managed objects

Hello people :-)

I'm doing some development work with Visual Studio 2005 and SQLServer 2000. My SQL DB is running on a Windows 2000 Server box in the office, and I'm doing the development on my XPPro workstation. Now I've been trying to connect to the Win2000 box though VS and although I can see the server and the DB when I hit ok I get this error

"The SQL server specified by these connection propertise does not support managed objects"

What the heck does that mean?

any help would be great :-)Well when you are using VS2005 it assumes you are connecting to SQL Server 2005, quick fix I think is to install .NET framework 2.0 in the Win2k server and make sure IIS is running even if you are not using it. Hope this helps.

Managed Disks in Windows 2003

While setting up windows cluster in 2003, my external array which is
logically partiotioned into P and Q appear as one disk group.
If i wanted to setup an active/active SQL cluster, how can i seperate into 2
groups, so that one node owns P and SQL instance 1 has data files on P and
the other node owns Q with another SQL instance owning Q. I didnt see a
managed disk dialog during the 2003 windows cluster instance.
Consult with your extenal array vendor documentation/support. It may be that your array cannot present virtual disks (like many high-end SANs can). This may mean that you need disk sets made up of different physical disks to present 2 "disks" to your cl
uster. eg physical disks 1, 2+3 are drive P, while physical disks 4 and 5 are drive Q. Don't forget that you'll also need a separate disk for the Quorum. So, in your configuration you'll need to have AT LEAST 3 separate disks to present to your cluster
. What sort of external array are you using?
|||MSCS looks at the physical layer, not the partition level. So you can have 4
partitions on a single disk, but MSCS will display this as one physical disk
resource. The only way to achieve an active/active configuration would be to
add another physical disk...can't be done with your current config.
Regards,
John.
"Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e$W6OIPFEHA.2768@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> While setting up windows cluster in 2003, my external array which is
> logically partiotioned into P and Q appear as one disk group.
> If i wanted to setup an active/active SQL cluster, how can i seperate into
2
> groups, so that one node owns P and SQL instance 1 has data files on P and
> the other node owns Q with another SQL instance owning Q. I didnt see a
> managed disk dialog during the 2003 windows cluster instance.
>
>

Making a subscriber the publisher

SQL 2000 /Windows 2000 Server
I need to shut the publisher down and remove it from the
network. Then I need the subscriber to now become the
publisher and push to other subscribers.
Is this as easy as just removing Data Replication, and
then recreating it, making the old subscriber, the
publisher?
Thx,
Don
Possibly. It depends on what type of replication you are doing. If you are
using merge it should just work after you have dropped the subscription.
With transactional that depends on if you are replicating DRI which will
replicate the primary keys as primary keys to the subscriber. If you were
not replicating DRI the primary keys will be replicated as unique indexes on
the subscriber and you will have to convert them to primary keys before your
can publish these tables.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a book on SQL Server replication?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"Don" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0fa001c48bba$5e3e36d0$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> SQL 2000 /Windows 2000 Server
> I need to shut the publisher down and remove it from the
> network. Then I need the subscriber to now become the
> publisher and push to other subscribers.
> Is this as easy as just removing Data Replication, and
> then recreating it, making the old subscriber, the
> publisher?
> Thx,
> Don
>

Make SQL use more memory

I've got a Windows 2003 Enterprise server with 8GB of memory running
SQL 2005 Standard (32 bit). According to the documentation SQL can
take up to the OS maximum amount of memory (64 GB with PAE). Well,
SQL isn't taking more than about 1.5GB of memory, and the Buffer Cache
Hit Ratio is up close to 100. How can I make SQL use more physical
memory?
Thanks
Dylan
If the Buffer Cache Hit Ratio is 100, that means that SQL Server doesn't
need to take any more memory. Your queries are all using data that's
already cached. SQL Server will not take memory it doesn't need.

Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182433233.008715.247450@.o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
> I've got a Windows 2003 Enterprise server with 8GB of memory running
> SQL 2005 Standard (32 bit). According to the documentation SQL can
> take up to the OS maximum amount of memory (64 GB with PAE). Well,
> SQL isn't taking more than about 1.5GB of memory, and the Buffer Cache
> Hit Ratio is up close to 100. How can I make SQL use more physical
> memory?
> Thanks
> Dylan
>
|||On Jun 21, 9:47 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> If the Buffer Cache Hit Ratio is 100, that means that SQL Server doesn't
> need to take any more memory. Your queries are all using data that's
> already cached. SQL Server will not take memory it doesn't need.
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182433233.008715.247450@.o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>
Ah, so you're right - I was reading my thresholds sheet wrong. I guess
I should have thought about what a ratio is before posting.
In any event, this SQL server's not very highly utilized right now.
If it becomes more highly utilized and does in fact need to take more
memory, will it, or do I need to change anything? I was reading about
enabling AWE - is that something that I should have enabled?
Thanks!
Dylan
|||"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182434972.723295.308160@.o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
> In any event, this SQL server's not very highly utilized right now.
> If it becomes more highly utilized and does in fact need to take more
> memory, will it, or do I need to change anything? I was reading about
> enabling AWE - is that something that I should have enabled?
Yes, you'll have to enable AWE if you want SQL Server to use any RAM
over the 2GB user-mode VAS limit.

Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
|||On Jun 21, 10:16 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182434972.723295.308160@.o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
> Yes, you'll have to enable AWE if you want SQL Server to use any RAM
> over the 2GB user-mode VAS limit.
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
Great, thanks - one last question. I see that you need to enable Lock
Pages in Memory access through group Policy. It says to:
In the Select Users or Groups dialog box, add an account with
privileges to run sqlservr.exe.
Is that referring to the user that the MSSQLSERVER service logs in as
when it starts, or is that just any user with login access to the
database? It seems like no matter what account (or accounts) I give
that access to, SQL still spits out an error saying that they don't
have access.
|||"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182436089.647770.79590@.p77g2000hsh.googlegro ups.com...
> Great, thanks - one last question. I see that you need to enable Lock
> Pages in Memory access through group Policy. It says to:
As far as I know, that's only applicable to 64-bit, Enterprise Edition
SQL Server.

Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
|||On Jun 21, 10:34 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182436089.647770.79590@.p77g2000hsh.googlegro ups.com...
>
>
> As far as I know, that's only applicable to 64-bit, Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server.
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
Hmm, well according to this article http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673(SQL.90).aspx
AWE is not needed and cannot be configured on 64-bit operating systems.
|||"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182437032.054788.207030@.n60g2000hse.googlegr oups.com...
> Hmm, well according to this article
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673(SQL.90).aspx
> AWE is not needed and cannot be configured on 64-bit operating systems.
AWE is needed for 32-bit SQL Server, whether running on a 32-bit or
64-bit operating system. Lock Pages in Memory is only needed for 64-bit SQL
Server. You're running 32-bit SQL Server, according to your first post?

Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
|||On Jun 21, 11:09 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182437032.054788.207030@.n60g2000hse.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
> AWE is needed for 32-bit SQL Server, whether running on a 32-bit or
> 64-bit operating system. Lock Pages in Memory is only needed for 64-bit SQL
> Server. You're running 32-bit SQL Server, according to your first post?
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
I really need to read these things better, I didn't see in your
previous post that you were talking about Enterprise Edition SQL
Server, I thought you meant 64 Bit Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition.
Yes, I am running 32 bit SQL Server Standard on 32 Bit Windows 2003
Enterprise. Given that, I can't get AWE to enable. When I try to
enable it, I get the following error:
Alter Failed (Microsoft.SQLServer.SMO)
Additional information
+ An exception occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or
batch.
(Microsoft.SQLServer.ConnectionInfo)
+ Address Windowing Extensions (AWE) requires the "lock pages in
memory" privilege which is not currently present in the access token
of the process.
When I looked that up, I found that I needed to enable the Enable the
Lock Pages in Memory Option. Using this article
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190730(SQL.90).aspx I tried
to do that, but it is still not working. Any insight?
Thanks very much for your help.
|||Do you have the /PAE switch enabled in boot.ini ?

Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182440393.064379.241090@.p77g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
> On Jun 21, 11:09 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
> wrote:
> I really need to read these things better, I didn't see in your
> previous post that you were talking about Enterprise Edition SQL
> Server, I thought you meant 64 Bit Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition.
> Yes, I am running 32 bit SQL Server Standard on 32 Bit Windows 2003
> Enterprise. Given that, I can't get AWE to enable. When I try to
> enable it, I get the following error:
> Alter Failed (Microsoft.SQLServer.SMO)
> Additional information
> + An exception occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or
> batch.
> (Microsoft.SQLServer.ConnectionInfo)
> + Address Windowing Extensions (AWE) requires the "lock pages in
> memory" privilege which is not currently present in the access token
> of the process.
> When I looked that up, I found that I needed to enable the Enable the
> Lock Pages in Memory Option. Using this article
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190730(SQL.90).aspx I tried
> to do that, but it is still not working. Any insight?
> Thanks very much for your help.
>

Make SQL use more memory

I've got a Windows 2003 Enterprise server with 8GB of memory running
SQL 2005 Standard (32 bit). According to the documentation SQL can
take up to the OS maximum amount of memory (64 GB with PAE). Well,
SQL isn't taking more than about 1.5GB of memory, and the Buffer Cache
Hit Ratio is up close to 100. How can I make SQL use more physical
memory?
Thanks
DylanIf the Buffer Cache Hit Ratio is 100, that means that SQL Server doesn't
need to take any more memory. Your queries are all using data that's
already cached. SQL Server will not take memory it doesn't need.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182433233.008715.247450@.o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> I've got a Windows 2003 Enterprise server with 8GB of memory running
> SQL 2005 Standard (32 bit). According to the documentation SQL can
> take up to the OS maximum amount of memory (64 GB with PAE). Well,
> SQL isn't taking more than about 1.5GB of memory, and the Buffer Cache
> Hit Ratio is up close to 100. How can I make SQL use more physical
> memory?
> Thanks
> Dylan
>|||On Jun 21, 9:47 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> If the Buffer Cache Hit Ratio is 100, that means that SQL Server doesn't
> need to take any more memory. Your queries are all using data that's
> already cached. SQL Server will not take memory it doesn't need.
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/boo
kDisplay.html?bID=10220
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182433233.008715.247450@.o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
Ah, so you're right - I was reading my thresholds sheet wrong. I guess
I should have thought about what a ratio is before posting.
In any event, this SQL server's not very highly utilized right now.
If it becomes more highly utilized and does in fact need to take more
memory, will it, or do I need to change anything? I was reading about
enabling AWE - is that something that I should have enabled?
Thanks!
Dylan|||"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182434972.723295.308160@.o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> In any event, this SQL server's not very highly utilized right now.
> If it becomes more highly utilized and does in fact need to take more
> memory, will it, or do I need to change anything? I was reading about
> enabling AWE - is that something that I should have enabled?
Yes, you'll have to enable AWE if you want SQL Server to use any RAM
over the 2GB user-mode VAS limit.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220|||On Jun 21, 10:16 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182434972.723295.308160@.o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Yes, you'll have to enable AWE if you want SQL Server to use any RAM
> over the 2GB user-mode VAS limit.
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay
.html?bID=10220
Great, thanks - one last question. I see that you need to enable Lock
Pages in Memory access through group Policy. It says to:
In the Select Users or Groups dialog box, add an account with
privileges to run sqlservr.exe.
Is that referring to the user that the MSSQLSERVER service logs in as
when it starts, or is that just any user with login access to the
database? It seems like no matter what account (or accounts) I give
that access to, SQL still spits out an error saying that they don't
have access.|||"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182436089.647770.79590@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> Great, thanks - one last question. I see that you need to enable Lock
> Pages in Memory access through group Policy. It says to:
As far as I know, that's only applicable to 64-bit, Enterprise Edition
SQL Server.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220|||On Jun 21, 10:34 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182436089.647770.79590@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> As far as I know, that's only applicable to 64-bit, Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server.
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay
.html?bID=10220
Hmm, well according to this article http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/li...s190
673(SQL.90).aspx
AWE is not needed and cannot be configured on 64-bit operating systems.|||Can you go into gpedit and make sure the perms are set properly, then go
back out to a command prompt, run gpupdate, and try again?
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182442259.823849.93310@.q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 21, 11:53 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
> wrote:
> Yes I do.
>|||On Jun 21, 12:20 pm, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Can you go into gpedit and make sure the perms are set properly, then go
> back out to a command prompt, run gpupdate, and try again?
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/boo
kDisplay.html?bID=10220
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182442259.823849.93310@.q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Well, that's part of the issue, I guess. It says "add an account with
privileges to run sqlservr.exe" - by that does it mean to add the
account that the MSSQLSERVER service starts as, or an account that has
sysadmin rights to the SQL Server?|||"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182446047.108936.106190@.w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> Well, that's part of the issue, I guess. It says "add an account with
> privileges to run sqlservr.exe" - by that does it mean to add the
> account that the MSSQLSERVER service starts as, or an account that has
> sysadmin rights to the SQL Server?
The account that the SQL Server service runs as.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220

