Search Results

Search found 335 results on 14 pages for 'mirroring'.

Page 7/14 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • User for MSSQL 2008 Service Accounts

    - by Campo
    I want to create a Domain User that runs the SQL Service Accounts. The reason for this is that I have setup mirroring and MS recommends having the same user (a domain user account) running the services across all the the computers in the configuration to ensure mirroring will work properly. Right now in the test environment I just had them run under my user for simplicity. But now that I know what I am doing I would like to test the configuration more accurately. I am also aware that it makes things much simpler if this user is an administrator. My question is. Should I just create a simple user SQLSERVICEUSER and make it an administrator? Seems a little insecure to me. Anyone have a more elegant solution?

    Read the article

  • Does HyperV allow binding physical NIC on virtual machine with promiscues mode?

    - by MadBoy
    I have HyperV on Windows 2008 Enterprise R2 installed with some Virtual Server running that I wanted to have ISA or NTOP to monitor traffic. I've added additional physical NIC to server and wanted to use this NIC as traffic monitor (I've enabled port mirroring on switch). I can see on physical machine that runs HyperV a lot of traffic coming to the NIC so port mirroring works fine. However in virtual machine even thou I've assigned that NIC to only this one and only server it sees 0 packets. In VWMare Workstation it worked without problem and I could see mirrored traffic on VM. Should this be possible or HyperV is crippled?

    Read the article

  • RAID1: Which disk will be mirrored?

    - by tmelen
    How does a RAID1 system determine which disk to use as the source and which disk to use as the destination when mirroring? Assume for instance the following scenario: A RAID1 array is created with two disks A and B. A is replaced by disk C, which is added to the array. Files are beeing modified as time goes by. Now B is removed and A is reinserted. Will the RAID1 system realize that A and C are out of sync? And that C is more up-to-date than A? And if not, is there a safe way to avoid the mirroring process to start immediately when disk A is inserted?

    Read the article

  • Page appears indexed in Google but not findable for any search terms?

    - by Jeff Atwood
    (Note that I am going to use screenshots here because I suspect writing about this will change the behavior over time.) If you do a Google search for uiviewcontroller best practices either with or without the quotes, you end up with results like this: Note that none of these pages resolve to the actual Stack Overflow question containing those words in the title. They resolve to either a) sites that are mirroring our creative commons data and correctly pointing back to the source question without nofollow, as properly specified by our attribution requirements or b) our own internal links to the question, but not the actual question itself. The actual page with the title ... Custom UIView and UIViewController best practices? ... does exist at this URL ... http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3300183/custom-uiview-and-uiviewcontroller-best-practices ... and apparently it is present in Google's index! But why does it not appear when we search for uiviewcontroller best practices ? We know that Google contains this page in its index Our search terms match the title of the question Stack Overflow has much higher pagerank than the other sites that are mirroring this question under Creative Commons I don't get it. What are we doing wrong here?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Configuration Scripting Utility Release 9

    - by Bill Graziano
    There’s another update to my little utility to script a SQL Server’s configuration.  I use this for two purposes.  First, I use it to keep my database mirroring servers up to date.  Second, I capture the output in a version control system and keep that for historical reference. In release 3.0.9 I made the following changes: Rewrote the encrypted trigger scripting.  It will now list the encrypted triggers in a comment in the table script but can’t actually script them. It now scripts any server event notifications. You can script a single database using the /scriptdb flag.  Please note that it will also script the instance and system databases when it does this. It will script any user-defined endpoints.  This will capture your mirroring endpoints and more importantly any service broker endpoints. It will gracefully skip database mail on the Express Edition. It still doesn’t support SQL Server 2012.  I think that’s the next feature to add though.

