue is a BUG. The issue was reverse engineering a
> SQL database, with objects owned by
> non-dbo users. visio would then give the following error:
> Error! Cannot extract column definition for the table/view 'TestTable'. Th
e
> definition is not available or you may not have sufficient privileges.
> Please check with your database administrator.
> If I have misunderstood, please feel free to let me know.
> Based on my research, this is a known issue of Visio. The gist of this
> known issue is the tables which are owned by objects other than the DBO
> object are NOT Reverse Engineered by Visio. The resolution of this problem
> is changing ownership of the Tables and other objects (Stored Procedures,
> etc.) so that the DBO is the owner. The cause of this problem is that Visi
o
> is unable to Reverse engineer Tables which are not owned by the DBO object
.
> Thanks for posting in the community.
> Best wishes,
> Michael Shao
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.

Bug in Visio?

I hope that MS ppl who are monitoring this newsgroup can comment on wether
this *is* a bug, and if so, what resolutions, work-arounds or patches might
be available:
Dejan Sarka reported a bug in visio to Microsoft in 2002.
The issue was reverse engineering a SQL database, with objects owned by
non-dbo users. Visio would then give the following error:
Error! Cannot extract column definition for the table/view 'TestTable'. The
definition is not available or you may not have sufficient privileges.
Please check with your database administrator.
This happens, even though integrated security is used (or SA for that
matter). Privleges is not the issue (if we do a little *hrm* update of
sysusers, so that dbo owns the table, everything is fine).
Dejan (or others): Do you know of a resolution to this issue?
Here is a googleref:// to the specific post:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=Xns92C05A65D2320dussanemailcom%40207.46.239.39&rnum=2&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26q%3D%2522Error!%2BCannot%2Bextract%2Bcolumn%2Bdefinition%2Bfor%2Bthe%2Btable%252Fview%2522%2Bvisio%2B
Thank you!
-IngeHi Inge,
Thanks for your post. According to your description, I understand that you
want to verify if this issue is a BUG. The issue was reverse engineering a
SQL database, with objects owned by
non-dbo users. Visio would then give the following error:
Error! Cannot extract column definition for the table/view 'TestTable'. The
definition is not available or you may not have sufficient privileges.
Please check with your database administrator.
If I have misunderstood, please feel free to let me know.
Based on my research, this is a known issue of Visio. The gist of this
known issue is the tables which are owned by objects other than the DBO
object are NOT Reverse Engineered by Visio. The resolution of this problem
is changing ownership of the Tables and other objects (Stored Procedures,
etc.) so that the DBO is the owner. The cause of this problem is that Visio
is unable to Reverse engineer Tables which are not owned by the DBO object.
Thanks for posting in the community.
Best wishes,
Michael Shao
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.|||Sorry, but Inge is right, this is a bug. If Vision can reverse engineer only
objects owned by dbo, then it should not give you the possibility to select
any objects not owned by dbo through UI. And this should be
documented.Otherwise it is simply a bug, which should be corrected. And a
simple hint: check the sp_MShelpcolumns system SP, which is called by Visio
during the reverse engineering. IMO Visio is a produc good enough to
deserve proper care.
Thank,
--
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Please reply only to the newsgroups.
""Yuan Shao"" <v-yshao@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:a5ut15g5DHA.4028@.cpmsftngxa07.phx.gbl...
> Hi Inge,
> Thanks for your post. According to your description, I understand that you
> want to verify if this issue is a BUG. The issue was reverse engineering a
> SQL database, with objects owned by
> non-dbo users. Visio would then give the following error:
> Error! Cannot extract column definition for the table/view 'TestTable'.
The
> definition is not available or you may not have sufficient privileges.
> Please check with your database administrator.
> If I have misunderstood, please feel free to let me know.
> Based on my research, this is a known issue of Visio. The gist of this
> known issue is the tables which are owned by objects other than the DBO
> object are NOT Reverse Engineered by Visio. The resolution of this problem
> is changing ownership of the Tables and other objects (Stored Procedures,
> etc.) so that the DBO is the owner. The cause of this problem is that
Visio
> is unable to Reverse engineer Tables which are not owned by the DBO
object.
> Thanks for posting in the community.
> Best wishes,
> Michael Shao
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
>|||The bug is in Visio's use of the database stroed procedure
sp_MShelpcolumns.
A work around is to modify the stored procedure witht he following
code after the "as":
--
--Visio Bug Fix db(2/25/2004)
declare @.myTableOwner varchar(64)
select top 1 @.myTableOwner=u.name from sysobjects s, sysusers u where
s.uid=u.uid and s.name=@.tablename
set @.tablename = @.myTableOwner + '.' + @.tablename
--
Note that it will only work if table names are unique. Otherwise it
will only return information on the first instance of that table.
v-yshao@.online.microsoft.com ("Yuan Shao") wrote in message news:<a5ut15g5DHA.4028@.cpmsftngxa07.phx.gbl>...
> Hi Inge,
> Thanks for your post. According to your description, I understand that you
> want to verify if this issue is a BUG. The issue was reverse engineering a
> SQL database, with objects owned by
> non-dbo users. Visio would then give the following error:
> Error! Cannot extract column definition for the table/view 'TestTable'. The
> definition is not available or you may not have sufficient privileges.
> Please check with your database administrator.
> If I have misunderstood, please feel free to let me know.
> Based on my research, this is a known issue of Visio. The gist of this
> known issue is the tables which are owned by objects other than the DBO
> object are NOT Reverse Engineered by Visio. The resolution of this problem
> is changing ownership of the Tables and other objects (Stored Procedures,
> etc.) so that the DBO is the owner. The cause of this problem is that Visio
> is unable to Reverse engineer Tables which are not owned by the DBO object.
> Thanks for posting in the community.
> Best wishes,
> Michael Shao
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Buffer Manager on SQl server