Make SQL use more memory

I've got a Windows 2003 Enterprise server with 8GB of memory running
SQL 2005 Standard (32 bit). According to the documentation SQL can
take up to the OS maximum amount of memory (64 GB with PAE). Well,
SQL isn't taking more than about 1.5GB of memory, and the Buffer Cache
Hit Ratio is up close to 100. How can I make SQL use more physical
memory?
Thanks
DylanIf the Buffer Cache Hit Ratio is 100, that means that SQL Server doesn't
need to take any more memory. Your queries are all using data that's
already cached. SQL Server will not take memory it doesn't need.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182433233.008715.247450@.o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> I've got a Windows 2003 Enterprise server with 8GB of memory running
> SQL 2005 Standard (32 bit). According to the documentation SQL can
> take up to the OS maximum amount of memory (64 GB with PAE). Well,
> SQL isn't taking more than about 1.5GB of memory, and the Buffer Cache
> Hit Ratio is up close to 100. How can I make SQL use more physical
> memory?
> Thanks
> Dylan
>|||On Jun 21, 9:47 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
> If the Buffer Cache Hit Ratio is 100, that means that SQL Server doesn't
> need to take any more memory. Your queries are all using data that's
> already cached. SQL Server will not take memory it doesn't need.
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182433233.008715.247450@.o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> > I've got a Windows 2003 Enterprise server with 8GB of memory running
> > SQL 2005 Standard (32 bit). According to the documentation SQL can
> > take up to the OS maximum amount of memory (64 GB with PAE). Well,
> > SQL isn't taking more than about 1.5GB of memory, and the Buffer Cache
> > Hit Ratio is up close to 100. How can I make SQL use more physical
> > memory?
> > Thanks
> > Dylan
Ah, so you're right - I was reading my thresholds sheet wrong. I guess
I should have thought about what a ratio is before posting.
In any event, this SQL server's not very highly utilized right now.
If it becomes more highly utilized and does in fact need to take more
memory, will it, or do I need to change anything? I was reading about
enabling AWE - is that something that I should have enabled?
Thanks!
Dylan|||"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182434972.723295.308160@.o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> In any event, this SQL server's not very highly utilized right now.
> If it becomes more highly utilized and does in fact need to take more
> memory, will it, or do I need to change anything? I was reading about
> enabling AWE - is that something that I should have enabled?
Yes, you'll have to enable AWE if you want SQL Server to use any RAM
over the 2GB user-mode VAS limit.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220|||On Jun 21, 10:16 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182434972.723295.308160@.o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > In any event, this SQL server's not very highly utilized right now.
> > If it becomes more highly utilized and does in fact need to take more
> > memory, will it, or do I need to change anything? I was reading about
> > enabling AWE - is that something that I should have enabled?
> Yes, you'll have to enable AWE if you want SQL Server to use any RAM
> over the 2GB user-mode VAS limit.
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
Great, thanks - one last question. I see that you need to enable Lock
Pages in Memory access through group Policy. It says to:
In the Select Users or Groups dialog box, add an account with
privileges to run sqlservr.exe.
Is that referring to the user that the MSSQLSERVER service logs in as
when it starts, or is that just any user with login access to the
database? It seems like no matter what account (or accounts) I give
that access to, SQL still spits out an error saying that they don't
have access.|||"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182436089.647770.79590@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> Great, thanks - one last question. I see that you need to enable Lock
> Pages in Memory access through group Policy. It says to:
As far as I know, that's only applicable to 64-bit, Enterprise Edition
SQL Server.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220|||On Jun 21, 10:34 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182436089.647770.79590@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Great, thanks - one last question. I see that you need to enable Lock
> > Pages in Memory access through group Policy. It says to:
> As far as I know, that's only applicable to 64-bit, Enterprise Edition
> SQL Server.
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
Hmm, well according to this article http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673(SQL.90).aspx
AWE is not needed and cannot be configured on 64-bit operating systems.|||"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182437032.054788.207030@.n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> Hmm, well according to this article
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673(SQL.90).aspx
> AWE is not needed and cannot be configured on 64-bit operating systems.
AWE is needed for 32-bit SQL Server, whether running on a 32-bit or
64-bit operating system. Lock Pages in Memory is only needed for 64-bit SQL
Server. You're running 32-bit SQL Server, according to your first post?
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220|||On Jun 21, 11:09 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182437032.054788.207030@.n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Hmm, well according to this article
> >http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673(SQL.90).aspx
> > AWE is not needed and cannot be configured on 64-bit operating systems.
> AWE is needed for 32-bit SQL Server, whether running on a 32-bit or
> 64-bit operating system. Lock Pages in Memory is only needed for 64-bit SQL
> Server. You're running 32-bit SQL Server, according to your first post?
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
I really need to read these things better, I didn't see in your
previous post that you were talking about Enterprise Edition SQL
Server, I thought you meant 64 Bit Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition.
Yes, I am running 32 bit SQL Server Standard on 32 Bit Windows 2003
Enterprise. Given that, I can't get AWE to enable. When I try to
enable it, I get the following error:
Alter Failed (Microsoft.SQLServer.SMO)
Additional information
+ An exception occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or
batch.
(Microsoft.SQLServer.ConnectionInfo)
+ Address Windowing Extensions (AWE) requires the "lock pages in
memory" privilege which is not currently present in the access token
of the process.
When I looked that up, I found that I needed to enable the Enable the
Lock Pages in Memory Option. Using this article
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190730(SQL.90).aspx I tried
to do that, but it is still not working. Any insight?
Thanks very much for your help.|||Do you have the /PAE switch enabled in boot.ini ?
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182440393.064379.241090@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 21, 11:09 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
> wrote:
>> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1182437032.054788.207030@.n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > Hmm, well according to this article
>> >http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673(SQL.90).aspx
>> > AWE is not needed and cannot be configured on 64-bit operating systems.
>> AWE is needed for 32-bit SQL Server, whether running on a 32-bit or
>> 64-bit operating system. Lock Pages in Memory is only needed for 64-bit
>> SQL
>> Server. You're running 32-bit SQL Server, according to your first post?
>> --
>> Adam Machanic
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005
>> Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
> I really need to read these things better, I didn't see in your
> previous post that you were talking about Enterprise Edition SQL
> Server, I thought you meant 64 Bit Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition.
> Yes, I am running 32 bit SQL Server Standard on 32 Bit Windows 2003
> Enterprise. Given that, I can't get AWE to enable. When I try to
> enable it, I get the following error:
> Alter Failed (Microsoft.SQLServer.SMO)
> Additional information
> + An exception occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or
> batch.
> (Microsoft.SQLServer.ConnectionInfo)
> + Address Windowing Extensions (AWE) requires the "lock pages in
> memory" privilege which is not currently present in the access token
> of the process.
> When I looked that up, I found that I needed to enable the Enable the
> Lock Pages in Memory Option. Using this article
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190730(SQL.90).aspx I tried
> to do that, but it is still not working. Any insight?
> Thanks very much for your help.
>|||On Jun 21, 11:53 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
> Do you have the /PAE switch enabled in boot.ini ?
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182440393.064379.241090@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> > On Jun 21, 11:09 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:1182437032.054788.207030@.n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> >> > Hmm, well according to this article
> >> >http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673(SQL.90).aspx
> >> > AWE is not needed and cannot be configured on 64-bit operating systems.
> >> AWE is needed for 32-bit SQL Server, whether running on a 32-bit or
> >> 64-bit operating system. Lock Pages in Memory is only needed for 64-bit
> >> SQL
> >> Server. You're running 32-bit SQL Server, according to your first post?
> >> --
> >> Adam Machanic
> >> SQL Server MVP
> >> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005
> >> Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
> > I really need to read these things better, I didn't see in your
> > previous post that you were talking about Enterprise Edition SQL
> > Server, I thought you meant 64 Bit Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition.
> > Yes, I am running 32 bit SQL Server Standard on 32 Bit Windows 2003
> > Enterprise. Given that, I can't get AWE to enable. When I try to
> > enable it, I get the following error:
> > Alter Failed (Microsoft.SQLServer.SMO)
> > Additional information
> > + An exception occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or
> > batch.
> > (Microsoft.SQLServer.ConnectionInfo)
> > + Address Windowing Extensions (AWE) requires the "lock pages in
> > memory" privilege which is not currently present in the access token
> > of the process.
> > When I looked that up, I found that I needed to enable the Enable the
> > Lock Pages in Memory Option. Using this article
> >http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190730(SQL.90).aspxI tried
> > to do that, but it is still not working. Any insight?
> > Thanks very much for your help.
Yes I do.|||Can you go into gpedit and make sure the perms are set properly, then go
back out to a command prompt, run gpupdate, and try again?
--
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182442259.823849.93310@.q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 21, 11:53 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Do you have the /PAE switch enabled in boot.ini ?
>> --
>> Adam Machanic
>> SQL Server MVP
>> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005
>> Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
>> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1182440393.064379.241090@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>> > On Jun 21, 11:09 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >>news:1182437032.054788.207030@.n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>> >> > Hmm, well according to this article
>> >> >http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673(SQL.90).aspx
>> >> > AWE is not needed and cannot be configured on 64-bit operating
>> >> > systems.
>> >> AWE is needed for 32-bit SQL Server, whether running on a 32-bit
>> >> or
>> >> 64-bit operating system. Lock Pages in Memory is only needed for
>> >> 64-bit
>> >> SQL
>> >> Server. You're running 32-bit SQL Server, according to your first
>> >> post?
>> >> --
>> >> Adam Machanic
>> >> SQL Server MVP
>> >> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005
>> >> Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
>> > I really need to read these things better, I didn't see in your
>> > previous post that you were talking about Enterprise Edition SQL
>> > Server, I thought you meant 64 Bit Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition.
>> > Yes, I am running 32 bit SQL Server Standard on 32 Bit Windows 2003
>> > Enterprise. Given that, I can't get AWE to enable. When I try to
>> > enable it, I get the following error:
>> > Alter Failed (Microsoft.SQLServer.SMO)
>> > Additional information
>> > + An exception occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or
>> > batch.
>> > (Microsoft.SQLServer.ConnectionInfo)
>> > + Address Windowing Extensions (AWE) requires the "lock pages in
>> > memory" privilege which is not currently present in the access token
>> > of the process.
>> > When I looked that up, I found that I needed to enable the Enable the
>> > Lock Pages in Memory Option. Using this article
>> >http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190730(SQL.90).aspxI tried
>> > to do that, but it is still not working. Any insight?
>> > Thanks very much for your help.
> Yes I do.
>|||On Jun 21, 12:20 pm, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
> Can you go into gpedit and make sure the perms are set properly, then go
> back out to a command prompt, run gpupdate, and try again?
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182442259.823849.93310@.q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> > On Jun 21, 11:53 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> Do you have the /PAE switch enabled in boot.ini ?
> >> --
> >> Adam Machanic
> >> SQL Server MVP
> >> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005
> >> Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
> >> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:1182440393.064379.241090@.p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> >> > On Jun 21, 11:09 am, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >>news:1182437032.054788.207030@.n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> >> >> > Hmm, well according to this article
> >> >> >http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190673(SQL.90).aspx
> >> >> > AWE is not needed and cannot be configured on 64-bit operating
> >> >> > systems.
> >> >> AWE is needed for 32-bit SQL Server, whether running on a 32-bit
> >> >> or
> >> >> 64-bit operating system. Lock Pages in Memory is only needed for
> >> >> 64-bit
> >> >> SQL
> >> >> Server. You're running 32-bit SQL Server, according to your first
> >> >> post?
> >> >> --
> >> >> Adam Machanic
> >> >> SQL Server MVP
> >> >> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005
> >> >> Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
> >> > I really need to read these things better, I didn't see in your
> >> > previous post that you were talking about Enterprise Edition SQL
> >> > Server, I thought you meant 64 Bit Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition.
> >> > Yes, I am running 32 bit SQL Server Standard on 32 Bit Windows 2003
> >> > Enterprise. Given that, I can't get AWE to enable. When I try to
> >> > enable it, I get the following error:
> >> > Alter Failed (Microsoft.SQLServer.SMO)
> >> > Additional information
> >> > + An exception occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or
> >> > batch.
> >> > (Microsoft.SQLServer.ConnectionInfo)
> >> > + Address Windowing Extensions (AWE) requires the "lock pages in
> >> > memory" privilege which is not currently present in the access token
> >> > of the process.
> >> > When I looked that up, I found that I needed to enable the Enable the
> >> > Lock Pages in Memory Option. Using this article
> >> >http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190730(SQL.90).aspxItried
> >> > to do that, but it is still not working. Any insight?
> >> > Thanks very much for your help.
> > Yes I do.
Well, that's part of the issue, I guess. It says "add an account with
privileges to run sqlservr.exe" - by that does it mean to add the
account that the MSSQLSERVER service starts as, or an account that has
sysadmin rights to the SQL Server?|||"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182446047.108936.106190@.w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> Well, that's part of the issue, I guess. It says "add an account with
> privileges to run sqlservr.exe" - by that does it mean to add the
> account that the MSSQLSERVER service starts as, or an account that has
> sysadmin rights to the SQL Server?
The account that the SQL Server service runs as.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220|||On Jun 21, 1:17 pm, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182446047.108936.106190@.w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Well, that's part of the issue, I guess. It says "add an account with
> > privileges to run sqlservr.exe" - by that does it mean to add the
> > account that the MSSQLSERVER service starts as, or an account that has
> > sysadmin rights to the SQL Server?
> The account that the SQL Server service runs as.
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
I still get the same error. Does it matter that I'm not logging into
the SQL Server as the account that starts the service?|||"dylan" <dylan.roehrig@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182447460.877712.292450@.n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> I still get the same error. Does it matter that I'm not logging into
> the SQL Server as the account that starts the service?
No, that shouldn't be an issue. Did you try rebooting? I'm wondering
if the policy isn't being applied for some reason.
Also, if you look in Task Manager, is SQL Server running using the
account that you think it should be using?
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220|||On Jun 21, 2:12 pm, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182447460.877712.292450@.n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I still get the same error. Does it matter that I'm not logging into
> > the SQL Server as the account that starts the service?
> No, that shouldn't be an issue. Did you try rebooting? I'm wondering
> if the policy isn't being applied for some reason.
> Also, if you look in Task Manager, is SQL Server running using the
> account that you think it should be using?
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220|||On Jun 21, 2:12 pm, "Adam Machanic" <amacha...@.IHATESPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
> "dylan" <dylan.roeh...@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1182447460.877712.292450@.n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I still get the same error. Does it matter that I'm not logging into
> > the SQL Server as the account that starts the service?
> No, that shouldn't be an issue. Did you try rebooting? I'm wondering
> if the policy isn't being applied for some reason.
> Also, if you look in Task Manager, is SQL Server running using the
> account that you think it should be using?
> --
> Adam Machanic
> SQL Server MVP
> Author, "Expert SQL Server 2005 Development"http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10220
I haven't tried rebooting, I can't do that until tonight, but I will
try that. I know sometimes Computer Configuration policies do not
take effect until after rebooting. I checked, and the SQL Server is
running as the account I expect it to be.|||Do you see "Address Windowing Extensions enabled" in the message log?
> I haven't tried rebooting, I can't do that until tonight, but I will
> try that. I know sometimes Computer Configuration policies do not
> take effect until after rebooting. I checked, and the SQL Server is
> running as the account I expect it to be.
>

Make SQL Agent use drive mapping?

Good day,
I'm migrating our current SQL 2k box (running on win 2000) to a new Windows 2003 server. I'm having trouble getting the SQL agent to use the servers drive mapping when running jobs. The odbc driver that I'm using does not support UNC paths. I know, dri
ve mapping are not cool becuase we have to keep the server logged in but it's the only way and it does work on our old box. The weird thing is that I can't get this working on the new server. On the old box the SQL Agent is set to run as the same accoun
t as the logged in user and it can access the drive mappings fine, it's been running this way for quite some time. However, on my new box this does not work...is this a windows 2003 server thing? I'm runing SQL 2k SP3 on both boxes. Also, the new box i
n not in a domain so the account I'm trying to use is a local admin acount.
Any ideas?
Drive mappings are not guaranteed to work when being accessed from a
service. There is no way to force them to work.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
|||I figured it out. I simply added a step in each scheduled job to create and then delete the drive mapping.
For example, I just use the "net use f: \\server\volume" to create the drive ampping an then excute the rest of my job steps and then use another step with this command "net use f: /delete" to delete it. Becuase the SQL Agent service is excuting the comm
and the drive mapping is in it's session and it works every time. It's nice becuase the drive mapping isn't even seen by the desktop and works when the server in not logged in. I remove the drive mapping at the end of each job becuase the drive mapping
remains in tack as long as the SQL agent service stays running and therefore if another job runs and tries to re-create the drive mapping the job will fail.

Make SQL Agent use drive mapping?

Good day,
I'm migrating our current SQL 2k box (running on win 2000) to a new Windows
2003 server. I'm having trouble getting the SQL agent to use the servers dr
ive mapping when running jobs. The odbc driver that I'm using does not supp
ort UNC paths. I know, dri
ve mapping are not cool becuase we have to keep the server logged in but it'
s the only way and it does work on our old box. The weird thing is that I c
an't get this working on the new server. On the old box the SQL Agent is se
t to run as the same accoun
t as the logged in user and it can access the drive mappings fine, it's been
running this way for quite some time. However, on my new box this does not
work...is this a windows 2003 server thing? I'm runing SQL 2k SP3 on both
boxes. Also, the new box i
n not in a domain so the account I'm trying to use is a local admin acount.
Any ideas?Drive mappings are not guaranteed to work when being accessed from a
service. There is no way to force them to work.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.|||I figured it out. I simply added a step in each scheduled job to create and
then delete the drive mapping.
For example, I just use the "net use f: \\server\volume" to create the drive
ampping an then excute the rest of my job steps and then use another step w
ith this command "net use f: /delete" to delete it. Becuase the SQL Agent s
ervice is excuting the comm
and the drive mapping is in it's session and it works every time. It's nice
becuase the drive mapping isn't even seen by the desktop and works when the
server in not logged in. I remove the drive mapping at the end of each job
becuase the drive mapping
remains in tack as long as the SQL agent service stays running and therefore
if another job runs and tries to re-create the drive mapping the job will f
ail.

