sql error: size

Showing posts with label size. Show all posts

Saturday, February 25, 2012

"max text repl size" safety

I just increased the max size of text replication to 524288 bytes with below
Sql statements. The system allows me to do that but I'm wondering if there
is any issue/drawback that I should know about pumping the max size up by so
much. Thank you in advance for your advice.
EXEC sp_configure 'max text repl size', '524288'
go
RECONFIGURE WITH OVERRIDE
goBasically it means that SQL can replicate data where a row contains more
than 524288 bytes. This will cause performance degradation on your system as
rows this size are going through.
--
Hilary Cotter
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
"Zeng" <Zeng5000@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e3DD325%23FHA.3992@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>I just increased the max size of text replication to 524288 bytes with
>below
> Sql statements. The system allows me to do that but I'm wondering if
> there
> is any issue/drawback that I should know about pumping the max size up by
> so
> much. Thank you in advance for your advice.
> EXEC sp_configure 'max text repl size', '524288'
> go
> RECONFIGURE WITH OVERRIDE
> go
>|||If you have a separate distributor server where does this setting need to be
issued. At the distributor or the publisher?
If the system is moving large files (2- 10 MB) what kind of impact will it
have? What impact will it have on both servers?
Thanks
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:
> Basically it means that SQL can replicate data where a row contains more
> than 524288 bytes. This will cause performance degradation on your system as
> rows this size are going through.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> 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
> "Zeng" <Zeng5000@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e3DD325%23FHA.3992@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> >I just increased the max size of text replication to 524288 bytes with
> >below
> > Sql statements. The system allows me to do that but I'm wondering if
> > there
> > is any issue/drawback that I should know about pumping the max size up by
> > so
> > much. Thank you in advance for your advice.
> >
> > EXEC sp_configure 'max text repl size', '524288'
> > go
> > RECONFIGURE WITH OVERRIDE
> > go
> >
> >
>
>|||I believe its on the publisher.
--
Hilary Cotter
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
"Mark" <Mark@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2DB417F1-5573-48EA-B1AC-C10B8760D75E@.microsoft.com...
> If you have a separate distributor server where does this setting need to
> be
> issued. At the distributor or the publisher?
> If the system is moving large files (2- 10 MB) what kind of impact will it
> have? What impact will it have on both servers?
> Thanks
> "Hilary Cotter" wrote:
>> Basically it means that SQL can replicate data where a row contains more
>> than 524288 bytes. This will cause performance degradation on your system
>> as
>> rows this size are going through.
>> --
>> Hilary Cotter
>> 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
>> "Zeng" <Zeng5000@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:e3DD325%23FHA.3992@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> >I just increased the max size of text replication to 524288 bytes with
>> >below
>> > Sql statements. The system allows me to do that but I'm wondering if
>> > there
>> > is any issue/drawback that I should know about pumping the max size up
>> > by
>> > so
>> > much. Thank you in advance for your advice.
>> >
>> > EXEC sp_configure 'max text repl size', '524288'
>> > go
>> > RECONFIGURE WITH OVERRIDE
>> > go
>> >
>> >
>>

Thursday, February 9, 2012

"Cannot sort a row of size" how to resolve

I have a SQL Stored Procedure which select data from some tables. I worked on some rows but when I inserted one more row which had a large data- new row has inserted but I cannot select and order its record and SQLsrv raised this error
"Cannot sort a row of size 8154, which is greater than the allowable maximum of 8094"
any one, plz help me to Fix this.
Thanks alotThe row size extends a maximum page length - You will have to normailze the data further or reduce the attribute lengths - Can you post the table schema (DDL)?

"backup log {Database_Name} with no_log" issue

I issue the "backup log {Database_Name} with no_log" and
also "Dump transaction {Datebase_Name} with no_log". The
LDF file still got the same size. Any idea?It's usually best to leave the size of the .ldf file as is after backing up
a log because this saves sql server from having to go through the effort of
manually growing it whilst the database is in operation. This is because
having to grow the log file during operation slows down the performance of
SQL Server. This is why most production environments leave the .ldf file as
it is & simply truncate the "logical" log records from the file. There are
also other factors that come into play when considering recovery times as
well.
So, backing up a log & shrinking a .ldf file aren't two things you should
expect to happen automatically.
If you really want to shrink the .ldf file for some reason, there is a good
article on the topic in SQL Server Books Online here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_da2_1uzr.asp
HTH
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
"KL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:034801c3c744$e685fc70$a101280a@.phx.gbl...
> I issue the "backup log {Database_Name} with no_log" and
> also "Dump transaction {Datebase_Name} with no_log". The
> LDF file still got the same size. Any idea?
>|||Just to add to Greg's comments you should note that backingup a log file
will not shrink it. That will only happen with a DBCC SHRINKDATABASE or
SHRINKFILE command. It may not be able to actually shrink until the backup
is completed but that alone does not shrink the log file.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Greg Linwood" <g_linwoodQhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23LGr8z2xDHA.1616@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> It's usually best to leave the size of the .ldf file as is after backing
up
> a log because this saves sql server from having to go through the effort
of
> manually growing it whilst the database is in operation. This is because
> having to grow the log file during operation slows down the performance of
> SQL Server. This is why most production environments leave the .ldf file
as
> it is & simply truncate the "logical" log records from the file. There are
> also other factors that come into play when considering recovery times as
> well.
> So, backing up a log & shrinking a .ldf file aren't two things you should
> expect to happen automatically.
> If you really want to shrink the .ldf file for some reason, there is a
good
> article on the topic in SQL Server Books Online here:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/architec/8_ar_da2_1uzr.asp
> HTH
> Regards,
> Greg Linwood
> SQL Server MVP
> "KL" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:034801c3c744$e685fc70$a101280a@.phx.gbl...
> > I issue the "backup log {Database_Name} with no_log" and
> > also "Dump transaction {Datebase_Name} with no_log". The
> > LDF file still got the same size. Any idea?
> >
>

Saturday, February 25, 2012

"max text repl size" safety

"max text repl size" safety

"max text repl size" safety

"max text repl size" safety

Thursday, February 9, 2012

"Cannot sort a row of size" how to resolve

"backup log {Database_Name} with no_log" issue

sql error

Blog Archive

About Me