I am monitoring my SQL Server. If the server has 2gig of
physical ram and SQL server memory is 1.6G and the SQL
Servver Buffer Manager cache hit ratio is 99, is that
good? If not, what configuration can be done? The server
is very slow at themoment. Thank you.
Jasmine>--Original Message--
>I am monitoring my SQL Server. If the server has 2gig of
>physical ram and SQL server memory is 1.6G and the SQL
>Servver Buffer Manager cache hit ratio is 99, is that
>good? If not, what configuration can be done? The
server
>is very slow at the moment. Thank you.
>Jasmine
Friends,
I just thought I should post this from sp_configure so you
can see how the memory is configured for sql server. It
is set to dynamically configure sql server memory - but
when I run performance monitoring it shows that sql server
consumes too much memory. Please take a look and let me
know if I need to reduce the amount of sql memory or some
key buffer and sort buffer configurations? Thank you very
much.
minimum maximum configure_value run_value
max degree of parallelism 0 32 0 0
max server memory (MB) 4 2147483647 2147483647
2147483647
max text repl size (B) 0 2147483647 65536
65536
max worker threads 32 32767 255 255
media retention 0 365 0 0
min memory per query (KB) 512 2147483647
1024 1024
min server memory (MB) 0 2147483647 0 0
>|||Those numbers are pretty good. SQL is using as much memory as is available
(2GB minus some for OS, overhead, etc. 1.6 is about right). 99% Buffer
cache hit ratio is also good. Until that gets under 95% or so, adding
memory likely won't give a noticable performance boost.
It looks like memory isn't your performance problem. Here is a good
starting point for finding out why your server isn't responding as well as
you need it to.
HOW TO: Troubleshoot Application Performance Issues
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;298475&Product=sql2k
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Jasmine Quinlan" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:f64701c43dd2$ff0f0f20$a001280a@.phx.gbl...
> I am monitoring my SQL Server. If the server has 2gig of
> physical ram and SQL server memory is 1.6G and the SQL
> Servver Buffer Manager cache hit ratio is 99, is that
> good? If not, what configuration can be done? The server
> is very slow at themoment. Thank you.
> Jasmine
>|||Geoff,
Thank you so much for your help. I appreciate that.
Jasmine
>--Original Message--
>Those numbers are pretty good. SQL is using as much
memory as is available
>(2GB minus some for OS, overhead, etc. 1.6 is about
right). 99% Buffer
>cache hit ratio is also good. Until that gets under 95%
or so, adding
>memory likely won't give a noticable performance boost.
>It looks like memory isn't your performance problem.
Here is a good
>starting point for finding out why your server isn't
responding as well as
>you need it to.
>HOW TO: Troubleshoot Application Performance Issues
>http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-
us;298475&Product=sql2k
>
>--
>Geoff N. Hiten
>Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>Senior Database Administrator
>Careerbuilder.com
>I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
>www.sqlpass.org
>"Jasmine Quinlan" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message
>news:f64701c43dd2$ff0f0f20$a001280a@.phx.gbl...
>> I am monitoring my SQL Server. If the server has 2gig
of
>> physical ram and SQL server memory is 1.6G and the SQL
>> Servver Buffer Manager cache hit ratio is 99, is that
>> good? If not, what configuration can be done? The
server
>> is very slow at themoment. Thank you.
>> Jasmine
>
>.
>