    Read the article

  • SSAS – Synchronisation performance

    - by ACALVETT
    I’ve always thought of SSAS synchronisation as a clever file mirroring utility built into SSAS and i have never considered the technology as bringing any performance gains to the table. So, its a good job I like to revisit areas…. :) I decided to compare the performance of robocopy and SSAS Synchronisation between 2 Windows 2003 servers running SSAS 2008 SP1 CU7 with 1gb network links. For the robocopy of the data directory i used the SQLCat Robocopy Script . The results are shown below. SSAS Sync...(read more)

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – SQL Server High Availability Options – Notes from the Field #032

    - by Pinal Dave
    [Notes from Pinal]: When it is about High Availability or Disaster Recovery, I often see people getting confused. There are so many options available that when the user has to select what is the most optimal solution for their organization they are often confused. Most of the people even know the salient features of various options, but when they have to figure out one single option to use they are often not sure which option to use. I like to give ask my dear friend time all these kinds of complicated questions. He has a skill to make a complex subject very simple and easy to understand. Linchpin People are database coaches and wellness experts for a data driven world. In this 26th episode of the Notes from the Fields series database expert Tim Radney (partner at Linchpin People) explains in a very simple words the best High Availability Option for your SQL Server.  Working with SQL Server a common challenge we are faced with is providing the maximum uptime possible.  To meet these demands we have to design a solution to provide High Availability (HA). Microsoft SQL Server depending on your edition provides you with several options.  This could be database mirroring, log shipping, failover clusters, availability groups or replication. Each possible solution comes with pro’s and con’s.  Not anyone one solution fits all scenarios so understanding which solution meets which need is important.  As with anything IT related, you need to fully understand your requirements before trying to solution the problem.  When it comes to building an HA solution, you need to understand the risk your organization needs to mitigate the most. I have found that most are concerned about hardware failure and OS failures. Other common concerns are data corruption or storage issues.  For data corruption or storage issues you can mitigate those concerns by having a second copy of the databases. That can be accomplished with database mirroring, log shipping, replication or availability groups with a secondary replica.  Failover clustering and virtualization with shared storage do not provide redundancy of the data. I recently created a chart outlining some pros and cons of each of the technologies that I posted on my blog. I like to use this chart to help illustrate how each technology provides a certain number of benefits.  Each of these solutions carries with it some level of cost and complexity.  As a database professional we should all be familiar with these technologies so we can make the best possible choice for our organization. If you want me to take a look at your server and its settings, or if your server is facing any issue we can Fix Your SQL Server. Note: Tim has also written an excellent book on SQL Backup and Recovery, a must have for everyone. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com)Filed under: Notes from the Field, PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Performance, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL Tagged: Shrinking Database

    Read the article

  • T-SQL in SQL Azure

    - by kaleidoscope
    The following table summarizes the Transact-SQL support provided by SQL Azure Database at PDC 2009: Transact-SQL Features Supported Transact-SQL Features Unsupported Constants Constraints Cursors Index management and rebuilding indexes Local temporary tables Reserved keywords Stored procedures Statistics management Transactions Triggers Tables, joins, and table variables Transact-SQL language elements such as Create/drop databases Create/alter/drop tables Create/alter/drop users and logins User-defined functions Views, including sys.synonyms view Common Language Runtime (CLR) Database file placement Database mirroring Distributed queries Distributed transactions Filegroup management Global temporary tables Spatial data and indexes SQL Server configuration options SQL Server Service Broker System tables Trace Flags   Amit, S

    Read the article

  • Is event sourcing ready for prime time?

    - by Dakotah North
    Event Sourcing was popularized by LMAX as a means to provide speed, performance scalability, transparent persistence and transparent live mirroring. Before being rebranded as Event Sourcing, this type of architectural pattern was known as System Prevalence but yet I was never familiar with this pattern before the LMAX team went public. Has this pattern proved itself in numerous production systems and therefore even conservative individuals should feel empowered to embrace this pattern or is event sourcing / system prevalence an exotic pattern that is best left for the fearless?

    Read the article

  • Are We Losing a Standard (Edition) Data Recovery Technology?

    - by AllenMWhite
    One of the coolest technologies Microsoft released with SQL Server 2005 was Database Mirroring, which provided the ability to have a failover copy of a database on another SQL Server instance, and have the ability to automatically failover to that copy should a problem occur with the primary database. What was even cooler was that this new technology was available on Standard Edition! Mom and Pop shops could afford to implement a high availability solution without paying an extra tens of thousands...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Steps to Apply a Service Pack or Patch to Mirrored SQL Server Databases

    Planning on patching my SQL Servers to the latest service pack, but not sure how to complete this for a environment that is using database mirroring? In this tip, will outline the environment and then walk through the process of patching mirrored servers. New! SQL Monitor 3.0 Red Gate's multi-server performance monitoring and alerting tool gets results from Day One.Simple to install and easy to use – download a free trial today.

