"The process could not connect to Distributor"

Hi, i have the following problem:
i have a publisher and a subscriber in the same sql server 2005 machine. All
the process (the Log Reader Agent and the Snapshot Agent) works fine. Even
the snapshot files are being created in the UNC path (\\Desa5el1\Paso), but
when attempt to run synchronization, the Replication Monitor show me an error
in the Subscription. When i see the details of the error, i see the following:
Error messages:
The process could not read file
'\\Desa5el1\Paso\unc\DESA5EL1$CASCABEL_MC_AREASQL_ PUB_MC_AREASQL_PRUEBA\20070719170351\prueba_2.pre'
due to OS error 5. (Source: MSSQL_REPL, Error number: MSSQL_REPL20024)
Get help: http://help/MSSQL_REPL20024
The account under which the agent runs is db_owner (is an sql account, not
an Windows account) and member of the Publication Access List. I think maybe
the problem it is in this:
"Have read permissions on the snapshot share."
Could someone explain me this point? i need to configure some thing extra?
some permissions to the unc path?
I really appreciate any help.
Thanks in advance
Locate your snapshot share. Do that by issue the following on your
distributor
sp_helpdistributor
The name of your snapshot share should be in the directory column.
Also on your publisher in your publication database do this
sp_helppublication 'pubs' -- where pubs is your publication name
Note the value for alt_snapshot_folder column. If this value is null your
snapshot share is the value for the directory column returned by
sp_helpdistributor. If it is not null the snapshot share is in the
alt_snapshot_folder column.
Using file explorer navigate to this folder and right click on it, select
sharing and security and then make sure that the account which the sql
server agent account runs under has read and list files and folders rights
on this folder. The share permissions are by default always read.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"byteman" <byteman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9E69C2AD-9AA6-4B12-8B1A-B118123E9F3D@.microsoft.com...
> Hi, i have the following problem:
> i have a publisher and a subscriber in the same sql server 2005 machine.
> All
> the process (the Log Reader Agent and the Snapshot Agent) works fine. Even
> the snapshot files are being created in the UNC path (\\Desa5el1\Paso),
> but
> when attempt to run synchronization, the Replication Monitor show me an
> error
> in the Subscription. When i see the details of the error, i see the
> following:
> Error messages:
> The process could not read file
> '\\Desa5el1\Paso\unc\DESA5EL1$CASCABEL_MC_AREASQL_ PUB_MC_AREASQL_PRUEBA\20070719170351\prueba_2.pre'
> due to OS error 5. (Source: MSSQL_REPL, Error number: MSSQL_REPL20024)
> Get help: http://help/MSSQL_REPL20024
> The account under which the agent runs is db_owner (is an sql account, not
> an Windows account) and member of the Publication Access List. I think
> maybe
> the problem it is in this:
> "Have read permissions on the snapshot share."
> Could someone explain me this point? i need to configure some thing extra?
> some permissions to the unc path?
> I really appreciate any help.
> --
> Thanks in advance
>
|||Thanks for your help, Hilary.
I executed both sp_helpdistributor and sp_helppublication, and the snapshot
share that appears is correct (\\Desa5el1\Paso).
How can i set sharing and security rights for the account under which the
agent runs? The account exists only in sql server. I need to "register" this
account in somewhere out of sql server? How can i do that?
Thanks again.
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> Locate your snapshot share. Do that by issue the following on your
> distributor
> sp_helpdistributor
> The name of your snapshot share should be in the directory column.
> Also on your publisher in your publication database do this
> sp_helppublication 'pubs' -- where pubs is your publication name
> Note the value for alt_snapshot_folder column. If this value is null your
> snapshot share is the value for the directory column returned by
> sp_helpdistributor. If it is not null the snapshot share is in the
> alt_snapshot_folder column.
> Using file explorer navigate to this folder and right click on it, select
> sharing and security and then make sure that the account which the sql
> server agent account runs under has read and list files and folders rights
> on this folder. The share permissions are by default always read.
>
> --
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
> "byteman" <byteman@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:9E69C2AD-9AA6-4B12-8B1A-B118123E9F3D@.microsoft.com...
>
>