Buffer Manager on SQl server

I am monitoring my SQL Server. If the server has 2gig of
physical ram and SQL server memory is 1.6G and the SQL
Servver Buffer Manager cache hit ratio is 99, is that
good? If not, what configuration can be done? The server
is very slow at themoment. Thank you.
Jasmine
Those numbers are pretty good. SQL is using as much memory as is available
(2GB minus some for OS, overhead, etc. 1.6 is about right). 99% Buffer
cache hit ratio is also good. Until that gets under 95% or so, adding
memory likely won't give a noticable performance boost.
It looks like memory isn't your performance problem. Here is a good
starting point for finding out why your server isn't responding as well as
you need it to.
HOW TO: Troubleshoot Application Performance Issues
http://support.microsoft.com/default...&Product=sql2k
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Jasmine Quinlan" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:f64701c43dd2$ff0f0f20$a001280a@.phx.gbl...
> I am monitoring my SQL Server. If the server has 2gig of
> physical ram and SQL server memory is 1.6G and the SQL
> Servver Buffer Manager cache hit ratio is 99, is that
> good? If not, what configuration can be done? The server
> is very slow at themoment. Thank you.
> Jasmine
>
|||Geoff,
Thank you so much for your help. I appreciate that.
Jasmine

>--Original Message--
>Those numbers are pretty good. SQL is using as much
memory as is available
>(2GB minus some for OS, overhead, etc. 1.6 is about
right). 99% Buffer
>cache hit ratio is also good. Until that gets under 95%
or so, adding
>memory likely won't give a noticable performance boost.
>It looks like memory isn't your performance problem.
Here is a good
>starting point for finding out why your server isn't
responding as well as
>you need it to.
>HOW TO: Troubleshoot Application Performance Issues
>http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-
us;298475&Product=sql2k
>
>--
>Geoff N. Hiten
>Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>Senior Database Administrator
>Careerbuilder.com
>I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
>www.sqlpass.org
>"Jasmine Quinlan" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message[vbcol=seagreen]
>news:f64701c43dd2$ff0f0f20$a001280a@.phx.gbl...
of[vbcol=seagreen]
server
>
>.
>

Buffer Manager on SQl server

I am monitoring my SQL Server. If the server has 2gig of
physical ram and SQL server memory is 1.6G and the SQL
Servver Buffer Manager cache hit ratio is 99, is that
good? If not, what configuration can be done? The server
is very slow at themoment. Thank you.
JasmineThose numbers are pretty good. SQL is using as much memory as is available
(2GB minus some for OS, overhead, etc. 1.6 is about right). 99% Buffer
cache hit ratio is also good. Until that gets under 95% or so, adding
memory likely won't give a noticable performance boost.
It looks like memory isn't your performance problem. Here is a good
starting point for finding out why your server isn't responding as well as
you need it to.
HOW TO: Troubleshoot Application Performance Issues
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...5&Product=sql2k
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Jasmine Quinlan" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:f64701c43dd2$ff0f0f20$a001280a@.phx.gbl...
> I am monitoring my SQL Server. If the server has 2gig of
> physical ram and SQL server memory is 1.6G and the SQL
> Servver Buffer Manager cache hit ratio is 99, is that
> good? If not, what configuration can be done? The server
> is very slow at themoment. Thank you.
> Jasmine
>|||Geoff,
Thank you so much for your help. I appreciate that.
Jasmine

>--Original Message--
>Those numbers are pretty good. SQL is using as much
memory as is available
>(2GB minus some for OS, overhead, etc. 1.6 is about
right). 99% Buffer
>cache hit ratio is also good. Until that gets under 95%
or so, adding
>memory likely won't give a noticable performance boost.
>It looks like memory isn't your performance problem.
Here is a good
>starting point for finding out why your server isn't
responding as well as
>you need it to.
>HOW TO: Troubleshoot Application Performance Issues
>http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-
us;298475&Product=sql2k
>
>--
>Geoff N. Hiten
>Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>Senior Database Administrator
>Careerbuilder.com
>I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
>www.sqlpass.org
>"Jasmine Quinlan" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message
>news:f64701c43dd2$ff0f0f20$a001280a@.phx.gbl...
of[vbcol=seagreen]
server[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>.
>