Majority Node Set cluster

If you want to deploy a SQL 2005 geocluster or a cluster without shared
storage for quorum - there is only Windows 2003 Ent Edition "Majority Node
Set" option.
Majority Node Set implies three nodes for failover - in case one node is
failing.
But I have 2 SQL 2005 nodes and no shared storage - how we can implement in
this situation SQL Majority Node Set Cluster ?
There is possible? There are other possibilities ?
Thank you in advance,
You can look into SQL Server 2005 database mirroring, although for
automatic failover you will still need a witness server. There are
lesser levels of availability (high protection and high performance
operating modes) you can build with SQL 2005 Database mirroring that
only require 2-Nodes, however the failover is always done manually. It
is more of a DR solution than an HA solution. Check out the details
here...
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../dbmirror.mspx
http://www.databasejournal.com/featu...le.php/3440511
You can look into third party solutions such as Neverfail and
SteelEye's LifeKeeper (my employer) which provide both the replication
for data protection and application/system level protection using just
two servers. Another benefit of 3rd party clustering is that it will
work fine with Standard versions of Windows and SQL, Enterprise is not
required.
You can request a 30 day free trial from our website at
www.steeleye.com.
David A. Bermingham, MCSE, MCSA:Messaging
Senior Systems Engineer
www.steeleye.com
anonymous wrote:
> If you want to deploy a SQL 2005 geocluster or a cluster without shared
> storage for quorum - there is only Windows 2003 Ent Edition "Majority Node
> Set" option.
> Majority Node Set implies three nodes for failover - in case one node is
> failing.
> But I have 2 SQL 2005 nodes and no shared storage - how we can implement in
> this situation SQL Majority Node Set Cluster ?
> There is possible? There are other possibilities ?
> Thank you in advance,
|||"anonymous" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:88AA523B-7A76-4E5C-B507-468EF6DF7B02@.microsoft.com...
> If you want to deploy a SQL 2005 geocluster or a cluster without shared
> storage for quorum - there is only Windows 2003 Ent Edition "Majority Node
> Set" option.
> Majority Node Set implies three nodes for failover - in case one node is
> failing.
> But I have 2 SQL 2005 nodes and no shared storage - how we can implement
> in
> this situation SQL Majority Node Set Cluster ?
> There is possible? There are other possibilities ?
MNS covers _only_ the quorum. If you want to cluster SQL 2005, you will need
shared storage for the database and transaction logs.
You can use 3rd party software for this, but if you do, then you must depend
on them for your support, too.
Another option you have with SQL 2005 is to use Database Mirroring. See
books online for additional information.
Russ Kaufmann
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
ClusterHelp.com, a Microsoft Certified Gold Partner
Web http://www.clusterhelp.com
Blog http://msmvps.com/clusterhelp

Majority Node Set and SQL Server 2000

Hello
I was doing some research about Windows 2003 Cluster with Majority Node Set
and SQL Server 2000 EE support.
I found some messages on the newsgroup saying that SQL Server 2000 is not
supported on MNS cluster.
I also read on SQL Server 2000 High Availability book on page 158 that SQL
Server support both cluster types (MNS and Shared Storage).
I also did not find any official documentation on the Microsoft web site
staying that SQL Server 2000 clustering is not supported on a MSCS configured
with MNS.
Because of that I am a lit bit confused.
Anyone know any document com Microsoft where its possible to read that SQL
Server 2000 is not supported on an MNS cluster?
I belive that is not possible to install SQL Server 2000 virtual server on a
MNS quorum because the SQL Server needs a shared storage for the system and
user databases. But It would be possible to install the WIndows 20003 cluster
on a MNS and them install SQL Server 2000 virtual server on a shared storage
(SAN)?
Regards
Carlos Eduardo Selonke de Souza
http://carlos.geekbunker.org
Hi
Have a look at the last post on this
http://groups.google.com.au/group/mi...f897c8231ea9f2
http://groups.google.com.au/group/mi...c936d07ef15cda
http://groups.google.com.au/group/mi...a0220e71bc8008
Regards
--
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/
"Carlos Eduardo Selonke de Souza"
<CarlosEduardoSelonkedeSouza@.discussions.microsoft .com> wrote in message
news:529DAF39-A3E6-4451-AE79-B91695CDFE7F@.microsoft.com...
> Hello
> I was doing some research about Windows 2003 Cluster with Majority Node
> Set
> and SQL Server 2000 EE support.
> I found some messages on the newsgroup saying that SQL Server 2000 is not
> supported on MNS cluster.
> I also read on SQL Server 2000 High Availability book on page 158 that SQL
> Server support both cluster types (MNS and Shared Storage).
> I also did not find any official documentation on the Microsoft web site
> staying that SQL Server 2000 clustering is not supported on a MSCS
> configured
> with MNS.
> Because of that I am a lit bit confused.
> Anyone know any document com Microsoft where its possible to read that SQL
> Server 2000 is not supported on an MNS cluster?
> I belive that is not possible to install SQL Server 2000 virtual server on
> a
> MNS quorum because the SQL Server needs a shared storage for the system
> and
> user databases. But It would be possible to install the WIndows 20003
> cluster
> on a MNS and them install SQL Server 2000 virtual server on a shared
> storage
> (SAN)?
> Regards
> --
> Carlos Eduardo Selonke de Souza
> http://carlos.geekbunker.org

Majority Node Set ?

Hello All
Has anyone created a clustered sql2000 instance on windows 2003 in different
geographical areas? I gather this can be done, but there is no shared
storage as such. I believe one has to replicate data another way.
I am looking for some docs on this before I dive in!
Thanks
Simone
Save yourself the trouble. SQL depends on shared storage for the data as
well as the cluster state. No Majority Node Set for SQL Server.
Geoff N, Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP.
"Simone Harris" <pleasenospam@.here.com> wrote in message
news:%23eWcFPTYFHA.3712@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hello All
> Has anyone created a clustered sql2000 instance on windows 2003 in
> different geographical areas? I gather this can be done, but there is no
> shared storage as such. I believe one has to replicate data another way.
> I am looking for some docs on this before I dive in!
> Thanks
> Simone
>
|||Many thanks
"Geoff N. Hiten" <sqlcraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:efOOlvVYFHA.2664@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Save yourself the trouble. SQL depends on shared storage for the data as
> well as the cluster state. No Majority Node Set for SQL Server.
> Geoff N, Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP.
> "Simone Harris" <pleasenospam@.here.com> wrote in message
> news:%23eWcFPTYFHA.3712@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>

Major SQL Server 2k5 x64 configuration problem

Dear All,
I've just installed two brand new SQL Server servers with Windows 2003
Server 2003 R2 + SP2 and SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition + SP2.
I now need to configure the network protocols for SQL Server on these
machines, but on both machines the SQL Server instances are not showing up in
the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager"
On two other x64 SQL Server 2005 servers which we installed last year I see
a total of 5 icons in the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager":
- SQL Server 2005 Services
- SQL Server 2005 Network configuration (32-bit)
- SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration (32 Bit)
- SQL Server 2005 Network configuration
- SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration
but on the two new servers only the first 3 groups are showing up.
Normaly the x64 Instances are listed in the group as "- SQL Server 2005
Network configuration", but this group is not showing up.
On both servers I only have configured a default (non-named) instance.
Does anybody have a clue what can be wrong or have a hint as where to start
searching for a solution?
Because we posted this question earlier and have not received a single
response I've resorted to crossposting to the following groups:
microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
microsoft.public.sqlserver.tools
microsoft.public.sqlserver.security
microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup
Kind regards,
Tom and Nick, Reeleezee
Solved: through security access failure auditing we saw that user "NETWORK
SERVICE" was getting access denieds for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\90\Shared\sqlmgmprovider.dll.
This was because we ourselves routinely implemented our security lock-down
policy of denying Read/Execute access to "C:\Program Files" and "C:\Program
Files (x86)" to the local USERS group which NETWORK SERVICE belongs to
through being an authenticated user.
We hadn't suspected such a security issue when running the tool as
administrator but apparently the Configuration Tool asks WMI to enumerate the
SQL Server instances and WMI does this under the NETWORK SERVICE account.
(not so for the 32-bit nodes?)
We have had no other issue whatsoever from applying our lock-down policy. I
hope this gets into the MS knowledge base.
Nick
"Nick" wrote:

> Dear All,
> I've just installed two brand new SQL Server servers with Windows 2003
> Server 2003 R2 + SP2 and SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition + SP2.
> I now need to configure the network protocols for SQL Server on these
> machines, but on both machines the SQL Server instances are not showing up in
> the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager"
> On two other x64 SQL Server 2005 servers which we installed last year I see
> a total of 5 icons in the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager":
> - SQL Server 2005 Services
> - SQL Server 2005 Network configuration (32-bit)
> - SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration (32 Bit)
> - SQL Server 2005 Network configuration
> - SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration
> but on the two new servers only the first 3 groups are showing up.
> Normaly the x64 Instances are listed in the group as "- SQL Server 2005
> Network configuration", but this group is not showing up.
> On both servers I only have configured a default (non-named) instance.
> Does anybody have a clue what can be wrong or have a hint as where to start
> searching for a solution?
> Because we posted this question earlier and have not received a single
> response I've resorted to crossposting to the following groups:
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.tools
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.security
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup
>
> Kind regards,
> Tom and Nick, Reeleezee
|||File it as a bug on Connect (Connect.microsoft.com) and it will make it to
the dev team. Whether this makes it all the way to KB article is an
entirely different matter.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Nick" <SaintNick@.nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:0EC7C9F4-EB90-466A-ABC9-BB72E74FECA9@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Solved: through security access failure auditing we saw that user "NETWORK
> SERVICE" was getting access denieds for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\Shared\sqlmgmprovider.dll.
> This was because we ourselves routinely implemented our security lock-down
> policy of denying Read/Execute access to "C:\Program Files" and
> "C:\Program
> Files (x86)" to the local USERS group which NETWORK SERVICE belongs to
> through being an authenticated user.
> We hadn't suspected such a security issue when running the tool as
> administrator but apparently the Configuration Tool asks WMI to enumerate
> the
> SQL Server instances and WMI does this under the NETWORK SERVICE account.
> (not so for the 32-bit nodes?)
> We have had no other issue whatsoever from applying our lock-down policy.
> I
> hope this gets into the MS knowledge base.
> Nick
> "Nick" wrote:
|||Nick,
Another set of problems may arise if you also locked down WINDOWS\SysWOW64
(the 32-bit stuff) or WINDOWS\System32 (the 64-bit stuff). For example, this
can prevent the appropriate version of cscript from running, should you have
a SQL Agent job with a cscript step. (And the error message will not be
obvious.)
RLF
"Nick" <SaintNick@.nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:0EC7C9F4-EB90-466A-ABC9-BB72E74FECA9@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Solved: through security access failure auditing we saw that user "NETWORK
> SERVICE" was getting access denieds for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\Shared\sqlmgmprovider.dll.
> This was because we ourselves routinely implemented our security lock-down
> policy of denying Read/Execute access to "C:\Program Files" and
> "C:\Program
> Files (x86)" to the local USERS group which NETWORK SERVICE belongs to
> through being an authenticated user.
> We hadn't suspected such a security issue when running the tool as
> administrator but apparently the Configuration Tool asks WMI to enumerate
> the
> SQL Server instances and WMI does this under the NETWORK SERVICE account.
> (not so for the 32-bit nodes?)
> We have had no other issue whatsoever from applying our lock-down policy.
> I
> hope this gets into the MS knowledge base.
> Nick
> "Nick" wrote:

Major SQL Server 2k5 x64 configuration problem

Dear All,
I've just installed two brand new SQL Server servers with Windows 2003
Server 2003 R2 + SP2 and SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition + SP2.
I now need to configure the network protocols for SQL Server on these
machines, but on both machines the SQL Server instances are not showing up in
the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager"
On two other x64 SQL Server 2005 servers which we installed last year I see
a total of 5 icons in the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager":
- SQL Server 2005 Services
- SQL Server 2005 Network configuration (32-bit)
- SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration (32 Bit)
- SQL Server 2005 Network configuration
- SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration
but on the two new servers only the first 3 groups are showing up.
Normaly the x64 Instances are listed in the group as "- SQL Server 2005
Network configuration", but this group is not showing up.
On both servers I only have configured a default (non-named) instance.
Does anybody have a clue what can be wrong or have a hint as where to start
searching for a solution?
Because we posted this question earlier and have not received a single
response I've resorted to crossposting to the following groups:
microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
microsoft.public.sqlserver.tools
microsoft.public.sqlserver.security
microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup
Kind regards,
Tom and Nick, Reeleezee
Solved: through security access failure auditing we saw that user "NETWORK
SERVICE" was getting access denieds for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\90\Shared\sqlmgmprovider.dll.
This was because we ourselves routinely implemented our security lock-down
policy of denying Read/Execute access to "C:\Program Files" and "C:\Program
Files (x86)" to the local USERS group which NETWORK SERVICE belongs to
through being an authenticated user.
We hadn't suspected such a security issue when running the tool as
administrator but apparently the Configuration Tool asks WMI to enumerate the
SQL Server instances and WMI does this under the NETWORK SERVICE account.
(not so for the 32-bit nodes?)
We have had no other issue whatsoever from applying our lock-down policy. I
hope this gets into the MS knowledge base.
Nick
"Nick" wrote:

> Dear All,
> I've just installed two brand new SQL Server servers with Windows 2003
> Server 2003 R2 + SP2 and SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition + SP2.
> I now need to configure the network protocols for SQL Server on these
> machines, but on both machines the SQL Server instances are not showing up in
> the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager"
> On two other x64 SQL Server 2005 servers which we installed last year I see
> a total of 5 icons in the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager":
> - SQL Server 2005 Services
> - SQL Server 2005 Network configuration (32-bit)
> - SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration (32 Bit)
> - SQL Server 2005 Network configuration
> - SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration
> but on the two new servers only the first 3 groups are showing up.
> Normaly the x64 Instances are listed in the group as "- SQL Server 2005
> Network configuration", but this group is not showing up.
> On both servers I only have configured a default (non-named) instance.
> Does anybody have a clue what can be wrong or have a hint as where to start
> searching for a solution?
> Because we posted this question earlier and have not received a single
> response I've resorted to crossposting to the following groups:
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.tools
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.security
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup
>
> Kind regards,
> Tom and Nick, Reeleezee
|||File it as a bug on Connect (Connect.microsoft.com) and it will make it to
the dev team. Whether this makes it all the way to KB article is an
entirely different matter.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Nick" <SaintNick@.nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:0EC7C9F4-EB90-466A-ABC9-BB72E74FECA9@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Solved: through security access failure auditing we saw that user "NETWORK
> SERVICE" was getting access denieds for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\Shared\sqlmgmprovider.dll.
> This was because we ourselves routinely implemented our security lock-down
> policy of denying Read/Execute access to "C:\Program Files" and
> "C:\Program
> Files (x86)" to the local USERS group which NETWORK SERVICE belongs to
> through being an authenticated user.
> We hadn't suspected such a security issue when running the tool as
> administrator but apparently the Configuration Tool asks WMI to enumerate
> the
> SQL Server instances and WMI does this under the NETWORK SERVICE account.
> (not so for the 32-bit nodes?)
> We have had no other issue whatsoever from applying our lock-down policy.
> I
> hope this gets into the MS knowledge base.
> Nick
> "Nick" wrote:
|||Nick,
Another set of problems may arise if you also locked down WINDOWS\SysWOW64
(the 32-bit stuff) or WINDOWS\System32 (the 64-bit stuff). For example, this
can prevent the appropriate version of cscript from running, should you have
a SQL Agent job with a cscript step. (And the error message will not be
obvious.)
RLF
"Nick" <SaintNick@.nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:0EC7C9F4-EB90-466A-ABC9-BB72E74FECA9@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Solved: through security access failure auditing we saw that user "NETWORK
> SERVICE" was getting access denieds for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\Shared\sqlmgmprovider.dll.
> This was because we ourselves routinely implemented our security lock-down
> policy of denying Read/Execute access to "C:\Program Files" and
> "C:\Program
> Files (x86)" to the local USERS group which NETWORK SERVICE belongs to
> through being an authenticated user.
> We hadn't suspected such a security issue when running the tool as
> administrator but apparently the Configuration Tool asks WMI to enumerate
> the
> SQL Server instances and WMI does this under the NETWORK SERVICE account.
> (not so for the 32-bit nodes?)
> We have had no other issue whatsoever from applying our lock-down policy.
> I
> hope this gets into the MS knowledge base.
> Nick
> "Nick" wrote:

Major SQL Server 2k5 x64 configuration problem

Dear All,
I've just installed two brand new SQL Server servers with Windows 2003
Server 2003 R2 + SP2 and SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition + SP2.
I now need to configure the network protocols for SQL Server on these
machines, but on both machines the SQL Server instances are not showing up in
the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager"
On two other x64 SQL Server 2005 servers which we installed last year I see
a total of 5 icons in the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager":
- SQL Server 2005 Services
- SQL Server 2005 Network configuration (32-bit)
- SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration (32 Bit)
- SQL Server 2005 Network configuration
- SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration
but on the two new servers only the first 3 groups are showing up.
Normaly the x64 Instances are listed in the group as "- SQL Server 2005
Network configuration", but this group is not showing up.
On both servers I only have configured a default (non-named) instance.
Does anybody have a clue what can be wrong or have a hint as where to start
searching for a solution?
Because we posted this question earlier and have not received a single
response I've resorted to crossposting to the following groups:
microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
microsoft.public.sqlserver.tools
microsoft.public.sqlserver.security
microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup
Kind regards,
Tom and Nick, ReeleezeeSolved: through security access failure auditing we saw that user "NETWORK
SERVICE" was getting access denieds for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\90\Shared\sqlmgmprovider.dll.
This was because we ourselves routinely implemented our security lock-down
policy of denying Read/Execute access to "C:\Program Files" and "C:\Program
Files (x86)" to the local USERS group which NETWORK SERVICE belongs to
through being an authenticated user.
We hadn't suspected such a security issue when running the tool as
administrator but apparently the Configuration Tool asks WMI to enumerate the
SQL Server instances and WMI does this under the NETWORK SERVICE account.
(not so for the 32-bit nodes')
We have had no other issue whatsoever from applying our lock-down policy. I
hope this gets into the MS knowledge base.
Nick
"Nick" wrote:
> Dear All,
> I've just installed two brand new SQL Server servers with Windows 2003
> Server 2003 R2 + SP2 and SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition + SP2.
> I now need to configure the network protocols for SQL Server on these
> machines, but on both machines the SQL Server instances are not showing up in
> the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager"
> On two other x64 SQL Server 2005 servers which we installed last year I see
> a total of 5 icons in the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager":
> - SQL Server 2005 Services
> - SQL Server 2005 Network configuration (32-bit)
> - SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration (32 Bit)
> - SQL Server 2005 Network configuration
> - SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration
> but on the two new servers only the first 3 groups are showing up.
> Normaly the x64 Instances are listed in the group as "- SQL Server 2005
> Network configuration", but this group is not showing up.
> On both servers I only have configured a default (non-named) instance.
> Does anybody have a clue what can be wrong or have a hint as where to start
> searching for a solution?
> Because we posted this question earlier and have not received a single
> response I've resorted to crossposting to the following groups:
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.tools
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.security
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup
>
> Kind regards,
> Tom and Nick, Reeleezee|||File it as a bug on Connect (Connect.microsoft.com) and it will make it to
the dev team. Whether this makes it all the way to KB article is an
entirely different matter.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Nick" <SaintNick@.nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:0EC7C9F4-EB90-466A-ABC9-BB72E74FECA9@.microsoft.com...
> Solved: through security access failure auditing we saw that user "NETWORK
> SERVICE" was getting access denieds for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\Shared\sqlmgmprovider.dll.
> This was because we ourselves routinely implemented our security lock-down
> policy of denying Read/Execute access to "C:\Program Files" and
> "C:\Program
> Files (x86)" to the local USERS group which NETWORK SERVICE belongs to
> through being an authenticated user.
> We hadn't suspected such a security issue when running the tool as
> administrator but apparently the Configuration Tool asks WMI to enumerate
> the
> SQL Server instances and WMI does this under the NETWORK SERVICE account.
> (not so for the 32-bit nodes')
> We have had no other issue whatsoever from applying our lock-down policy.
> I
> hope this gets into the MS knowledge base.
> Nick
> "Nick" wrote:
>> Dear All,
>> I've just installed two brand new SQL Server servers with Windows 2003
>> Server 2003 R2 + SP2 and SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition + SP2.
>> I now need to configure the network protocols for SQL Server on these
>> machines, but on both machines the SQL Server instances are not showing
>> up in
>> the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager"
>> On two other x64 SQL Server 2005 servers which we installed last year I
>> see
>> a total of 5 icons in the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager":
>> - SQL Server 2005 Services
>> - SQL Server 2005 Network configuration (32-bit)
>> - SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration (32 Bit)
>> - SQL Server 2005 Network configuration
>> - SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration
>> but on the two new servers only the first 3 groups are showing up.
>> Normaly the x64 Instances are listed in the group as "- SQL Server 2005
>> Network configuration", but this group is not showing up.
>> On both servers I only have configured a default (non-named) instance.
>> Does anybody have a clue what can be wrong or have a hint as where to
>> start
>> searching for a solution?
>> Because we posted this question earlier and have not received a single
>> response I've resorted to crossposting to the following groups:
>> microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
>> microsoft.public.sqlserver.tools
>> microsoft.public.sqlserver.security
>> microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Tom and Nick, Reeleezee|||Nick,
Another set of problems may arise if you also locked down WINDOWS\SysWOW64
(the 32-bit stuff) or WINDOWS\System32 (the 64-bit stuff). For example, this
can prevent the appropriate version of cscript from running, should you have
a SQL Agent job with a cscript step. (And the error message will not be
obvious.)
RLF
"Nick" <SaintNick@.nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:0EC7C9F4-EB90-466A-ABC9-BB72E74FECA9@.microsoft.com...
> Solved: through security access failure auditing we saw that user "NETWORK
> SERVICE" was getting access denieds for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\Shared\sqlmgmprovider.dll.
> This was because we ourselves routinely implemented our security lock-down
> policy of denying Read/Execute access to "C:\Program Files" and
> "C:\Program
> Files (x86)" to the local USERS group which NETWORK SERVICE belongs to
> through being an authenticated user.
> We hadn't suspected such a security issue when running the tool as
> administrator but apparently the Configuration Tool asks WMI to enumerate
> the
> SQL Server instances and WMI does this under the NETWORK SERVICE account.
> (not so for the 32-bit nodes')
> We have had no other issue whatsoever from applying our lock-down policy.
> I
> hope this gets into the MS knowledge base.
> Nick
> "Nick" wrote:
>> Dear All,
>> I've just installed two brand new SQL Server servers with Windows 2003
>> Server 2003 R2 + SP2 and SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition + SP2.
>> I now need to configure the network protocols for SQL Server on these
>> machines, but on both machines the SQL Server instances are not showing
>> up in
>> the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager"
>> On two other x64 SQL Server 2005 servers which we installed last year I
>> see
>> a total of 5 icons in the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager":
>> - SQL Server 2005 Services
>> - SQL Server 2005 Network configuration (32-bit)
>> - SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration (32 Bit)
>> - SQL Server 2005 Network configuration
>> - SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration
>> but on the two new servers only the first 3 groups are showing up.
>> Normaly the x64 Instances are listed in the group as "- SQL Server 2005
>> Network configuration", but this group is not showing up.
>> On both servers I only have configured a default (non-named) instance.
>> Does anybody have a clue what can be wrong or have a hint as where to
>> start
>> searching for a solution?
>> Because we posted this question earlier and have not received a single
>> response I've resorted to crossposting to the following groups:
>> microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
>> microsoft.public.sqlserver.tools
>> microsoft.public.sqlserver.security
>> microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Tom and Nick, Reeleezee

Major SQL Server 2k5 x64 configuration problem

Dear All,
I've just installed two brand new SQL Server servers with Windows 2003
Server 2003 R2 + SP2 and SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition + SP2.
I now need to configure the network protocols for SQL Server on these
machines, but on both machines the SQL Server instances are not showing up i
n
the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager"
On two other x64 SQL Server 2005 servers which we installed last year I see
a total of 5 icons in the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager":
- SQL Server 2005 Services
- SQL Server 2005 Network configuration (32-bit)
- SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration (32 Bit)
- SQL Server 2005 Network configuration
- SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration
but on the two new servers only the first 3 groups are showing up.
Normaly the x64 Instances are listed in the group as "- SQL Server 2005
Network configuration", but this group is not showing up.
On both servers I only have configured a default (non-named) instance.
Does anybody have a clue what can be wrong or have a hint as where to start
searching for a solution?
Because we posted this question earlier and have not received a single
response I've resorted to crossposting to the following groups:
microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
microsoft.public.sqlserver.tools
microsoft.public.sqlserver.security
microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup
Kind regards,
Tom and Nick, ReeleezeeSolved: through security access failure auditing we saw that user "NETWORK
SERVICE" was getting access denieds for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\90\Shared\sqlmgmprovider.dll.
This was because we ourselves routinely implemented our security lock-down
policy of denying Read/Execute access to "C:\Program Files" and "C:\Program
Files (x86)" to the local USERS group which NETWORK SERVICE belongs to
through being an authenticated user.
We hadn't suspected such a security issue when running the tool as
administrator but apparently the Configuration Tool asks WMI to enumerate th
e
SQL Server instances and WMI does this under the NETWORK SERVICE account.
(not so for the 32-bit nodes')
We have had no other issue whatsoever from applying our lock-down policy. I
hope this gets into the MS knowledge base.
Nick
"Nick" wrote:

> Dear All,
> I've just installed two brand new SQL Server servers with Windows 2003
> Server 2003 R2 + SP2 and SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition + SP2.
> I now need to configure the network protocols for SQL Server on these
> machines, but on both machines the SQL Server instances are not showing up
in
> the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager"
> On two other x64 SQL Server 2005 servers which we installed last year I se
e
> a total of 5 icons in the "SQL Server 2005 Configuration manager":
> - SQL Server 2005 Services
> - SQL Server 2005 Network configuration (32-bit)
> - SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration (32 Bit)
> - SQL Server 2005 Network configuration
> - SQL Server 2005 Native Client Configuration
> but on the two new servers only the first 3 groups are showing up.
> Normaly the x64 Instances are listed in the group as "- SQL Server 2005
> Network configuration", but this group is not showing up.
> On both servers I only have configured a default (non-named) instance.
> Does anybody have a clue what can be wrong or have a hint as where to star
t
> searching for a solution?
> Because we posted this question earlier and have not received a single
> response I've resorted to crossposting to the following groups:
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.tools
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.security
> microsoft.public.sqlserver.setup
>
> Kind regards,
> Tom and Nick, Reeleezee|||File it as a bug on Connect (Connect.microsoft.com) and it will make it to
the dev team. Whether this makes it all the way to KB article is an
entirely different matter.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Nick" <SaintNick@.nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:0EC7C9F4-EB90-466A-ABC9-BB72E74FECA9@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Solved: through security access failure auditing we saw that user "NETWORK
> SERVICE" was getting access denieds for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\Shared\sqlmgmprovider.dll.
> This was because we ourselves routinely implemented our security lock-down
> policy of denying Read/Execute access to "C:\Program Files" and
> "C:\Program
> Files (x86)" to the local USERS group which NETWORK SERVICE belongs to
> through being an authenticated user.
> We hadn't suspected such a security issue when running the tool as
> administrator but apparently the Configuration Tool asks WMI to enumerate
> the
> SQL Server instances and WMI does this under the NETWORK SERVICE account.
> (not so for the 32-bit nodes')
> We have had no other issue whatsoever from applying our lock-down policy.
> I
> hope this gets into the MS knowledge base.
> Nick
> "Nick" wrote:
>|||Nick,
Another set of problems may arise if you also locked down WINDOWS\SysWOW64
(the 32-bit stuff) or WINDOWS\System32 (the 64-bit stuff). For example, this
can prevent the appropriate version of cscript from running, should you have
a SQL Agent job with a cscript step. (And the error message will not be
obvious.)
RLF
"Nick" <SaintNick@.nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:0EC7C9F4-EB90-466A-ABC9-BB72E74FECA9@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Solved: through security access failure auditing we saw that user "NETWORK
> SERVICE" was getting access denieds for C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\90\Shared\sqlmgmprovider.dll.
> This was because we ourselves routinely implemented our security lock-down
> policy of denying Read/Execute access to "C:\Program Files" and
> "C:\Program
> Files (x86)" to the local USERS group which NETWORK SERVICE belongs to
> through being an authenticated user.
> We hadn't suspected such a security issue when running the tool as
> administrator but apparently the Configuration Tool asks WMI to enumerate
> the
> SQL Server instances and WMI does this under the NETWORK SERVICE account.
> (not so for the 32-bit nodes')
> We have had no other issue whatsoever from applying our lock-down policy.
> I
> hope this gets into the MS knowledge base.
> Nick
> "Nick" wrote:
>