    Read the article

  • Simplified Restores with SQL Server 2012 Recovery Advisor

    Occasionally, a DBA may need to restore a database from a multiple backup files that originated from multiple servers. This requirement might arise, for example, in a database-mirroring configuration, where backups may be from either of the servers. Get smart with SQL Backup ProGet faster, smaller backups with integrated verification.Quickly and easily DBCC CHECKDB your backups. Learn more.

    Read the article

  • Database Management for SharePoint 2010

    With each revision, SharePoint becomes more a SQL Server Database application, with everything that implies for planning and deployment. There are advantages to this: SharePoint can make use of mirroring, data-compression and remote BLOB storage. It can employ advanced tools such as data file compression, and object-level restore. DBAs can employ familiar techniques to speed SharePoint applications. Bert explains the way that SharePoint and SQL Server interact.

    Read the article

  • ZFS: Mirror vs. RAID-Z

    - by John Clayton
    I'm planning on building a file server using OpenSolaris and ZFS that will provide two primary services - be an iSCSI target for XenServer virtual machines & be a general home file server. The hardware I'm looking at includes 2x 4-port SATA controllers, 2x small boot drives (one on each controller), and 4x big drives for storage. This allows one free port per controller for upgrading the array down the road. Where I'm a little confused is how to setup the storage drives. For performance, mirroring appears to be king. I'm having a hard time seeing what the benefit would be of using RAIDZ over mirroring would be. With this setup I can see two options - two mirrored pools in one stripe, or RAIDZ2. Both should protect against 2 drive failures, and/or one controller failure...the only benefit of RAIDZ2 would be that any 2 drives could fail. The storage should be 50% of capacity in both cases, but the first should have much better performance, right? The other thing I'm trying to wrap my mind around is the benefit of mirrored arrays with more than two devices. For data integrity what, if any, would be the benefit of a RAIDZ over a three-way mirror? Since ZFS maintains file integrity what does RAIDZ bring to the table...doesn't ZFS's integrity checks negate the value of RAIDZ's parity?

    Read the article

  • How to get local bzr commits to server?

    - by C.W.Holeman II
    lanchpad.net states that for project Emle - Electronic Mathematics Laboratory Equipment 2.0 series is the current focus of development This is what I have done so far: Set the launchpad.net project to import from the sourceforge.net project Emle (this actually set the launchpad.net project to mirror the sourceforge.net project rather than just inport the content once) Examined the launchpad.net project to see that the three commits (#1 - #3) which were done in the sourceorge.net project previousley made it into launchpad.net. Used bzrto get the launchpad.net project which I did while is was still set for mirroring. Made three changes and commits using bzr (#4 - #6). Was unable to see the changes on the launchpad.net site. Requested the mirroring to be stopped (it did). Here is an extract from lanchpad.net for project Emle 2.0 series showing that launchpad.net has #1 - #3: Code for this series The following branch has been registered as the mainline branch for this release series: lp:emle - C.W.Holeman II 3 revisions, 3 in the past month. Here on my system showing changes #1 - #6: $ bzr log --line 6: C.W.Holeman II 2010-02-27 #528096 Corrected setting of paramter value for emleDi... 5: C.W.Holeman II 2010-02-27 Minor refactor - improved comment regarding workaround... 4: C.W.Holeman II 2010-02-27 #529089 #529087 Index file html tag lang attribute cor... 3: cwhii 2010-02-25 {Emle 2.4-5 (BL0011)} New top levels: trunk and tags. 2: cwhii 2010-02-25 New top levels: trunk and tags. 1: cwhii 2010-02-25 New top level trunk and tags. How do I get the changes that are in bzr on my system to apply to launchpad.net?

    Read the article

  • SSD redundancy via HDD

    - by Mascarpone
    Is there a way to guarantee redundancy to an SSD using an HDD? Raid 1 is the best choice to guarantee redundancy in HDDs, but SSDs are too expensive to guarantee redundancy via RAID. If I was to couple an SSD with an HDD, could I guarantee redundancy using the HDD as a failover device, and lazily mirroring the data on the HDD? (e.g.: every 5 minutes the data should be synchronized, rather than in real time like with Raid 1).