"Start Automatically when SQL Server Agent Starts" doesn't always work

We have a SQL job that always needs to be running and have the "Start
Automatically when SQL Server Agent Starts" option enabled. We've
noticed that on occassion this job is stopped. No errors / failure
notifications.
Any idea why this would happen? How can we get this to always run, or
at least notify us when the job stops?
Thanks,
RubensAre you on the latest Service Packs ? It would also be nice if you can =mention the SQL Server version you are presetly on ... -- HTH,
Vinod Kumar
MCSE, DBA, MCAD
SCT Software Solutions http://www32.brinkster.com/sqlvinod
"Rubens" <rubensrose@.hotmail.com> wrote in message =news:a988e2b1.0307150438.7e58dc87@.posting.google.com...
> We have a SQL job that always needs to be running and have the "Start
> Automatically when SQL Server Agent Starts" option enabled. We've
> noticed that on occassion this job is stopped. No errors / failure
> notifications.
> > Any idea why this would happen? How can we get this to always run, or
> at least notify us when the job stops?
> > Thanks,
> Rubens|||"Vinodk" <vinodk sct@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<erfG7AtSDHA.2148@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>...
> Are you on the latest Service Packs ? It would also be nice if you can
> mention the SQL Server version you are presetly on ...
Sorry, can't believe I didn't mention that. SQL Server 2000 with SP3 on W2K SP3.
Thanks,
Rubens|||"Vinodk" <vinodk sct@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<erfG7AtSDHA.2148@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>...
> Are you on the latest Service Packs ? It would also be nice if you can
> mention the SQL Server version you are presetly on ...
Sorry, can't believe I didn't mentioned that. SQL Server 2000 SP3.
Thanks,
Rubens

"Resetting" an obsolete snapshot

Berb,
running a snapshot agent in this case will just add the
new article and is different from a reinitialization.
HTH,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
Thanks, Paul. That's just what I needed to know.
One more related question...
Will this "lock" the database tables? In other words, will the snapshot
process, in this case, prevent use of the database while it is in progress?
Brent
"Paul Ibison" wrote:

> Berb,
> running a snapshot agent in this case will just add the
> new article and is different from a reinitialization.
> HTH,
> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
> (recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
>
|||Brent,
this'll lock the table unless you are using transactional replication with
the concurrent snapshot option.
Rgds,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)

"Lock Pages in Memory" Service Account and SQL Agent

Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
currently)
I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?Perhaps you are talking about this on BOL
"Although it is not required, we recommend locking pages in memory when
using 64-bit operating systems. For 32-bit operating systems, Lock pages in
memory permission must be granted before AWE is configured for SQL Server."
I do not see why there could be a conflict if both services are using the
same Windows account and this account has the Lock pages in memory permission
granted. It should be Ok.
(BOL note from
Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
ms-help://MS.SQLCC.v9/MS.SQLSVR.v9.en/udb9/html/34950321-2bfd-4679-8f1b-0a0a440eb443.htm
)
Hope this helps,
Ben Nevarez
"Neufusion" wrote:
> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
> currently)
> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?
>|||The main SQL Server service is specifically designed for managing large
amounts of memory and has an option to use AWE but the SQL Agent only works
like any other regular program as far as memory management's concerned
(Virtual Memory). Therefore there's no reason to think both services would
make large AWE allocations at startup.
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
http://blogs.sqlserver.org.au/blogs/greg_linwood
Benchmark your query performance
http://www.SQLBenchmarkPro.com
"Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
> currently)
> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?|||If I remember correctly, the "Lock pages in memory" setting only applies to
Enterprise, not Standard edition. not sure which you are running
--
Kevin3NF
SQL Server dude
You want fries with that?
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
"Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
> currently)
> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?|||This was true for SQL 2000 but not SQL 2005
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
http://blogs.sqlserver.org.au/blogs/greg_linwood
Benchmark your query performance
http://www.SQLBenchmarkPro.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:Oh8WQgnYIHA.3964@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> If I remember correctly, the "Lock pages in memory" setting only applies
> to Enterprise, not Standard edition. not sure which you are running
> --
> Kevin3NF
> SQL Server dude
> You want fries with that?
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
> I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
> Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
>
> "Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
>> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
>> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
>> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
>> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
>> currently)
>> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
>> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?
>|||http://support.microsoft.com/kb/918483/en-us
Note For 64-bit systems, SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition is the only
edition that is designed to use lock pages in memory.
Am I misreading? I have a 3 node, 2 instance cluster my customer is about
to upgrade for this very reason...
--
Kevin3NF
SQL Server dude
You want fries with that?
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
"Greg Linwood" <g_linwood@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:utExsLrYIHA.4196@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> This was true for SQL 2000 but not SQL 2005
> Regards,
> Greg Linwood
> SQL Server MVP
> http://blogs.sqlserver.org.au/blogs/greg_linwood
> Benchmark your query performance
> http://www.SQLBenchmarkPro.com
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:Oh8WQgnYIHA.3964@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> If I remember correctly, the "Lock pages in memory" setting only applies
>> to Enterprise, not Standard edition. not sure which you are running
>> --
>> Kevin3NF
>> SQL Server dude
>> You want fries with that?
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
>> I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
>> Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
>>
>> "Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
>> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
>> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
>> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
>> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
>> currently)
>> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
>> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?
>>
>