Major problems setting up RS and deploying a report

As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what I'm doing.
We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql Server 2000.
We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the tables in SQL
Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard including RS on the
server.
IIS has been installed. When it came time to install SQL2005 I had a few
moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005 Express which seems to
automatically install a named instance. In this case I manually selected a
named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen seemed to imply
that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded (which wouldn't be a
good idea.)
So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI Studio. I copied
over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that I cannot get it
to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are connection errors: 'A
connection could not be made to the report server
http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional information - The attempt
to connect to the report server failed. Check your connection information,
etc.'
I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager. To save time, here
are the settings:
Report Server Status
Instance Name RS2005
Instance ID MSSQL.2
Running
--
Report Server Virtual Directory
Name ReportServer$RS2005
Website Default Website
Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
Name Reports$RS2005
Website Default Web Site
Windows Service Identity
Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
Service Account LocalSystem
Built-in Account Local SystemFirst things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is the portal that
ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people in the local
administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will automatically
be in the RS administrators role.
Deploying is the last thing you should try.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
> As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what I'm doing.
> We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql Server 2000.
> We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the tables in SQL
> Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard including RS on the
> server.
> IIS has been installed. When it came time to install SQL2005 I had a few
> moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005 Express which seems
> to
> automatically install a named instance. In this case I manually selected
> a
> named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen seemed to imply
> that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded (which wouldn't be
> a
> good idea.)
> So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI Studio. I copied
> over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that I cannot get
> it
> to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
> http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are connection errors: 'A
> connection could not be made to the report server
> http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional information - The
> attempt
> to connect to the report server failed. Check your connection
> information,
> etc.'
> I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager. To save time,
> here
> are the settings:
> Report Server Status
> Instance Name RS2005
> Instance ID MSSQL.2
> Running
> --
> Report Server Virtual Directory
> Name ReportServer$RS2005
> Website Default Website
> Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
> Name Reports$RS2005
> Website Default Web Site
> Windows Service Identity
> Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
> Service Account LocalSystem
> Built-in Account Local System
>|||No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another machine. Always
'Page cannot be found.'
(Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
As far as I know I'm an administrator.
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is the portal that
> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people in the local
> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will automatically
> be in the RS administrators role.
> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>
> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what I'm doing.
> >
> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql Server 2000.
> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the tables in SQL
> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard including RS on the
> > server.
> >
> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install SQL2005 I had a few
> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005 Express which seems
> > to
> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I manually selected
> > a
> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen seemed to imply
> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded (which wouldn't be
> > a
> > good idea.)
> >
> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI Studio. I copied
> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that I cannot get
> > it
> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are connection errors: 'A
> > connection could not be made to the report server
> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional information - The
> > attempt
> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your connection
> > information,
> > etc.'
> >
> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager. To save time,
> > here
> > are the settings:
> > Report Server Status
> > Instance Name RS2005
> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
> > Running
> >
> > --
> >
> > Report Server Virtual Directory
> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
> > Website Default Website
> >
> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
> > Name Reports$RS2005
> > Website Default Web Site
> >
> > Windows Service Identity
> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
> > Service Account LocalSystem
> > Built-in Account Local System
> >
> >
>
>|||By what you posted it seems that you have it installed in the default
website in which case this should be working. Open up IIS adminstrator
(whatever it is called) and see if you have the websites.
By the way, you did not need to install SQL 2005. RS 2005 can use SQL 2000
for its object/metadata storage. You have to have a license for SQL Server
2005 but it does not need to be installed.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BD671A1B-82BA-466C-B6A0-7A73EB6B3FFA@.microsoft.com...
> No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another machine.
> Always
> 'Page cannot be found.'
> (Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
> http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
> As far as I know I'm an administrator.
> "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is the portal
>> that
>> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
>> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
>> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
>> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people in the local
>> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will
>> automatically
>> be in the RS administrators role.
>> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
>>
>> --
>> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>>
>> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
>> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what I'm doing.
>> >
>> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql Server
>> > 2000.
>> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the tables in SQL
>> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard including RS on
>> > the
>> > server.
>> >
>> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install SQL2005 I had a
>> > few
>> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005 Express which
>> > seems
>> > to
>> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I manually
>> > selected
>> > a
>> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen seemed to
>> > imply
>> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded (which wouldn't
>> > be
>> > a
>> > good idea.)
>> >
>> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI Studio. I
>> > copied
>> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that I cannot
>> > get
>> > it
>> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
>> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are connection errors:
>> > 'A
>> > connection could not be made to the report server
>> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional information - The
>> > attempt
>> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your connection
>> > information,
>> > etc.'
>> >
>> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager. To save time,
>> > here
>> > are the settings:
>> > Report Server Status
>> > Instance Name RS2005
>> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
>> > Running
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > Report Server Virtual Directory
>> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
>> > Website Default Website
>> >
>> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
>> > Name Reports$RS2005
>> > Website Default Web Site
>> >
>> > Windows Service Identity
>> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
>> > Service Account LocalSystem
>> > Built-in Account Local System
>> >
>> >
>>|||By 'websites' do you mean the report directories under Default Web Site?
I have 4 report directories under the Default Web Site: ReportServer,
Reports, Reports$RS2005, and ReportServer$RS2005. The first 2 are empty.
The last two are full of what appears to be asp.net related files and
directories.
(I admit that I was under the impression that RS2005 needed a 2005 db to
store its data.)
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> By what you posted it seems that you have it installed in the default
> website in which case this should be working. Open up IIS adminstrator
> (whatever it is called) and see if you have the websites.
> By the way, you did not need to install SQL 2005. RS 2005 can use SQL 2000
> for its object/metadata storage. You have to have a license for SQL Server
> 2005 but it does not need to be installed.
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:BD671A1B-82BA-466C-B6A0-7A73EB6B3FFA@.microsoft.com...
> > No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another machine.
> > Always
> > 'Page cannot be found.'
> >
> > (Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
> > http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
> >
> > As far as I know I'm an administrator.
> >
> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is the portal
> >> that
> >> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
> >>
> >> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
> >>
> >> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
> >>
> >> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people in the local
> >> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will
> >> automatically
> >> be in the RS administrators role.
> >>
> >> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
> >> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what I'm doing.
> >> >
> >> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql Server
> >> > 2000.
> >> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the tables in SQL
> >> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard including RS on
> >> > the
> >> > server.
> >> >
> >> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install SQL2005 I had a
> >> > few
> >> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005 Express which
> >> > seems
> >> > to
> >> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I manually
> >> > selected
> >> > a
> >> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen seemed to
> >> > imply
> >> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded (which wouldn't
> >> > be
> >> > a
> >> > good idea.)
> >> >
> >> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI Studio. I
> >> > copied
> >> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that I cannot
> >> > get
> >> > it
> >> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are connection errors:
> >> > 'A
> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional information - The
> >> > attempt
> >> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your connection
> >> > information,
> >> > etc.'
> >> >
> >> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager. To save time,
> >> > here
> >> > are the settings:
> >> > Report Server Status
> >> > Instance Name RS2005
> >> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
> >> > Running
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> >
> >> > Report Server Virtual Directory
> >> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
> >> > Website Default Website
> >> >
> >> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
> >> > Name Reports$RS2005
> >> > Website Default Web Site
> >> >
> >> > Windows Service Identity
> >> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
> >> > Service Account LocalSystem
> >> > Built-in Account Local System
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>|||You have somehow gotten a totally messed up install. You should not have
four sites. Try this:
http://yourservername/Reports$RS2005/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D65947A7-6E16-4331-8810-D59BBEE1487C@.microsoft.com...
> By 'websites' do you mean the report directories under Default Web Site?
> I have 4 report directories under the Default Web Site: ReportServer,
> Reports, Reports$RS2005, and ReportServer$RS2005. The first 2 are empty.
> The last two are full of what appears to be asp.net related files and
> directories.
> (I admit that I was under the impression that RS2005 needed a 2005 db to
> store its data.)
> "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> By what you posted it seems that you have it installed in the default
>> website in which case this should be working. Open up IIS adminstrator
>> (whatever it is called) and see if you have the websites.
>> By the way, you did not need to install SQL 2005. RS 2005 can use SQL
>> 2000
>> for its object/metadata storage. You have to have a license for SQL
>> Server
>> 2005 but it does not need to be installed.
>>
>> --
>> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:BD671A1B-82BA-466C-B6A0-7A73EB6B3FFA@.microsoft.com...
>> > No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another machine.
>> > Always
>> > 'Page cannot be found.'
>> >
>> > (Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
>> > http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
>> >
>> > As far as I know I'm an administrator.
>> >
>> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is the portal
>> >> that
>> >> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
>> >>
>> >> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
>> >>
>> >> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
>> >>
>> >> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people in the
>> >> local
>> >> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will
>> >> automatically
>> >> be in the RS administrators role.
>> >>
>> >> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what I'm
>> >> > doing.
>> >> >
>> >> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql Server
>> >> > 2000.
>> >> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the tables in
>> >> > SQL
>> >> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard including RS
>> >> > on
>> >> > the
>> >> > server.
>> >> >
>> >> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install SQL2005 I had
>> >> > a
>> >> > few
>> >> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005 Express which
>> >> > seems
>> >> > to
>> >> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I manually
>> >> > selected
>> >> > a
>> >> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen seemed to
>> >> > imply
>> >> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded (which
>> >> > wouldn't
>> >> > be
>> >> > a
>> >> > good idea.)
>> >> >
>> >> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI Studio. I
>> >> > copied
>> >> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that I cannot
>> >> > get
>> >> > it
>> >> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
>> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are connection
>> >> > errors:
>> >> > 'A
>> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
>> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional information - The
>> >> > attempt
>> >> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your connection
>> >> > information,
>> >> > etc.'
>> >> >
>> >> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager. To save
>> >> > time,
>> >> > here
>> >> > are the settings:
>> >> > Report Server Status
>> >> > Instance Name RS2005
>> >> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
>> >> > Running
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> >
>> >> > Report Server Virtual Directory
>> >> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
>> >> > Website Default Website
>> >> >
>> >> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
>> >> > Name Reports$RS2005
>> >> > Website Default Web Site
>> >> >
>> >> > Windows Service Identity
>> >> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
>> >> > Service Account LocalSystem
>> >> > Built-in Account Local System
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>|||I've already tried that and it doesn't work. Also tried deleting the empty
directories. (I might have created them when I was messing with the
Reporting Services Configuration Manager.)
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> You have somehow gotten a totally messed up install. You should not have
> four sites. Try this:
> http://yourservername/Reports$RS2005/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D65947A7-6E16-4331-8810-D59BBEE1487C@.microsoft.com...
> > By 'websites' do you mean the report directories under Default Web Site?
> >
> > I have 4 report directories under the Default Web Site: ReportServer,
> > Reports, Reports$RS2005, and ReportServer$RS2005. The first 2 are empty.
> > The last two are full of what appears to be asp.net related files and
> > directories.
> >
> > (I admit that I was under the impression that RS2005 needed a 2005 db to
> > store its data.)
> >
> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >> By what you posted it seems that you have it installed in the default
> >> website in which case this should be working. Open up IIS adminstrator
> >> (whatever it is called) and see if you have the websites.
> >>
> >> By the way, you did not need to install SQL 2005. RS 2005 can use SQL
> >> 2000
> >> for its object/metadata storage. You have to have a license for SQL
> >> Server
> >> 2005 but it does not need to be installed.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >>
> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:BD671A1B-82BA-466C-B6A0-7A73EB6B3FFA@.microsoft.com...
> >> > No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another machine.
> >> > Always
> >> > 'Page cannot be found.'
> >> >
> >> > (Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
> >> > http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
> >> >
> >> > As far as I know I'm an administrator.
> >> >
> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is the portal
> >> >> that
> >> >> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
> >> >>
> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
> >> >>
> >> >> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
> >> >>
> >> >> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people in the
> >> >> local
> >> >> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will
> >> >> automatically
> >> >> be in the RS administrators role.
> >> >>
> >> >> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what I'm
> >> >> > doing.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql Server
> >> >> > 2000.
> >> >> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the tables in
> >> >> > SQL
> >> >> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard including RS
> >> >> > on
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > server.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install SQL2005 I had
> >> >> > a
> >> >> > few
> >> >> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005 Express which
> >> >> > seems
> >> >> > to
> >> >> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I manually
> >> >> > selected
> >> >> > a
> >> >> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen seemed to
> >> >> > imply
> >> >> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded (which
> >> >> > wouldn't
> >> >> > be
> >> >> > a
> >> >> > good idea.)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI Studio. I
> >> >> > copied
> >> >> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that I cannot
> >> >> > get
> >> >> > it
> >> >> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are connection
> >> >> > errors:
> >> >> > 'A
> >> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional information - The
> >> >> > attempt
> >> >> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your connection
> >> >> > information,
> >> >> > etc.'
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager. To save
> >> >> > time,
> >> >> > here
> >> >> > are the settings:
> >> >> > Report Server Status
> >> >> > Instance Name RS2005
> >> >> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
> >> >> > Running
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Report Server Virtual Directory
> >> >> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
> >> >> > Website Default Website
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
> >> >> > Name Reports$RS2005
> >> >> > Website Default Web Site
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Windows Service Identity
> >> >> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
> >> >> > Service Account LocalSystem
> >> >> > Built-in Account Local System
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>|||Maybe I should just uninstall everything and start over.
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> You have somehow gotten a totally messed up install. You should not have
> four sites. Try this:
> http://yourservername/Reports$RS2005/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D65947A7-6E16-4331-8810-D59BBEE1487C@.microsoft.com...
> > By 'websites' do you mean the report directories under Default Web Site?
> >
> > I have 4 report directories under the Default Web Site: ReportServer,
> > Reports, Reports$RS2005, and ReportServer$RS2005. The first 2 are empty.
> > The last two are full of what appears to be asp.net related files and
> > directories.
> >
> > (I admit that I was under the impression that RS2005 needed a 2005 db to
> > store its data.)
> >
> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >> By what you posted it seems that you have it installed in the default
> >> website in which case this should be working. Open up IIS adminstrator
> >> (whatever it is called) and see if you have the websites.
> >>
> >> By the way, you did not need to install SQL 2005. RS 2005 can use SQL
> >> 2000
> >> for its object/metadata storage. You have to have a license for SQL
> >> Server
> >> 2005 but it does not need to be installed.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >>
> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:BD671A1B-82BA-466C-B6A0-7A73EB6B3FFA@.microsoft.com...
> >> > No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another machine.
> >> > Always
> >> > 'Page cannot be found.'
> >> >
> >> > (Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
> >> > http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
> >> >
> >> > As far as I know I'm an administrator.
> >> >
> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is the portal
> >> >> that
> >> >> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
> >> >>
> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
> >> >>
> >> >> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
> >> >>
> >> >> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people in the
> >> >> local
> >> >> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will
> >> >> automatically
> >> >> be in the RS administrators role.
> >> >>
> >> >> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what I'm
> >> >> > doing.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql Server
> >> >> > 2000.
> >> >> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the tables in
> >> >> > SQL
> >> >> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard including RS
> >> >> > on
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > server.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install SQL2005 I had
> >> >> > a
> >> >> > few
> >> >> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005 Express which
> >> >> > seems
> >> >> > to
> >> >> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I manually
> >> >> > selected
> >> >> > a
> >> >> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen seemed to
> >> >> > imply
> >> >> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded (which
> >> >> > wouldn't
> >> >> > be
> >> >> > a
> >> >> > good idea.)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI Studio. I
> >> >> > copied
> >> >> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that I cannot
> >> >> > get
> >> >> > it
> >> >> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are connection
> >> >> > errors:
> >> >> > 'A
> >> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional information - The
> >> >> > attempt
> >> >> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your connection
> >> >> > information,
> >> >> > etc.'
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager. To save
> >> >> > time,
> >> >> > here
> >> >> > are the settings:
> >> >> > Report Server Status
> >> >> > Instance Name RS2005
> >> >> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
> >> >> > Running
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Report Server Virtual Directory
> >> >> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
> >> >> > Website Default Website
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
> >> >> > Name Reports$RS2005
> >> >> > Website Default Web Site
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Windows Service Identity
> >> >> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
> >> >> > Service Account LocalSystem
> >> >> > Built-in Account Local System
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>|||My suggestion is to do that and this time do not create SQL Server 2005
database. Just point it to an existing SQL Server 2000 db that you have.
There is no advantage to the added complexity of what you were doing.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F5CFAD3D-6221-4DAB-923B-863B88E0D5BA@.microsoft.com...
> Maybe I should just uninstall everything and start over.
> "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> You have somehow gotten a totally messed up install. You should not have
>> four sites. Try this:
>> http://yourservername/Reports$RS2005/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
>>
>> --
>> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:D65947A7-6E16-4331-8810-D59BBEE1487C@.microsoft.com...
>> > By 'websites' do you mean the report directories under Default Web
>> > Site?
>> >
>> > I have 4 report directories under the Default Web Site: ReportServer,
>> > Reports, Reports$RS2005, and ReportServer$RS2005. The first 2 are
>> > empty.
>> > The last two are full of what appears to be asp.net related files and
>> > directories.
>> >
>> > (I admit that I was under the impression that RS2005 needed a 2005 db
>> > to
>> > store its data.)
>> >
>> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> By what you posted it seems that you have it installed in the default
>> >> website in which case this should be working. Open up IIS adminstrator
>> >> (whatever it is called) and see if you have the websites.
>> >>
>> >> By the way, you did not need to install SQL 2005. RS 2005 can use SQL
>> >> 2000
>> >> for its object/metadata storage. You have to have a license for SQL
>> >> Server
>> >> 2005 but it does not need to be installed.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >>
>> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:BD671A1B-82BA-466C-B6A0-7A73EB6B3FFA@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another machine.
>> >> > Always
>> >> > 'Page cannot be found.'
>> >> >
>> >> > (Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
>> >> > http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
>> >> >
>> >> > As far as I know I'm an administrator.
>> >> >
>> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is the
>> >> >> portal
>> >> >> that
>> >> >> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
>> >> >>
>> >> >> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people in the
>> >> >> local
>> >> >> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will
>> >> >> automatically
>> >> >> be in the RS administrators role.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> >> >> message
>> >> >> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
>> >> >> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what I'm
>> >> >> > doing.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql
>> >> >> > Server
>> >> >> > 2000.
>> >> >> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the tables
>> >> >> > in
>> >> >> > SQL
>> >> >> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard including
>> >> >> > RS
>> >> >> > on
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > server.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install SQL2005 I
>> >> >> > had
>> >> >> > a
>> >> >> > few
>> >> >> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005 Express
>> >> >> > which
>> >> >> > seems
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I manually
>> >> >> > selected
>> >> >> > a
>> >> >> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen seemed
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > imply
>> >> >> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded (which
>> >> >> > wouldn't
>> >> >> > be
>> >> >> > a
>> >> >> > good idea.)
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI Studio.
>> >> >> > I
>> >> >> > copied
>> >> >> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that I
>> >> >> > cannot
>> >> >> > get
>> >> >> > it
>> >> >> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
>> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are connection
>> >> >> > errors:
>> >> >> > 'A
>> >> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
>> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional information -
>> >> >> > The
>> >> >> > attempt
>> >> >> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your connection
>> >> >> > information,
>> >> >> > etc.'
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager. To save
>> >> >> > time,
>> >> >> > here
>> >> >> > are the settings:
>> >> >> > Report Server Status
>> >> >> > Instance Name RS2005
>> >> >> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
>> >> >> > Running
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Report Server Virtual Directory
>> >> >> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
>> >> >> > Website Default Website
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
>> >> >> > Name Reports$RS2005
>> >> >> > Website Default Web Site
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Windows Service Identity
>> >> >> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
>> >> >> > Service Account LocalSystem
>> >> >> > Built-in Account Local System
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>|||Ok I did that and now I've got new problems.
I reinstalled without creating a SQL2005 db. I went through the RS Config
manager using only defaults and the DBs appear to have been created
successfully under the SQL2000 server.
Now when I try to deploy the report using VS/BI, I get an error: A
connection could not be made to the report server
http://localhost/ReportServer. Additional Information: Client found response
content type of 'text/html; charset=utf-8', but expected 'text/xml'. The
request failed with the error message: '
The rest is too long to type here (looks like a big piece of HTML or XML)
but the system event log is full of error messages like this: The
application-specific permission settings do not grant Local Activation
permission for the COM Server application with CLSID
{BA126AD1-2166-11D1-B1D0-00805FC1270E}
to the user NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE SID (S-1-5-20). This security
permission can be modified using the Component Services administrative tool.
Could this have something to do with the fact that I wrote the report on my
desktop and then copied the entire project over to the server?
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> My suggestion is to do that and this time do not create SQL Server 2005
> database. Just point it to an existing SQL Server 2000 db that you have.
> There is no advantage to the added complexity of what you were doing.
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:F5CFAD3D-6221-4DAB-923B-863B88E0D5BA@.microsoft.com...
> > Maybe I should just uninstall everything and start over.
> >
> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >> You have somehow gotten a totally messed up install. You should not have
> >> four sites. Try this:
> >> http://yourservername/Reports$RS2005/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >>
> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:D65947A7-6E16-4331-8810-D59BBEE1487C@.microsoft.com...
> >> > By 'websites' do you mean the report directories under Default Web
> >> > Site?
> >> >
> >> > I have 4 report directories under the Default Web Site: ReportServer,
> >> > Reports, Reports$RS2005, and ReportServer$RS2005. The first 2 are
> >> > empty.
> >> > The last two are full of what appears to be asp.net related files and
> >> > directories.
> >> >
> >> > (I admit that I was under the impression that RS2005 needed a 2005 db
> >> > to
> >> > store its data.)
> >> >
> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> By what you posted it seems that you have it installed in the default
> >> >> website in which case this should be working. Open up IIS adminstrator
> >> >> (whatever it is called) and see if you have the websites.
> >> >>
> >> >> By the way, you did not need to install SQL 2005. RS 2005 can use SQL
> >> >> 2000
> >> >> for its object/metadata storage. You have to have a license for SQL
> >> >> Server
> >> >> 2005 but it does not need to be installed.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >>
> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:BD671A1B-82BA-466C-B6A0-7A73EB6B3FFA@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> > No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another machine.
> >> >> > Always
> >> >> > 'Page cannot be found.'
> >> >> >
> >> >> > (Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
> >> >> > http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > As far as I know I'm an administrator.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is the
> >> >> >> portal
> >> >> >> that
> >> >> >> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people in the
> >> >> >> local
> >> >> >> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will
> >> >> >> automatically
> >> >> >> be in the RS administrators role.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> >> >> >> message
> >> >> >> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> >> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what I'm
> >> >> >> > doing.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql
> >> >> >> > Server
> >> >> >> > 2000.
> >> >> >> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the tables
> >> >> >> > in
> >> >> >> > SQL
> >> >> >> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard including
> >> >> >> > RS
> >> >> >> > on
> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> > server.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install SQL2005 I
> >> >> >> > had
> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> > few
> >> >> >> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005 Express
> >> >> >> > which
> >> >> >> > seems
> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I manually
> >> >> >> > selected
> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen seemed
> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> > imply
> >> >> >> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded (which
> >> >> >> > wouldn't
> >> >> >> > be
> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> > good idea.)
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI Studio.
> >> >> >> > I
> >> >> >> > copied
> >> >> >> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that I
> >> >> >> > cannot
> >> >> >> > get
> >> >> >> > it
> >> >> >> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are connection
> >> >> >> > errors:
> >> >> >> > 'A
> >> >> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional information -
> >> >> >> > The
> >> >> >> > attempt
> >> >> >> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your connection
> >> >> >> > information,
> >> >> >> > etc.'
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager. To save
> >> >> >> > time,
> >> >> >> > here
> >> >> >> > are the settings:
> >> >> >> > Report Server Status
> >> >> >> > Instance Name RS2005
> >> >> >> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
> >> >> >> > Running
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Report Server Virtual Directory
> >> >> >> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
> >> >> >> > Website Default Website
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
> >> >> >> > Name Reports$RS2005
> >> >> >> > Website Default Web Site
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Windows Service Identity
> >> >> >> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
> >> >> >> > Service Account LocalSystem
> >> >> >> > Built-in Account Local System
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>|||Can you see Report Manager. That is the first thing you need to do.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:22ACC894-897A-4C62-A25D-AB116C07BD7D@.microsoft.com...
> Ok I did that and now I've got new problems.
> I reinstalled without creating a SQL2005 db. I went through the RS Config
> manager using only defaults and the DBs appear to have been created
> successfully under the SQL2000 server.
> Now when I try to deploy the report using VS/BI, I get an error: A
> connection could not be made to the report server
> http://localhost/ReportServer. Additional Information: Client found
> response
> content type of 'text/html; charset=utf-8', but expected 'text/xml'. The
> request failed with the error message: '
> The rest is too long to type here (looks like a big piece of HTML or XML)
> but the system event log is full of error messages like this: The
> application-specific permission settings do not grant Local Activation
> permission for the COM Server application with CLSID
> {BA126AD1-2166-11D1-B1D0-00805FC1270E}
> to the user NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE SID (S-1-5-20). This security
> permission can be modified using the Component Services administrative
> tool.
> Could this have something to do with the fact that I wrote the report on
> my
> desktop and then copied the entire project over to the server?
> "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> My suggestion is to do that and this time do not create SQL Server 2005
>> database. Just point it to an existing SQL Server 2000 db that you have.
>> There is no advantage to the added complexity of what you were doing.
>>
>> --
>> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:F5CFAD3D-6221-4DAB-923B-863B88E0D5BA@.microsoft.com...
>> > Maybe I should just uninstall everything and start over.
>> >
>> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> You have somehow gotten a totally messed up install. You should not
>> >> have
>> >> four sites. Try this:
>> >> http://yourservername/Reports$RS2005/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >>
>> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:D65947A7-6E16-4331-8810-D59BBEE1487C@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > By 'websites' do you mean the report directories under Default Web
>> >> > Site?
>> >> >
>> >> > I have 4 report directories under the Default Web Site:
>> >> > ReportServer,
>> >> > Reports, Reports$RS2005, and ReportServer$RS2005. The first 2 are
>> >> > empty.
>> >> > The last two are full of what appears to be asp.net related files
>> >> > and
>> >> > directories.
>> >> >
>> >> > (I admit that I was under the impression that RS2005 needed a 2005
>> >> > db
>> >> > to
>> >> > store its data.)
>> >> >
>> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> By what you posted it seems that you have it installed in the
>> >> >> default
>> >> >> website in which case this should be working. Open up IIS
>> >> >> adminstrator
>> >> >> (whatever it is called) and see if you have the websites.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> By the way, you did not need to install SQL 2005. RS 2005 can use
>> >> >> SQL
>> >> >> 2000
>> >> >> for its object/metadata storage. You have to have a license for SQL
>> >> >> Server
>> >> >> 2005 but it does not need to be installed.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> >> >> message
>> >> >> news:BD671A1B-82BA-466C-B6A0-7A73EB6B3FFA@.microsoft.com...
>> >> >> > No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another
>> >> >> > machine.
>> >> >> > Always
>> >> >> > 'Page cannot be found.'
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > (Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
>> >> >> > http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > As far as I know I'm an administrator.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is the
>> >> >> >> portal
>> >> >> >> that
>> >> >> >> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people in
>> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> local
>> >> >> >> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will
>> >> >> >> automatically
>> >> >> >> be in the RS administrators role.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --
>> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> >> >> >> message
>> >> >> >> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
>> >> >> >> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what
>> >> >> >> > I'm
>> >> >> >> > doing.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql
>> >> >> >> > Server
>> >> >> >> > 2000.
>> >> >> >> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the
>> >> >> >> > tables
>> >> >> >> > in
>> >> >> >> > SQL
>> >> >> >> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard
>> >> >> >> > including
>> >> >> >> > RS
>> >> >> >> > on
>> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> > server.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install SQL2005
>> >> >> >> > I
>> >> >> >> > had
>> >> >> >> > a
>> >> >> >> > few
>> >> >> >> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005 Express
>> >> >> >> > which
>> >> >> >> > seems
>> >> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I
>> >> >> >> > manually
>> >> >> >> > selected
>> >> >> >> > a
>> >> >> >> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen
>> >> >> >> > seemed
>> >> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> > imply
>> >> >> >> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded (which
>> >> >> >> > wouldn't
>> >> >> >> > be
>> >> >> >> > a
>> >> >> >> > good idea.)
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI
>> >> >> >> > Studio.
>> >> >> >> > I
>> >> >> >> > copied
>> >> >> >> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that I
>> >> >> >> > cannot
>> >> >> >> > get
>> >> >> >> > it
>> >> >> >> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
>> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are
>> >> >> >> > connection
>> >> >> >> > errors:
>> >> >> >> > 'A
>> >> >> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
>> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional
>> >> >> >> > information -
>> >> >> >> > The
>> >> >> >> > attempt
>> >> >> >> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your connection
>> >> >> >> > information,
>> >> >> >> > etc.'
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager. To
>> >> >> >> > save
>> >> >> >> > time,
>> >> >> >> > here
>> >> >> >> > are the settings:
>> >> >> >> > Report Server Status
>> >> >> >> > Instance Name RS2005
>> >> >> >> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
>> >> >> >> > Running
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > --
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Report Server Virtual Directory
>> >> >> >> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
>> >> >> >> > Website Default Website
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
>> >> >> >> > Name Reports$RS2005
>> >> >> >> > Website Default Web Site
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Windows Service Identity
>> >> >> >> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
>> >> >> >> > Service Account LocalSystem
>> >> >> >> > Built-in Account Local System
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>|||Now what. Am I forgetting some option when running RS off SQL 2000? Got a
very different error.
The XML page cannot be displayed
Cannot view XML input using XSL style sheet. Please correct the error and
then click the Refresh button, or try again later.
----
A name was started with an invalid character. Error processing resource
'http://ussog-s-a000002/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx'...
<%@. Page language="c#" Codebehind="Folder.aspx.cs" AutoEventWireup="false"
Inherits="Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.Folde
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> Can you see Report Manager. That is the first thing you need to do.
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:22ACC894-897A-4C62-A25D-AB116C07BD7D@.microsoft.com...
> > Ok I did that and now I've got new problems.
> >
> > I reinstalled without creating a SQL2005 db. I went through the RS Config
> > manager using only defaults and the DBs appear to have been created
> > successfully under the SQL2000 server.
> >
> > Now when I try to deploy the report using VS/BI, I get an error: A
> > connection could not be made to the report server
> > http://localhost/ReportServer. Additional Information: Client found
> > response
> > content type of 'text/html; charset=utf-8', but expected 'text/xml'. The
> > request failed with the error message: '
> >
> > The rest is too long to type here (looks like a big piece of HTML or XML)
> > but the system event log is full of error messages like this: The
> > application-specific permission settings do not grant Local Activation
> > permission for the COM Server application with CLSID
> > {BA126AD1-2166-11D1-B1D0-00805FC1270E}
> > to the user NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE SID (S-1-5-20). This security
> > permission can be modified using the Component Services administrative
> > tool.
> >
> > Could this have something to do with the fact that I wrote the report on
> > my
> > desktop and then copied the entire project over to the server?
> >
> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >> My suggestion is to do that and this time do not create SQL Server 2005
> >> database. Just point it to an existing SQL Server 2000 db that you have.
> >> There is no advantage to the added complexity of what you were doing.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >>
> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:F5CFAD3D-6221-4DAB-923B-863B88E0D5BA@.microsoft.com...
> >> > Maybe I should just uninstall everything and start over.
> >> >
> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> You have somehow gotten a totally messed up install. You should not
> >> >> have
> >> >> four sites. Try this:
> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports$RS2005/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >>
> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:D65947A7-6E16-4331-8810-D59BBEE1487C@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> > By 'websites' do you mean the report directories under Default Web
> >> >> > Site?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I have 4 report directories under the Default Web Site:
> >> >> > ReportServer,
> >> >> > Reports, Reports$RS2005, and ReportServer$RS2005. The first 2 are
> >> >> > empty.
> >> >> > The last two are full of what appears to be asp.net related files
> >> >> > and
> >> >> > directories.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > (I admit that I was under the impression that RS2005 needed a 2005
> >> >> > db
> >> >> > to
> >> >> > store its data.)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> By what you posted it seems that you have it installed in the
> >> >> >> default
> >> >> >> website in which case this should be working. Open up IIS
> >> >> >> adminstrator
> >> >> >> (whatever it is called) and see if you have the websites.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> By the way, you did not need to install SQL 2005. RS 2005 can use
> >> >> >> SQL
> >> >> >> 2000
> >> >> >> for its object/metadata storage. You have to have a license for SQL
> >> >> >> Server
> >> >> >> 2005 but it does not need to be installed.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> >> >> >> message
> >> >> >> news:BD671A1B-82BA-466C-B6A0-7A73EB6B3FFA@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> >> > No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another
> >> >> >> > machine.
> >> >> >> > Always
> >> >> >> > 'Page cannot be found.'
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > (Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
> >> >> >> > http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > As far as I know I'm an administrator.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is the
> >> >> >> >> portal
> >> >> >> >> that
> >> >> >> >> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people in
> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> local
> >> >> >> >> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will
> >> >> >> >> automatically
> >> >> >> >> be in the RS administrators role.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> >> >> >> >> message
> >> >> >> >> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> >> >> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what
> >> >> >> >> > I'm
> >> >> >> >> > doing.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql
> >> >> >> >> > Server
> >> >> >> >> > 2000.
> >> >> >> >> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the
> >> >> >> >> > tables
> >> >> >> >> > in
> >> >> >> >> > SQL
> >> >> >> >> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard
> >> >> >> >> > including
> >> >> >> >> > RS
> >> >> >> >> > on
> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> > server.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install SQL2005
> >> >> >> >> > I
> >> >> >> >> > had
> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> > few
> >> >> >> >> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005 Express
> >> >> >> >> > which
> >> >> >> >> > seems
> >> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> >> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I
> >> >> >> >> > manually
> >> >> >> >> > selected
> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen
> >> >> >> >> > seemed
> >> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> >> > imply
> >> >> >> >> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded (which
> >> >> >> >> > wouldn't
> >> >> >> >> > be
> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> > good idea.)
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI
> >> >> >> >> > Studio.
> >> >> >> >> > I
> >> >> >> >> > copied
> >> >> >> >> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that I
> >> >> >> >> > cannot
> >> >> >> >> > get
> >> >> >> >> > it
> >> >> >> >> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
> >> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are
> >> >> >> >> > connection
> >> >> >> >> > errors:
> >> >> >> >> > 'A
> >> >> >> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
> >> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional
> >> >> >> >> > information -
> >> >> >> >> > The
> >> >> >> >> > attempt
> >> >> >> >> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your connection
> >> >> >> >> > information,
> >> >> >> >> > etc.'
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager. To
> >> >> >> >> > save
> >> >> >> >> > time,
> >> >> >> >> > here
> >> >> >> >> > are the settings:
> >> >> >> >> > Report Server Status
> >> >> >> >> > Instance Name RS2005
> >> >> >> >> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
> >> >> >> >> > Running
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Report Server Virtual Directory
> >> >> >> >> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
> >> >> >> >> > Website Default Website
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
> >> >> >> >> > Name Reports$RS2005
> >> >> >> >> > Website Default Web Site
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Windows Service Identity
> >> >> >> >> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
> >> >> >> >> > Service Account LocalSystem
> >> >> >> >> > Built-in Account Local System
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>|||If the RS configuration tool shows everything good it should not be a
problem.
I have never seen this error.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:23A2FD03-F2FF-4D94-A851-C2C6921C0A4A@.microsoft.com...
> Now what. Am I forgetting some option when running RS off SQL 2000? Got
> a
> very different error.
> The XML page cannot be displayed
> Cannot view XML input using XSL style sheet. Please correct the error and
> then click the Refresh button, or try again later.
>
> ----
> A name was started with an invalid character. Error processing resource
> 'http://ussog-s-a000002/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx'...
> <%@. Page language="c#" Codebehind="Folder.aspx.cs" AutoEventWireup="false"
> Inherits="Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.Folde
>
> "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> Can you see Report Manager. That is the first thing you need to do.
>>
>> --
>> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:22ACC894-897A-4C62-A25D-AB116C07BD7D@.microsoft.com...
>> > Ok I did that and now I've got new problems.
>> >
>> > I reinstalled without creating a SQL2005 db. I went through the RS
>> > Config
>> > manager using only defaults and the DBs appear to have been created
>> > successfully under the SQL2000 server.
>> >
>> > Now when I try to deploy the report using VS/BI, I get an error: A
>> > connection could not be made to the report server
>> > http://localhost/ReportServer. Additional Information: Client found
>> > response
>> > content type of 'text/html; charset=utf-8', but expected 'text/xml'.
>> > The
>> > request failed with the error message: '
>> >
>> > The rest is too long to type here (looks like a big piece of HTML or
>> > XML)
>> > but the system event log is full of error messages like this: The
>> > application-specific permission settings do not grant Local Activation
>> > permission for the COM Server application with CLSID
>> > {BA126AD1-2166-11D1-B1D0-00805FC1270E}
>> > to the user NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE SID (S-1-5-20). This security
>> > permission can be modified using the Component Services administrative
>> > tool.
>> >
>> > Could this have something to do with the fact that I wrote the report
>> > on
>> > my
>> > desktop and then copied the entire project over to the server?
>> >
>> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> My suggestion is to do that and this time do not create SQL Server
>> >> 2005
>> >> database. Just point it to an existing SQL Server 2000 db that you
>> >> have.
>> >> There is no advantage to the added complexity of what you were doing.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >>
>> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:F5CFAD3D-6221-4DAB-923B-863B88E0D5BA@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > Maybe I should just uninstall everything and start over.
>> >> >
>> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> You have somehow gotten a totally messed up install. You should not
>> >> >> have
>> >> >> four sites. Try this:
>> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports$RS2005/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> >> >> message
>> >> >> news:D65947A7-6E16-4331-8810-D59BBEE1487C@.microsoft.com...
>> >> >> > By 'websites' do you mean the report directories under Default
>> >> >> > Web
>> >> >> > Site?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I have 4 report directories under the Default Web Site:
>> >> >> > ReportServer,
>> >> >> > Reports, Reports$RS2005, and ReportServer$RS2005. The first 2
>> >> >> > are
>> >> >> > empty.
>> >> >> > The last two are full of what appears to be asp.net related files
>> >> >> > and
>> >> >> > directories.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > (I admit that I was under the impression that RS2005 needed a
>> >> >> > 2005
>> >> >> > db
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > store its data.)
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> By what you posted it seems that you have it installed in the
>> >> >> >> default
>> >> >> >> website in which case this should be working. Open up IIS
>> >> >> >> adminstrator
>> >> >> >> (whatever it is called) and see if you have the websites.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> By the way, you did not need to install SQL 2005. RS 2005 can
>> >> >> >> use
>> >> >> >> SQL
>> >> >> >> 2000
>> >> >> >> for its object/metadata storage. You have to have a license for
>> >> >> >> SQL
>> >> >> >> Server
>> >> >> >> 2005 but it does not need to be installed.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --
>> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> >> >> >> message
>> >> >> >> news:BD671A1B-82BA-466C-B6A0-7A73EB6B3FFA@.microsoft.com...
>> >> >> >> > No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another
>> >> >> >> > machine.
>> >> >> >> > Always
>> >> >> >> > 'Page cannot be found.'
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > (Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
>> >> >> >> > http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > As far as I know I'm an administrator.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is
>> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> portal
>> >> >> >> >> that
>> >> >> >> >> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people
>> >> >> >> >> in
>> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> local
>> >> >> >> >> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will
>> >> >> >> >> automatically
>> >> >> >> >> be in the RS administrators role.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> --
>> >> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> >> >> >> >> message
>> >> >> >> >> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
>> >> >> >> >> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what
>> >> >> >> >> > I'm
>> >> >> >> >> > doing.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql
>> >> >> >> >> > Server
>> >> >> >> >> > 2000.
>> >> >> >> >> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the
>> >> >> >> >> > tables
>> >> >> >> >> > in
>> >> >> >> >> > SQL
>> >> >> >> >> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard
>> >> >> >> >> > including
>> >> >> >> >> > RS
>> >> >> >> >> > on
>> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> > server.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install
>> >> >> >> >> > SQL2005
>> >> >> >> >> > I
>> >> >> >> >> > had
>> >> >> >> >> > a
>> >> >> >> >> > few
>> >> >> >> >> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005
>> >> >> >> >> > Express
>> >> >> >> >> > which
>> >> >> >> >> > seems
>> >> >> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> >> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I
>> >> >> >> >> > manually
>> >> >> >> >> > selected
>> >> >> >> >> > a
>> >> >> >> >> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen
>> >> >> >> >> > seemed
>> >> >> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> >> > imply
>> >> >> >> >> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded
>> >> >> >> >> > (which
>> >> >> >> >> > wouldn't
>> >> >> >> >> > be
>> >> >> >> >> > a
>> >> >> >> >> > good idea.)
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI
>> >> >> >> >> > Studio.
>> >> >> >> >> > I
>> >> >> >> >> > copied
>> >> >> >> >> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that
>> >> >> >> >> > I
>> >> >> >> >> > cannot
>> >> >> >> >> > get
>> >> >> >> >> > it
>> >> >> >> >> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
>> >> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are
>> >> >> >> >> > connection
>> >> >> >> >> > errors:
>> >> >> >> >> > 'A
>> >> >> >> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
>> >> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional
>> >> >> >> >> > information -
>> >> >> >> >> > The
>> >> >> >> >> > attempt
>> >> >> >> >> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your
>> >> >> >> >> > connection
>> >> >> >> >> > information,
>> >> >> >> >> > etc.'
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager.
>> >> >> >> >> > To
>> >> >> >> >> > save
>> >> >> >> >> > time,
>> >> >> >> >> > here
>> >> >> >> >> > are the settings:
>> >> >> >> >> > Report Server Status
>> >> >> >> >> > Instance Name RS2005
>> >> >> >> >> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
>> >> >> >> >> > Running
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > --
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > Report Server Virtual Directory
>> >> >> >> >> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
>> >> >> >> >> > Website Default Website
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
>> >> >> >> >> > Name Reports$RS2005
>> >> >> >> >> > Website Default Web Site
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > Windows Service Identity
>> >> >> >> >> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
>> >> >> >> >> > Service Account LocalSystem
>> >> >> >> >> > Built-in Account Local System
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>|||If this stumps an MVP, then I'm really in trouble!
It's quitting time here (Eastern time). Let's continue this tomorrow.
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> If the RS configuration tool shows everything good it should not be a
> problem.
> I have never seen this error.
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:23A2FD03-F2FF-4D94-A851-C2C6921C0A4A@.microsoft.com...
> > Now what. Am I forgetting some option when running RS off SQL 2000? Got
> > a
> > very different error.
> >
> > The XML page cannot be displayed
> > Cannot view XML input using XSL style sheet. Please correct the error and
> > then click the Refresh button, or try again later.
> >
> >
> > ----
> >
> > A name was started with an invalid character. Error processing resource
> > 'http://ussog-s-a000002/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx'...
> >
> > <%@. Page language="c#" Codebehind="Folder.aspx.cs" AutoEventWireup="false"
> > Inherits="Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.Folde
> >
> >
> >
> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >> Can you see Report Manager. That is the first thing you need to do.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >>
> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:22ACC894-897A-4C62-A25D-AB116C07BD7D@.microsoft.com...
> >> > Ok I did that and now I've got new problems.
> >> >
> >> > I reinstalled without creating a SQL2005 db. I went through the RS
> >> > Config
> >> > manager using only defaults and the DBs appear to have been created
> >> > successfully under the SQL2000 server.
> >> >
> >> > Now when I try to deploy the report using VS/BI, I get an error: A
> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer. Additional Information: Client found
> >> > response
> >> > content type of 'text/html; charset=utf-8', but expected 'text/xml'.
> >> > The
> >> > request failed with the error message: '
> >> >
> >> > The rest is too long to type here (looks like a big piece of HTML or
> >> > XML)
> >> > but the system event log is full of error messages like this: The
> >> > application-specific permission settings do not grant Local Activation
> >> > permission for the COM Server application with CLSID
> >> > {BA126AD1-2166-11D1-B1D0-00805FC1270E}
> >> > to the user NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE SID (S-1-5-20). This security
> >> > permission can be modified using the Component Services administrative
> >> > tool.
> >> >
> >> > Could this have something to do with the fact that I wrote the report
> >> > on
> >> > my
> >> > desktop and then copied the entire project over to the server?
> >> >
> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> My suggestion is to do that and this time do not create SQL Server
> >> >> 2005
> >> >> database. Just point it to an existing SQL Server 2000 db that you
> >> >> have.
> >> >> There is no advantage to the added complexity of what you were doing.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >>
> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:F5CFAD3D-6221-4DAB-923B-863B88E0D5BA@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> > Maybe I should just uninstall everything and start over.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> You have somehow gotten a totally messed up install. You should not
> >> >> >> have
> >> >> >> four sites. Try this:
> >> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports$RS2005/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> >> >> >> message
> >> >> >> news:D65947A7-6E16-4331-8810-D59BBEE1487C@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> >> > By 'websites' do you mean the report directories under Default
> >> >> >> > Web
> >> >> >> > Site?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > I have 4 report directories under the Default Web Site:
> >> >> >> > ReportServer,
> >> >> >> > Reports, Reports$RS2005, and ReportServer$RS2005. The first 2
> >> >> >> > are
> >> >> >> > empty.
> >> >> >> > The last two are full of what appears to be asp.net related files
> >> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> > directories.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > (I admit that I was under the impression that RS2005 needed a
> >> >> >> > 2005
> >> >> >> > db
> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> > store its data.)
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> By what you posted it seems that you have it installed in the
> >> >> >> >> default
> >> >> >> >> website in which case this should be working. Open up IIS
> >> >> >> >> adminstrator
> >> >> >> >> (whatever it is called) and see if you have the websites.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> By the way, you did not need to install SQL 2005. RS 2005 can
> >> >> >> >> use
> >> >> >> >> SQL
> >> >> >> >> 2000
> >> >> >> >> for its object/metadata storage. You have to have a license for
> >> >> >> >> SQL
> >> >> >> >> Server
> >> >> >> >> 2005 but it does not need to be installed.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> >> >> >> >> message
> >> >> >> >> news:BD671A1B-82BA-466C-B6A0-7A73EB6B3FFA@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> >> >> > No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another
> >> >> >> >> > machine.
> >> >> >> >> > Always
> >> >> >> >> > 'Page cannot be found.'
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > (Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
> >> >> >> >> > http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > As far as I know I'm an administrator.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is
> >> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> >> portal
> >> >> >> >> >> that
> >> >> >> >> >> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people
> >> >> >> >> >> in
> >> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> >> local
> >> >> >> >> >> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will
> >> >> >> >> >> automatically
> >> >> >> >> >> be in the RS administrators role.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> >> >> >> >> >> message
> >> >> >> >> >> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> >> >> >> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what
> >> >> >> >> >> > I'm
> >> >> >> >> >> > doing.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql
> >> >> >> >> >> > Server
> >> >> >> >> >> > 2000.
> >> >> >> >> >> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the
> >> >> >> >> >> > tables
> >> >> >> >> >> > in
> >> >> >> >> >> > SQL
> >> >> >> >> >> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard
> >> >> >> >> >> > including
> >> >> >> >> >> > RS
> >> >> >> >> >> > on
> >> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> > server.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install
> >> >> >> >> >> > SQL2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > I
> >> >> >> >> >> > had
> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> > few
> >> >> >> >> >> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Express
> >> >> >> >> >> > which
> >> >> >> >> >> > seems
> >> >> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> >> >> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I
> >> >> >> >> >> > manually
> >> >> >> >> >> > selected
> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen
> >> >> >> >> >> > seemed
> >> >> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> >> >> > imply
> >> >> >> >> >> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded
> >> >> >> >> >> > (which
> >> >> >> >> >> > wouldn't
> >> >> >> >> >> > be
> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> > good idea.)
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI
> >> >> >> >> >> > Studio.
> >> >> >> >> >> > I
> >> >> >> >> >> > copied
> >> >> >> >> >> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that
> >> >> >> >> >> > I
> >> >> >> >> >> > cannot
> >> >> >> >> >> > get
> >> >> >> >> >> > it
> >> >> >> >> >> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
> >> >> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are
> >> >> >> >> >> > connection
> >> >> >> >> >> > errors:
> >> >> >> >> >> > 'A
> >> >> >> >> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
> >> >> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional
> >> >> >> >> >> > information -
> >> >> >> >> >> > The
> >> >> >> >> >> > attempt
> >> >> >> >> >> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your
> >> >> >> >> >> > connection
> >> >> >> >> >> > information,
> >> >> >> >> >> > etc.'
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager.
> >> >> >> >> >> > To
> >> >> >> >> >> > save
> >> >> >> >> >> > time,
> >> >> >> >> >> > here
> >> >> >> >> >> > are the settings:
> >> >> >> >> >> > Report Server Status
> >> >> >> >> >> > Instance Name RS2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
> >> >> >> >> >> > Running
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Report Server Virtual Directory
> >> >> >> >> >> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Website Default Website
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
> >> >> >> >> >> > Name Reports$RS2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Website Default Web Site
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Windows Service Identity
> >> >> >> >> >> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Service Account LocalSystem
> >> >> >> >> >> > Built-in Account Local System
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>|||I probably forgot to mention: This server is part of a very large corporate
network, all regulated (so far as I know) using Active Directory. I have no
hands-on experience with Active Directory. Could this complicate the RS
configuration?
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> If the RS configuration tool shows everything good it should not be a
> problem.
> I have never seen this error.
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:23A2FD03-F2FF-4D94-A851-C2C6921C0A4A@.microsoft.com...
> > Now what. Am I forgetting some option when running RS off SQL 2000? Got
> > a
> > very different error.
> >
> > The XML page cannot be displayed
> > Cannot view XML input using XSL style sheet. Please correct the error and
> > then click the Refresh button, or try again later.
> >
> >
> > ----
> >
> > A name was started with an invalid character. Error processing resource
> > 'http://ussog-s-a000002/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx'...
> >
> > <%@. Page language="c#" Codebehind="Folder.aspx.cs" AutoEventWireup="false"
> > Inherits="Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.Folde
> >
> >
> >
> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >> Can you see Report Manager. That is the first thing you need to do.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >>
> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:22ACC894-897A-4C62-A25D-AB116C07BD7D@.microsoft.com...
> >> > Ok I did that and now I've got new problems.
> >> >
> >> > I reinstalled without creating a SQL2005 db. I went through the RS
> >> > Config
> >> > manager using only defaults and the DBs appear to have been created
> >> > successfully under the SQL2000 server.
> >> >
> >> > Now when I try to deploy the report using VS/BI, I get an error: A
> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer. Additional Information: Client found
> >> > response
> >> > content type of 'text/html; charset=utf-8', but expected 'text/xml'.
> >> > The
> >> > request failed with the error message: '
> >> >
> >> > The rest is too long to type here (looks like a big piece of HTML or
> >> > XML)
> >> > but the system event log is full of error messages like this: The
> >> > application-specific permission settings do not grant Local Activation
> >> > permission for the COM Server application with CLSID
> >> > {BA126AD1-2166-11D1-B1D0-00805FC1270E}
> >> > to the user NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE SID (S-1-5-20). This security
> >> > permission can be modified using the Component Services administrative
> >> > tool.
> >> >
> >> > Could this have something to do with the fact that I wrote the report
> >> > on
> >> > my
> >> > desktop and then copied the entire project over to the server?
> >> >
> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> My suggestion is to do that and this time do not create SQL Server
> >> >> 2005
> >> >> database. Just point it to an existing SQL Server 2000 db that you
> >> >> have.
> >> >> There is no advantage to the added complexity of what you were doing.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >>
> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:F5CFAD3D-6221-4DAB-923B-863B88E0D5BA@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> > Maybe I should just uninstall everything and start over.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> You have somehow gotten a totally messed up install. You should not
> >> >> >> have
> >> >> >> four sites. Try this:
> >> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports$RS2005/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> >> >> >> message
> >> >> >> news:D65947A7-6E16-4331-8810-D59BBEE1487C@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> >> > By 'websites' do you mean the report directories under Default
> >> >> >> > Web
> >> >> >> > Site?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > I have 4 report directories under the Default Web Site:
> >> >> >> > ReportServer,
> >> >> >> > Reports, Reports$RS2005, and ReportServer$RS2005. The first 2
> >> >> >> > are
> >> >> >> > empty.
> >> >> >> > The last two are full of what appears to be asp.net related files
> >> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> > directories.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > (I admit that I was under the impression that RS2005 needed a
> >> >> >> > 2005
> >> >> >> > db
> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> > store its data.)
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> By what you posted it seems that you have it installed in the
> >> >> >> >> default
> >> >> >> >> website in which case this should be working. Open up IIS
> >> >> >> >> adminstrator