    Read the article

  • Lefthand SAN questions.

    - by Gk
    I'm curious about Lefthand SAN solutions from HP. People from Dell have told me that Lefthand SAN's require at least two nodes and data must be mirroring between them so capacity is a half less compare to other SAN technology (e.g.Equal Logic). Is it true? Can a HP lefhand SAN be used as a stand-alone storage server with full RAID function (1, 10, 5)? TIA, -giobuon

    Read the article

  • Lefthand SAN quetions.

    - by Gk
    I'm curios about Lefthand SAN solution from HP. Ppl from Dell told me that lefthand SAN require at least two nodes and data must be mirroring between them so capacity is a half less compare to other SAN technology (e.g.Equal Logic). Is it true? Can a HP lefhand SAN can use as a stand-alone storage server with full RAID function (1, 10, 5)? TIA, -giobuon

    Read the article

  • Best Free Windows Imaging Software For Servers

    - by Justin
    We are running two physical servers both Windows 2003, not virtualized. What is the best free (if any) windows software to take a full image backup of the entire drives? If possible, while the image is taking place, it should not bring the hosts to their knees with excess CPU or I/O usage. The servers have RAID mirroring, but after hearing a few horror stories about hacked systems, we need to have weekly full image backups, so we can simply revert to a pre-hacked image. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Will iPad 4.0 support video out for Safari?

    - by Greg Mills
    I noticed on the Apple store product comments regarding the iPad video out connector that only specific Apps will provide video out.... I already have a situation where I need to project Safari but only Keynote and a few other Apps support video out.... Does anyone know if the iPad 4.0 operating system will offer full video out as in mirroring?

    Read the article

  • Does software RAID 1 in Windows 7 improve read speeds?

    - by Rich
    As the title says, does software RAID 1 (mirroring) in Windows 7 improve read speeds? I'd like to set up RAID 1 to help protect my important documents (yes, yes, I know it's not a backup), but performance is also important to me. As I understand it, RAID 1 should theoretically be able to improve my read speeds by n times, where n is the number of disks. Is Windows 7 able to get this boost? I haven't been able to find out this information anywhere.

    Read the article

  • SQL Clustering on Hyper V - is a cluster within a cluster a benefit.

    - by Chris W
    This is a re-hash of a question I asked a while back - after a consultant has come in firing ideas in to other teams in the department the whole issue has been raised again hence I'm looking for more detailed answers. We're intending to set-up a multi-instance SQL Cluster across a number of physical blades which will run a variety of different systems across each SQL instance. In general use there will be one virtual SQL instance running on each VM host. Again, in general operation each VM host will run on a dedicated underlying blade. The set-up should give us lots of flexibility for maintenance of any individual VM or underlying blade with all the SQL instances able to fail over as required. My original plan had been to do the following: Install 2008 R2 on each blade Add Hyper V to each blade Install a 2008 R2 VM to each blade Within the VMs - create a failover cluster and then install SQL Server clustering. The consultant has suggested that we instead do the following: Install 2008 R2 on each blade Add Hyper V to each blade Install a 2008 R2 VM to each blade Create a cluster on the HOST machines which will host all the VMs. Within the VMs - create a failover cluster and then install SQL Server clustering. The big difference is the addition of step 4 whereby we cluster all of the guest VMs as well. The argument is that it improves maintenance further since we have no ties at all between the SQL cluster and physical hardware. We can in theory live migrate the guest VMs around the hosts without affecting the SQL cluster at all so we for routine maintenance physical blades we move the SQL cluster around without interruption and without needing to failover. It sounds like a nice idea but I've not come across anything on the internet where people say they've done this and it works OK. Can I actually do the live migrations of the guests without the SQL Cluster hosted within them getting upset? Does anyone have any experience of this set up, good or bad? Are there some pros and cons that I've not considered? I appreciate that mirroring is also a valuable option to consider - in this case we're favouring clustering since it will do the whole of each instance and we have a good number of databases. Some DBs are for lumbering 3rd party systems that may not even work kindly with mirroring (and my understanding of clustering is that fail overs are completely transparent to the clients). Thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >