Production SQL server down!

Someone attempted to change the partition layout of our SQL cluster, then we
recieved an error:
"Could not start the MSSQLSERVER service on local computer. The service did
not return an error. This could be an internal Windows error or an internal
service error. . . ."
in event log, we have two repetitive errors (application), and errors in
system log:
Application:
Event ID #17052
Error: 17826, Severity: 18, State: 1
Could not set up Net-Library 'SSNETLIB'.
and
Event ID#17055
17120 :
SQL Server could not spawn FRunCM thread.
System:
Event ID#1069
Cluster resource 'SQL Server' failed.
Any ideas? I've been "googling" all morning
If your production SQL Server is down then I would suggest opening a case with Microsoft Product Support Services (PSS).
Newsgroups doesn't work well for critical situations that needs to be resolved asap.
The error messages that you mentioned could have many causes and a thourough diagnoses is required to find root
cause. One has to review the SQL Server Errorlogs, NT Event Logs, Cluster logs for a start. One may also need to review
the Cluster hive and other cluster related registry keys.
Here are some ideas:
What error messages do you see in SQL Server Errorlog?
Along with the errors that you mentioned are you also getting the following message
Encryption requested but no valid certificate was found. SQL Server terminating
Has somebody turned on the Force Protocol Encryption option in Server Network Utility ?
BUG: Turning On the 'Force Protocol Encryption' Option Is Irreversible If There Is No Certificate
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=319349
Since SQL Server is not coming online, you will not be able to open Server Network Utility. I will check the following registry
key :
For default instance
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\MSSQLServer\ MSSQLServer\SuperSocketNetLib
For named instance
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Microsoft SQL Server\<Instance Name>\MSSQLServer
\SuperSocketNetLib
See if it has the 'Encrypt' key. It will be present and set to 1 if Force Protocol Encryption is enabled. If it does not exist, it will
indicate that the encryption was never set.
If encryption is not set then the reason may be something different.
One more thing that comes to miind now is to check the Parameters key in the CLUSTER hive in the registry.
-- Locate the SQL Server Resource in the Cluster Hive under the Resources Key. Then drill down to the Parameters key
under the SQL Server Resource.
We should see the following two values under the Parameters Key.
(HKLM\Cluster\Resources\{GUID for Resource}\Parameters\)
Default Instance
Name: InstanceName Type: Reg_SZ Data: MSSQLSERVER
Name: VirtualServerName Type: Reg_SZ Data: Virtual SQL Server Name
Named Instance
Name: InstanceName Type: Reg_SZ Data: Instance Name of the SQL Server
Name: VirtualServerName Type: Reg_SZ Data: Virtual SQL Server Name
If these are missing then add them and see if you can bring SQL Server resource online. If you have another (working)
cluster, you may want to see the values under Parameter Key first and then make the changes on the problem cluster.
HTH,
Best Regards,
Uttam Parui
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Are you secure? For information about the Strategic Technology Protection Program and to order your FREE Security
Tool Kit, please visit http://www.microsoft.com/security.
Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet access update their Microsoft software to better protect against
viruses and security vulnerabilities. The easiest way to do this is to visit the following websites:
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
http://www.microsoft.com/security/guidance/default.mspx
|||Another point to consider:
If it turns out that the Parameters key is empty (and based on the
description of what happened, I believe this is it) then verirfy that the
following key exists:
HKLM\Cluster\Resources\{GUID for Resource}\RegSync.
If not, then this key will have to be recreated and the checkpoint files
for SQL Server may need to be recreated. You will probably want to open a
case with Microsoft Product Support Services (PSS) to help recreate the
checkpoint files.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.