"Could not continue scan with NOLOCK due to data" error during Replication Synchronization

I am receiving this message "Agent message code 601. Could not
continue scan with NOLOCK due to data" during the initial
synchronization after setting up a subscriber.
It is a straightforward tarnsactional replication of maybe twenty
tables.
I have never seen that message in the context of replication.
I think the 601 error looks to be slightly misleading as the previous
message in the log looks to indcate a successful snapshot
synchronization:
Delivered snapshot from the 'unc\serverX\20070208105750\' sub-folder
in 519625 milliseconds.
I have tried setting up the subscriber and publisher mulitple times
from scratch but always run into this message. Also all of the
replicated tables have multiple indexes and this is on a SQL Server
2005 SP1 Mirrored database. I have ran checkdb on database with no
problems found. This is halting the database from being replicated -
anyone know a way around this?
On Feb 8, 5:14 pm, "Calculated" <sarahjco...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> I am receiving this message "Agent message code 601.Could notcontinue scan with NOLOCK due to data"duringthe initialsynchronizationafter setting up a subscriber.
> It is a straightforward tarnsactionalreplicationof maybe twenty
> tables.
> I have never seen that message in the context ofreplication.
> I think the 601errorlooks to be slightly misleading as the previous
> message in the log looks to indcate a successful snapshotsynchronization:
> Delivered snapshot from the 'unc\serverX\20070208105750\' sub-folder
> in 519625 milliseconds.
> I have tried setting up the subscriber and publisher mulitple times
> from scratch but always run into this message. Also all of the
> replicated tables have multiple indexes and this is on a SQL Server
> 2005 SP1 Mirrored database. I have ran checkdb on database with no
> problems found. This is halting the database from being replicated -
> anyone know a way around this?
Resolved this - if anyone else has this problem try adding a table at
a time to the publication article and re-initializing the subscription
until you identify the problem table. Then either filter the table to
break down into smaller chunks (largest table in db was causing
problem in my case) or play around with the copy clustered index and
copy nonclustered index options on the specific table.

"Could not continue scan with NOLOCK due to data" error during Replication Synchronization

I am receiving this message "Agent message code 601. Could not
continue scan with NOLOCK due to data" during the initial
synchronization after setting up a subscriber.
It is a straightforward tarnsactional replication of maybe twenty
tables.
I have never seen that message in the context of replication.
I think the 601 error looks to be slightly misleading as the previous
message in the log looks to indcate a successful snapshot
synchronization:
Delivered snapshot from the 'unc\serverX\20070208105750\' sub-folder
in 519625 milliseconds.
I have tried setting up the subscriber and publisher mulitple times
from scratch but always run into this message. Also all of the
replicated tables have multiple indexes and this is on a SQL Server
2005 SP1 Mirrored database. I have ran checkdb on database with no
problems found. This is halting the database from being replicated -
anyone know a way around this?On Feb 8, 5:14 pm, "Calculated" <sarahjco...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> I am receiving this message "Agent message code 601.Could notcontinue scan with NOLOCK due to data"duringthe initialsynchronizationafter setting up a subscriber.
> It is a straightforward tarnsactionalreplicationof maybe twenty
> tables.
> I have never seen that message in the context ofreplication.
> I think the 601errorlooks to be slightly misleading as the previous
> message in the log looks to indcate a successful snapshotsynchronization:
> Delivered snapshot from the 'unc\serverX\20070208105750\' sub-folder
> in 519625 milliseconds.
> I have tried setting up the subscriber and publisher mulitple times
> from scratch but always run into this message. Also all of the
> replicated tables have multiple indexes and this is on a SQL Server
> 2005 SP1 Mirrored database. I have ran checkdb on database with no
> problems found. This is halting the database from being replicated -
> anyone know a way around this?
Resolved this - if anyone else has this problem try adding a table at
a time to the publication article and re-initializing the subscription
until you identify the problem table. Then either filter the table to
break down into smaller chunks (largest table in db was causing
problem in my case) or play around with the copy clustered index and
copy nonclustered index options on the specific table.