Processor Upgrade on a sql cluster

In our environment we have a cluster active standby with a shared storage
iscsi
The two machines are Windows 2000 Advanced Server with Intel Xeon
Single-Core 3.4Ghz with SQL Server 2000
Enterprise Edition.
Now we want to sustitute these two with another two machines with
Dual Intel Xeon Dual-Core 3.6Ghz
We want to clone the actual machines in the new environment cause we want a
current machine for disaster recovery and cause we want also to test the
disaster recovery plan...
1) the two new dual core processors are view from operating system as a four
processor is this configuration supported with the environment Windows 2000
Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Server Enterprise Edition ?
2)when we have transferred the disk and the configuration and the boot is ok
and sql services are started what tuning and best practice we have to apply
for the new environment for tuning performance with new dual vs single cpu
node
Hi Davide,
1) Yes, you can manage 4 processors with these licenses.
2) We need more information about your environment to answer this. Generally
speaking, you should take care of CPU affinity and IO affinity, and take a
look at your files and filegroups configurations, especially on tempdb
database
Regards
Antonio Soto
Solid Quality Leaning
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
DISCLAIMER:
Anything written in this message represents solely the point of view of the
sender. This message does not imply endorsement from Solid Quality Learning,
and it does not represent the point of view of Solid Quality Learning or any
other person, company or institution mentioned in this message
"Dr Davide BOmbarda" <DrDavideBOmbarda@.discussions.microsoft.com> escribi
en el mensaje news:CC20F619-9ED5-4CBB-BA62-B23AF4B2C75B@.microsoft.com...
> In our environment we have a cluster active standby with a shared storage
> iscsi
> The two machines are Windows 2000 Advanced Server with Intel Xeon
> Single-Core 3.4Ghz with SQL Server 2000
> Enterprise Edition.
> Now we want to sustitute these two with another two machines with
> Dual Intel Xeon Dual-Core 3.6Ghz
> We want to clone the actual machines in the new environment cause we want
> a
> current machine for disaster recovery and cause we want also to test the
> disaster recovery plan...
> 1) the two new dual core processors are view from operating system as a
> four
> processor is this configuration supported with the environment Windows
> 2000
> Advanced Server and SQL 2000 Server Enterprise Edition ?
> 2)when we have transferred the disk and the configuration and the boot is
> ok
> and sql services are started what tuning and best practice we have to
> apply
> for the new environment for tuning performance with new dual vs single cpu
> node
>
>
|||I/O affinity only comes into play with the Datacenter Edition when working
with specific SAN configurations. Even then, you need to be pushing the I/O
channel pretty hard to even see any effect.
Mike
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole
views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person
or entity either by inference or direct reference.
"Antonio Soto" <antoniosotorodriguez@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:umQqsqpKGHA.3896@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi Davide,
> 1) Yes, you can manage 4 processors with these licenses.
> 2) We need more information about your environment to answer this.
> Generally speaking, you should take care of CPU affinity and IO affinity,
> and take a look at your files and filegroups configurations, especially on
> tempdb database
> Regards
> Antonio Soto
> Solid Quality Leaning
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
> DISCLAIMER:
> Anything written in this message represents solely the point of view of
> the sender. This message does not imply endorsement from Solid Quality
> Learning, and it does not represent the point of view of Solid Quality
> Learning or any other person, company or institution mentioned in this
> message
>
>
> "Dr Davide BOmbarda" <DrDavideBOmbarda@.discussions.microsoft.com> escribi
> en el mensaje news:CC20F619-9ED5-4CBB-BA62-B23AF4B2C75B@.microsoft.com...
>

Processes locking themselves after SP4

Hi All,
We've recently rebuilt our failover cluster to Windows 2003 and SQL Server
200 SP4. Users are complaining that the system is running slowly, looking at
the processes, the active processes appear to be blocking themselves. The
configuration of SQL is identical to before and the hardware is the same,
just the OS and the SP version of SQL has changed.
Any ideas what might be causing the blocking? I've checked for lock
escalation (using profiler) and we're not experiencing it!
Dave Wall
Are you using the very latest SP4 for SQL2K? Does your system use RAM
above 4GB and is AWE-enabled?
This may not be the issue I know but better to check rather than
assume. I know the first SP4 release problems didn't necessarily
manifest in the way your system is but you can never be sure ...
ALI
|||We're using the patch on SP4 to allow us to run AWE with RAM of 5GB
(restricted from 8GB)
Dave
Dave Wall
"zashah@.gmail.com" wrote:

> Are you using the very latest SP4 for SQL2K? Does your system use RAM
> above 4GB and is AWE-enabled?
> This may not be the issue I know but better to check rather than
> assume. I know the first SP4 release problems didn't necessarily
> manifest in the way your system is but you can never be sure ...
> ALI
>
|||Processes appearing to lock themselves is a change in reporting in SP4, not an actual issue. Basically the process reports itself as a blocking process when it goes to grab disk allocation (as I understand it). The Wait Type should display as PAGELATCH IO if I recall correctly.
Took me by surprise too but it isn't an actual blocked process.
As far as performance goes, I haven't seen any performance hits on databases up to 400 GB in size.

Quote:

Originally posted by Dave Wall
Hi All,
We've recently rebuilt our failover cluster to Windows 2003 and SQL Server
200 SP4. Users are complaining that the system is running slowly, looking at
the processes, the active processes appear to be blocking themselves. The
configuration of SQL is identical to before and the hardware is the same,
just the OS and the SP version of SQL has changed.
Any ideas what might be causing the blocking? I've checked for lock
escalation (using profiler) and we're not experiencing it!
Dave Wall

|||Hi
Have a look at this explanation by Santeri Voutilainen from MSFT
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...513ab281?hl=en
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Dave Wall" <DaveWall@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B746F00D-1908-4D9B-9934-F35F24304D54@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> We've recently rebuilt our failover cluster to Windows 2003 and SQL Server
> 200 SP4. Users are complaining that the system is running slowly, looking
> at
> the processes, the active processes appear to be blocking themselves. The
> configuration of SQL is identical to before and the hardware is the same,
> just the OS and the SP version of SQL has changed.
> Any ideas what might be causing the blocking? I've checked for lock
> escalation (using profiler) and we're not experiencing it!
> --
> Dave Wall
|||Thanks Kyle,
and thanks to everyone else for your input. Turns out that while our
networking team assured me that the server had been set up to use PAE it
wasn't entriely true. Once it was set and the server rebooted, SQL started to
use the additional memory, IO dropped to nothing (as it can now hold around
1/3 of the DB in memory) and the blocking spids disappeared.
Thanks again for everyones input!
Dave
Dave Wall
"Kyle Quinby" wrote:

> Processes appearing to lock themselves is a change in reporting in SP4,
> not an actual issue. Basically the process reports itself as a blocking
> process when it goes to grab disk allocation (as I understand it). The
> Wait Type should display as PAGELATCH IO if I recall correctly.
> Took me by surprise too but it isn't an actual blocked process.
> As far as performance goes, I haven't seen any performance hits on
> databases up to 400 GB in size.
> Dave Wall wrote:
>
> --
> Kyle Quinby
> Posted via http://www.mcse.ms
> View this thread: http://www.mcse.ms/message1756427.html
>

Processes locking themselves after SP4

Hi All,
We've recently rebuilt our failover cluster to Windows 2003 and SQL Server
200 SP4. Users are complaining that the system is running slowly, looking at
the processes, the active processes appear to be blocking themselves. The
configuration of SQL is identical to before and the hardware is the same,
just the OS and the SP version of SQL has changed.
Any ideas what might be causing the blocking? I've checked for lock
escalation (using profiler) and we're not experiencing it!
--
Dave WallAre you using the very latest SP4 for SQL2K? Does your system use RAM
above 4GB and is AWE-enabled?
This may not be the issue I know but better to check rather than
assume. I know the first SP4 release problems didn't necessarily
manifest in the way your system is but you can never be sure ...
ALI|||We're using the patch on SP4 to allow us to run AWE with RAM of 5GB
(restricted from 8GB)
Dave
--
Dave Wall
"zashah@.gmail.com" wrote:
> Are you using the very latest SP4 for SQL2K? Does your system use RAM
> above 4GB and is AWE-enabled?
> This may not be the issue I know but better to check rather than
> assume. I know the first SP4 release problems didn't necessarily
> manifest in the way your system is but you can never be sure ...
> ALI
>|||Hi
Have a look at this explanation by Santeri Voutilainen from MSFT
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/microsoft.public.sqlserver.server/msg/b86e343e513ab281?hl=en
--
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Dave Wall" <DaveWall@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B746F00D-1908-4D9B-9934-F35F24304D54@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> We've recently rebuilt our failover cluster to Windows 2003 and SQL Server
> 200 SP4. Users are complaining that the system is running slowly, looking
> at
> the processes, the active processes appear to be blocking themselves. The
> configuration of SQL is identical to before and the hardware is the same,
> just the OS and the SP version of SQL has changed.
> Any ideas what might be causing the blocking? I've checked for lock
> escalation (using profiler) and we're not experiencing it!
> --
> Dave Wall|||Processes appearing to lock themselves is a change in reporting in SP4,
not an actual issue. Basically the process reports itself as a blocking
process when it goes to grab disk allocation (as I understand it). The
Wait Type should display as PAGELATCH IO if I recall correctly.
Took me by surprise too but it isn't an actual blocked process.
As far as performance goes, I haven't seen any performance hits on
databases up to 400 GB in size.
Dave Wall wrote:
> *Hi All,
> We've recently rebuilt our failover cluster to Windows 2003 and SQL
> Server
> 200 SP4. Users are complaining that the system is running slowly,
> looking at
> the processes, the active processes appear to be blocking themselves.
> The
> configuration of SQL is identical to before and the hardware is the
> same,
> just the OS and the SP version of SQL has changed.
> Any ideas what might be causing the blocking? I've checked for lock
> escalation (using profiler) and we're not experiencing it!
> --
> Dave Wall *
Kyle Quinby
---
Posted via http://www.mcse.ms
---
View this thread: http://www.mcse.ms/message1756427.html|||Thanks Kyle,
and thanks to everyone else for your input. Turns out that while our
networking team assured me that the server had been set up to use PAE it
wasn't entriely true. Once it was set and the server rebooted, SQL started to
use the additional memory, IO dropped to nothing (as it can now hold around
1/3 of the DB in memory) and the blocking spids disappeared.
Thanks again for everyones input!
Dave
--
Dave Wall
"Kyle Quinby" wrote:
> Processes appearing to lock themselves is a change in reporting in SP4,
> not an actual issue. Basically the process reports itself as a blocking
> process when it goes to grab disk allocation (as I understand it). The
> Wait Type should display as PAGELATCH IO if I recall correctly.
> Took me by surprise too but it isn't an actual blocked process.
> As far as performance goes, I haven't seen any performance hits on
> databases up to 400 GB in size.
> Dave Wall wrote:
> > *Hi All,
> >
> > We've recently rebuilt our failover cluster to Windows 2003 and SQL
> > Server
> > 200 SP4. Users are complaining that the system is running slowly,
> > looking at
> > the processes, the active processes appear to be blocking themselves.
> > The
> > configuration of SQL is identical to before and the hardware is the
> > same,
> > just the OS and the SP version of SQL has changed.
> >
> > Any ideas what might be causing the blocking? I've checked for lock
> > escalation (using profiler) and we're not experiencing it!
> >
> > --
> > Dave Wall *
>
> --
> Kyle Quinby
> ---
> Posted via http://www.mcse.ms
> ---
> View this thread: http://www.mcse.ms/message1756427.html
>

Processes locking themselves after SP4

Hi All,
We've recently rebuilt our failover cluster to Windows 2003 and SQL Server
200 SP4. Users are complaining that the system is running slowly, looking a
t
the processes, the active processes appear to be blocking themselves. The
configuration of SQL is identical to before and the hardware is the same,
just the OS and the SP version of SQL has changed.
Any ideas what might be causing the blocking? I've checked for lock
escalation (using profiler) and we're not experiencing it!
Dave WallAre you using the very latest SP4 for SQL2K? Does your system use RAM
above 4GB and is AWE-enabled?
This may not be the issue I know but better to check rather than
assume. I know the first SP4 release problems didn't necessarily
manifest in the way your system is but you can never be sure ...
ALI|||We're using the patch on SP4 to allow us to run AWE with RAM of 5GB
(restricted from 8GB)
Dave
Dave Wall
"zashah@.gmail.com" wrote:

> Are you using the very latest SP4 for SQL2K? Does your system use RAM
> above 4GB and is AWE-enabled?
> This may not be the issue I know but better to check rather than
> assume. I know the first SP4 release problems didn't necessarily
> manifest in the way your system is but you can never be sure ...
> ALI
>|||Hi
Have a look at this explanation by Santeri Voutilainen from MSFT
http://groups-beta.google.com/group...
513ab281?hl=en
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Dave Wall" <DaveWall@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B746F00D-1908-4D9B-9934-F35F24304D54@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> We've recently rebuilt our failover cluster to Windows 2003 and SQL Server
> 200 SP4. Users are complaining that the system is running slowly, looking
> at
> the processes, the active processes appear to be blocking themselves. The
> configuration of SQL is identical to before and the hardware is the same,
> just the OS and the SP version of SQL has changed.
> Any ideas what might be causing the blocking? I've checked for lock
> escalation (using profiler) and we're not experiencing it!
> --
> Dave Wall|||Processes appearing to lock themselves is a change in reporting in SP4,
not an actual issue. Basically the process reports itself as a blocking
process when it goes to grab disk allocation (as I understand it). The
Wait Type should display as PAGELATCH IO if I recall correctly.
Took me by surprise too but it isn't an actual blocked process.
As far as performance goes, I haven't seen any performance hits on
databases up to 400 GB in size.
Dave Wall wrote:
> *Hi All,
> We've recently rebuilt our failover cluster to Windows 2003 and SQL
> Server
> 200 SP4. Users are complaining that the system is running slowly,
> looking at
> the processes, the active processes appear to be blocking themselves.
> The
> configuration of SQL is identical to before and the hardware is the
> same,
> just the OS and the SP version of SQL has changed.
> Any ideas what might be causing the blocking? I've checked for lock
> escalation (using profiler) and we're not experiencing it!
> --
> Dave Wall *
Kyle Quinby
---
Posted via http://www.mcse.ms
---
View this thread: http://www.mcse.ms/message1756427.html|||Thanks Kyle,
and thanks to everyone else for your input. Turns out that while our
networking team assured me that the server had been set up to use PAE it
wasn't entriely true. Once it was set and the server rebooted, SQL started t
o
use the additional memory, IO dropped to nothing (as it can now hold around
1/3 of the DB in memory) and the blocking spids disappeared.
Thanks again for everyones input!
Dave
--
Dave Wall
"Kyle Quinby" wrote:

> Processes appearing to lock themselves is a change in reporting in SP4,
> not an actual issue. Basically the process reports itself as a blocking
> process when it goes to grab disk allocation (as I understand it). The
> Wait Type should display as PAGELATCH IO if I recall correctly.
> Took me by surprise too but it isn't an actual blocked process.
> As far as performance goes, I haven't seen any performance hits on
> databases up to 400 GB in size.
> Dave Wall wrote:
>
> --
> Kyle Quinby
> ---
> Posted via http://www.mcse.ms
> ---
> View this thread: http://www.mcse.ms/message1756427.html
>