> >> >> >> >> (whatever it is called) and see if you have the websites.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> By the way, you did not need to install SQL 2005. RS 2005 can
> >> >> >> >> use
> >> >> >> >> SQL
> >> >> >> >> 2000
> >> >> >> >> for its object/metadata storage. You have to have a license for
> >> >> >> >> SQL
> >> >> >> >> Server
> >> >> >> >> 2005 but it does not need to be installed.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> >> >> >> >> message
> >> >> >> >> news:BD671A1B-82BA-466C-B6A0-7A73EB6B3FFA@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> >> >> > No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another
> >> >> >> >> > machine.
> >> >> >> >> > Always
> >> >> >> >> > 'Page cannot be found.'
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > (Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
> >> >> >> >> > http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > As far as I know I'm an administrator.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is
> >> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> >> portal
> >> >> >> >> >> that
> >> >> >> >> >> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people
> >> >> >> >> >> in
> >> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> >> local
> >> >> >> >> >> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will
> >> >> >> >> >> automatically
> >> >> >> >> >> be in the RS administrators role.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> >> >> >> >> >> message
> >> >> >> >> >> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> >> >> >> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what
> >> >> >> >> >> > I'm
> >> >> >> >> >> > doing.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql
> >> >> >> >> >> > Server
> >> >> >> >> >> > 2000.
> >> >> >> >> >> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the
> >> >> >> >> >> > tables
> >> >> >> >> >> > in
> >> >> >> >> >> > SQL
> >> >> >> >> >> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard
> >> >> >> >> >> > including
> >> >> >> >> >> > RS
> >> >> >> >> >> > on
> >> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> > server.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install
> >> >> >> >> >> > SQL2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > I
> >> >> >> >> >> > had
> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> > few
> >> >> >> >> >> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Express
> >> >> >> >> >> > which
> >> >> >> >> >> > seems
> >> >> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> >> >> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I
> >> >> >> >> >> > manually
> >> >> >> >> >> > selected
> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen
> >> >> >> >> >> > seemed
> >> >> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> >> >> > imply
> >> >> >> >> >> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded
> >> >> >> >> >> > (which
> >> >> >> >> >> > wouldn't
> >> >> >> >> >> > be
> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> > good idea.)
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI
> >> >> >> >> >> > Studio.
> >> >> >> >> >> > I
> >> >> >> >> >> > copied
> >> >> >> >> >> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that
> >> >> >> >> >> > I
> >> >> >> >> >> > cannot
> >> >> >> >> >> > get
> >> >> >> >> >> > it
> >> >> >> >> >> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
> >> >> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are
> >> >> >> >> >> > connection
> >> >> >> >> >> > errors:
> >> >> >> >> >> > 'A
> >> >> >> >> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
> >> >> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional
> >> >> >> >> >> > information -
> >> >> >> >> >> > The
> >> >> >> >> >> > attempt
> >> >> >> >> >> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your
> >> >> >> >> >> > connection
> >> >> >> >> >> > information,
> >> >> >> >> >> > etc.'
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager.
> >> >> >> >> >> > To
> >> >> >> >> >> > save
> >> >> >> >> >> > time,
> >> >> >> >> >> > here
> >> >> >> >> >> > are the settings:
> >> >> >> >> >> > Report Server Status
> >> >> >> >> >> > Instance Name RS2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
> >> >> >> >> >> > Running
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Report Server Virtual Directory
> >> >> >> >> >> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Website Default Website
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
> >> >> >> >> >> > Name Reports$RS2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Website Default Web Site
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Windows Service Identity
> >> >> >> >> >> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Service Account LocalSystem
> >> >> >> >> >> > Built-in Account Local System
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>|||Stop the presses!!! I have solved the problem of the missing Folder page and
the report is now successsfully deployed!!!!
The problem is not in RS. The problem is that the Dot Net Framework was
installed on the Windows 2003 server before the IIS component was installed.
The solution was simple:
"C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\aspnet_regiis.exe -i"
Looks like I have a few brain cells left.
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> If the RS configuration tool shows everything good it should not be a
> problem.
> I have never seen this error.
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:23A2FD03-F2FF-4D94-A851-C2C6921C0A4A@.microsoft.com...
> > Now what. Am I forgetting some option when running RS off SQL 2000? Got
> > a
> > very different error.
> >
> > The XML page cannot be displayed
> > Cannot view XML input using XSL style sheet. Please correct the error and
> > then click the Refresh button, or try again later.
> >
> >
> > ----
> >
> > A name was started with an invalid character. Error processing resource
> > 'http://ussog-s-a000002/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx'...
> >
> > <%@. Page language="c#" Codebehind="Folder.aspx.cs" AutoEventWireup="false"
> > Inherits="Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.Folde
> >
> >
> >
> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >> Can you see Report Manager. That is the first thing you need to do.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >>
> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:22ACC894-897A-4C62-A25D-AB116C07BD7D@.microsoft.com...
> >> > Ok I did that and now I've got new problems.
> >> >
> >> > I reinstalled without creating a SQL2005 db. I went through the RS
> >> > Config
> >> > manager using only defaults and the DBs appear to have been created
> >> > successfully under the SQL2000 server.
> >> >
> >> > Now when I try to deploy the report using VS/BI, I get an error: A
> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer. Additional Information: Client found
> >> > response
> >> > content type of 'text/html; charset=utf-8', but expected 'text/xml'.
> >> > The
> >> > request failed with the error message: '
> >> >
> >> > The rest is too long to type here (looks like a big piece of HTML or
> >> > XML)
> >> > but the system event log is full of error messages like this: The
> >> > application-specific permission settings do not grant Local Activation
> >> > permission for the COM Server application with CLSID
> >> > {BA126AD1-2166-11D1-B1D0-00805FC1270E}
> >> > to the user NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE SID (S-1-5-20). This security
> >> > permission can be modified using the Component Services administrative
> >> > tool.
> >> >
> >> > Could this have something to do with the fact that I wrote the report
> >> > on
> >> > my
> >> > desktop and then copied the entire project over to the server?
> >> >
> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> My suggestion is to do that and this time do not create SQL Server
> >> >> 2005
> >> >> database. Just point it to an existing SQL Server 2000 db that you
> >> >> have.
> >> >> There is no advantage to the added complexity of what you were doing.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >>
> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:F5CFAD3D-6221-4DAB-923B-863B88E0D5BA@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> > Maybe I should just uninstall everything and start over.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> You have somehow gotten a totally messed up install. You should not
> >> >> >> have
> >> >> >> four sites. Try this:
> >> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports$RS2005/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> >> >> >> message
> >> >> >> news:D65947A7-6E16-4331-8810-D59BBEE1487C@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> >> > By 'websites' do you mean the report directories under Default
> >> >> >> > Web
> >> >> >> > Site?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > I have 4 report directories under the Default Web Site:
> >> >> >> > ReportServer,
> >> >> >> > Reports, Reports$RS2005, and ReportServer$RS2005. The first 2
> >> >> >> > are
> >> >> >> > empty.
> >> >> >> > The last two are full of what appears to be asp.net related files
> >> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> > directories.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > (I admit that I was under the impression that RS2005 needed a
> >> >> >> > 2005
> >> >> >> > db
> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> > store its data.)
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> By what you posted it seems that you have it installed in the
> >> >> >> >> default
> >> >> >> >> website in which case this should be working. Open up IIS
> >> >> >> >> adminstrator
> >> >> >> >> (whatever it is called) and see if you have the websites.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> By the way, you did not need to install SQL 2005. RS 2005 can
> >> >> >> >> use
> >> >> >> >> SQL
> >> >> >> >> 2000
> >> >> >> >> for its object/metadata storage. You have to have a license for
> >> >> >> >> SQL
> >> >> >> >> Server
> >> >> >> >> 2005 but it does not need to be installed.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> >> >> >> >> message
> >> >> >> >> news:BD671A1B-82BA-466C-B6A0-7A73EB6B3FFA@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> >> >> > No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another
> >> >> >> >> > machine.
> >> >> >> >> > Always
> >> >> >> >> > 'Page cannot be found.'
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > (Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
> >> >> >> >> > http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > As far as I know I'm an administrator.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this is
> >> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> >> portal
> >> >> >> >> >> that
> >> >> >> >> >> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All people
> >> >> >> >> >> in
> >> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> >> local
> >> >> >> >> >> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed will
> >> >> >> >> >> automatically
> >> >> >> >> >> be in the RS administrators role.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> >> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> >> >> >> >> >> message
> >> >> >> >> >> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> >> >> >> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know what
> >> >> >> >> >> > I'm
> >> >> >> >> >> > doing.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and Sql
> >> >> >> >> >> > Server
> >> >> >> >> >> > 2000.
> >> >> >> >> >> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of the
> >> >> >> >> >> > tables
> >> >> >> >> >> > in
> >> >> >> >> >> > SQL
> >> >> >> >> >> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard
> >> >> >> >> >> > including
> >> >> >> >> >> > RS
> >> >> >> >> >> > on
> >> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> > server.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install
> >> >> >> >> >> > SQL2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > I
> >> >> >> >> >> > had
> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> > few
> >> >> >> >> >> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Express
> >> >> >> >> >> > which
> >> >> >> >> >> > seems
> >> >> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> >> >> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I
> >> >> >> >> >> > manually
> >> >> >> >> >> > selected
> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the screen
> >> >> >> >> >> > seemed
> >> >> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> >> >> > imply
> >> >> >> >> >> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded
> >> >> >> >> >> > (which
> >> >> >> >> >> > wouldn't
> >> >> >> >> >> > be
> >> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> >> > good idea.)
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI
> >> >> >> >> >> > Studio.
> >> >> >> >> >> > I
> >> >> >> >> >> > copied
> >> >> >> >> >> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is that
> >> >> >> >> >> > I
> >> >> >> >> >> > cannot
> >> >> >> >> >> > get
> >> >> >> >> >> > it
> >> >> >> >> >> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
> >> >> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are
> >> >> >> >> >> > connection
> >> >> >> >> >> > errors:
> >> >> >> >> >> > 'A
> >> >> >> >> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
> >> >> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional
> >> >> >> >> >> > information -
> >> >> >> >> >> > The
> >> >> >> >> >> > attempt
> >> >> >> >> >> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your
> >> >> >> >> >> > connection
> >> >> >> >> >> > information,
> >> >> >> >> >> > etc.'
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager.
> >> >> >> >> >> > To
> >> >> >> >> >> > save
> >> >> >> >> >> > time,
> >> >> >> >> >> > here
> >> >> >> >> >> > are the settings:
> >> >> >> >> >> > Report Server Status
> >> >> >> >> >> > Instance Name RS2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
> >> >> >> >> >> > Running
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Report Server Virtual Directory
> >> >> >> >> >> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Website Default Website
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
> >> >> >> >> >> > Name Reports$RS2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Website Default Web Site
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Windows Service Identity
> >> >> >> >> >> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
> >> >> >> >> >> > Service Account LocalSystem
> >> >> >> >> >> > Built-in Account Local System
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>|||Interesting. I would have thought the act of installing would have detected
and installed/configured IIS for the 2.0 framework. I guess the installer
thought everything was OK when it was not.
Glad to hear it is all OK now. One benefit. You have a simplier environment
running without SQL 2005 database and just using the 2000 database already
installed.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:43FC7545-4619-4E0E-8F06-9B9E2D6AF466@.microsoft.com...
> Stop the presses!!! I have solved the problem of the missing Folder page
> and
> the report is now successsfully deployed!!!!
> The problem is not in RS. The problem is that the Dot Net Framework was
> installed on the Windows 2003 server before the IIS component was
> installed.
> The solution was simple:
> "C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\aspnet_regiis.exe -i"
> Looks like I have a few brain cells left.
> "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> If the RS configuration tool shows everything good it should not be a
>> problem.
>> I have never seen this error.
>>
>> --
>> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:23A2FD03-F2FF-4D94-A851-C2C6921C0A4A@.microsoft.com...
>> > Now what. Am I forgetting some option when running RS off SQL 2000?
>> > Got
>> > a
>> > very different error.
>> >
>> > The XML page cannot be displayed
>> > Cannot view XML input using XSL style sheet. Please correct the error
>> > and
>> > then click the Refresh button, or try again later.
>> >
>> >
>> > ----
>> >
>> > A name was started with an invalid character. Error processing resource
>> > 'http://ussog-s-a000002/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx'...
>> >
>> > <%@. Page language="c#" Codebehind="Folder.aspx.cs"
>> > AutoEventWireup="false"
>> > Inherits="Microsoft.ReportingServices.UI.Folde
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Can you see Report Manager. That is the first thing you need to do.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >>
>> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:22ACC894-897A-4C62-A25D-AB116C07BD7D@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > Ok I did that and now I've got new problems.
>> >> >
>> >> > I reinstalled without creating a SQL2005 db. I went through the RS
>> >> > Config
>> >> > manager using only defaults and the DBs appear to have been created
>> >> > successfully under the SQL2000 server.
>> >> >
>> >> > Now when I try to deploy the report using VS/BI, I get an error: A
>> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
>> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer. Additional Information: Client found
>> >> > response
>> >> > content type of 'text/html; charset=utf-8', but expected 'text/xml'.
>> >> > The
>> >> > request failed with the error message: '
>> >> >
>> >> > The rest is too long to type here (looks like a big piece of HTML or
>> >> > XML)
>> >> > but the system event log is full of error messages like this: The
>> >> > application-specific permission settings do not grant Local
>> >> > Activation
>> >> > permission for the COM Server application with CLSID
>> >> > {BA126AD1-2166-11D1-B1D0-00805FC1270E}
>> >> > to the user NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE SID (S-1-5-20). This
>> >> > security
>> >> > permission can be modified using the Component Services
>> >> > administrative
>> >> > tool.
>> >> >
>> >> > Could this have something to do with the fact that I wrote the
>> >> > report
>> >> > on
>> >> > my
>> >> > desktop and then copied the entire project over to the server?
>> >> >
>> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> My suggestion is to do that and this time do not create SQL Server
>> >> >> 2005
>> >> >> database. Just point it to an existing SQL Server 2000 db that you
>> >> >> have.
>> >> >> There is no advantage to the added complexity of what you were
>> >> >> doing.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> >> >> message
>> >> >> news:F5CFAD3D-6221-4DAB-923B-863B88E0D5BA@.microsoft.com...
>> >> >> > Maybe I should just uninstall everything and start over.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> You have somehow gotten a totally messed up install. You should
>> >> >> >> not
>> >> >> >> have
>> >> >> >> four sites. Try this:
>> >> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports$RS2005/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --
>> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> >> >> >> message
>> >> >> >> news:D65947A7-6E16-4331-8810-D59BBEE1487C@.microsoft.com...
>> >> >> >> > By 'websites' do you mean the report directories under Default
>> >> >> >> > Web
>> >> >> >> > Site?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > I have 4 report directories under the Default Web Site:
>> >> >> >> > ReportServer,
>> >> >> >> > Reports, Reports$RS2005, and ReportServer$RS2005. The first 2
>> >> >> >> > are
>> >> >> >> > empty.
>> >> >> >> > The last two are full of what appears to be asp.net related
>> >> >> >> > files
>> >> >> >> > and
>> >> >> >> > directories.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > (I admit that I was under the impression that RS2005 needed a
>> >> >> >> > 2005
>> >> >> >> > db
>> >> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> > store its data.)
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> By what you posted it seems that you have it installed in the
>> >> >> >> >> default
>> >> >> >> >> website in which case this should be working. Open up IIS
>> >> >> >> >> adminstrator
>> >> >> >> >> (whatever it is called) and see if you have the websites.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> By the way, you did not need to install SQL 2005. RS 2005 can
>> >> >> >> >> use
>> >> >> >> >> SQL
>> >> >> >> >> 2000
>> >> >> >> >> for its object/metadata storage. You have to have a license
>> >> >> >> >> for
>> >> >> >> >> SQL
>> >> >> >> >> Server
>> >> >> >> >> 2005 but it does not need to be installed.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> --
>> >> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> >> >> >> >> message
>> >> >> >> >> news:BD671A1B-82BA-466C-B6A0-7A73EB6B3FFA@.microsoft.com...
>> >> >> >> >> > No. I've tried both on the server itself and from another
>> >> >> >> >> > machine.
>> >> >> >> >> > Always
>> >> >> >> >> > 'Page cannot be found.'
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > (Tried with both http://<servername>/Reports and
>> >> >> >> >> > http://<servername>/Reports$RS2005)
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > As far as I know I'm an administrator.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> First things first. Can you pull up Report Manager (this
>> >> >> >> >> >> is
>> >> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> portal
>> >> >> >> >> >> that
>> >> >> >> >> >> ships with RS and is used to manage RS).
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> http://yourservername/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> localhost only works if you are on the machine hosting RS.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Second, are you an adminstrator on that machine. All
>> >> >> >> >> >> people
>> >> >> >> >> >> in
>> >> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> >> local
>> >> >> >> >> >> administrator group on the machine that has RS installed
>> >> >> >> >> >> will
>> >> >> >> >> >> automatically
>> >> >> >> >> >> be in the RS administrators role.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Deploying is the last thing you should try.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> --
>> >> >> >> >> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> >> >> >> >> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> "B. Chernick" <BChernick@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
>> >> >> >> >> >> in
>> >> >> >> >> >> message
>> >> >> >> >> >> news:B0ABE746-24C8-4D92-9952-776C52F6EF9D@.microsoft.com...
>> >> >> >> >> >> > As usual I'm learning by doing and I'm not sure I know
>> >> >> >> >> >> > what
>> >> >> >> >> >> > I'm
>> >> >> >> >> >> > doing.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > We have a legacy server running Windows Server 2003 and
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Sql
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Server
>> >> >> >> >> >> > 2000.
>> >> >> >> >> >> > We want to run a Reporting Services report off one of
>> >> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> >> > tables
>> >> >> >> >> >> > in
>> >> >> >> >> >> > SQL
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Server 2000 so I was told to install SQL2005 Standard
>> >> >> >> >> >> > including
>> >> >> >> >> >> > RS
>> >> >> >> >> >> > on
>> >> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> >> > server.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > IIS has been installed. When it came time to install
>> >> >> >> >> >> > SQL2005
>> >> >> >> >> >> > I
>> >> >> >> >> >> > had
>> >> >> >> >> >> > a
>> >> >> >> >> >> > few
>> >> >> >> >> >> > moments of confusion. I am used to installing SQL2005
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Express
>> >> >> >> >> >> > which
>> >> >> >> >> >> > seems
>> >> >> >> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> >> >> > automatically install a named instance. In this case I
>> >> >> >> >> >> > manually
>> >> >> >> >> >> > selected
>> >> >> >> >> >> > a
>> >> >> >> >> >> > named instance (RS2005) because the wording of the
>> >> >> >> >> >> > screen
>> >> >> >> >> >> > seemed
>> >> >> >> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> >> >> > imply
>> >> >> >> >> >> > that the default instance of SQL2000 would be upgraded
>> >> >> >> >> >> > (which
>> >> >> >> >> >> > wouldn't
>> >> >> >> >> >> > be
>> >> >> >> >> >> > a
>> >> >> >> >> >> > good idea.)
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > So I installed SQL2005 with a named instance and the BI
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Studio.
>> >> >> >> >> >> > I
>> >> >> >> >> >> > copied
>> >> >> >> >> >> > over the report I wanted to deploy. Now my problem is
>> >> >> >> >> >> > that
>> >> >> >> >> >> > I
>> >> >> >> >> >> > cannot
>> >> >> >> >> >> > get
>> >> >> >> >> >> > it
>> >> >> >> >> >> > to deploy. In BI/VS the TargetServerURL is
>> >> >> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. All I get are
>> >> >> >> >> >> > connection
>> >> >> >> >> >> > errors:
>> >> >> >> >> >> > 'A
>> >> >> >> >> >> > connection could not be made to the report server
>> >> >> >> >> >> > http://localhost/ReportServer$RS2005. Additional
>> >> >> >> >> >> > information -
>> >> >> >> >> >> > The
>> >> >> >> >> >> > attempt
>> >> >> >> >> >> > to connect to the report server failed. Check your
>> >> >> >> >> >> > connection
>> >> >> >> >> >> > information,
>> >> >> >> >> >> > etc.'
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > I have run the Reporting Services Configuration manager.
>> >> >> >> >> >> > To
>> >> >> >> >> >> > save
>> >> >> >> >> >> > time,
>> >> >> >> >> >> > here
>> >> >> >> >> >> > are the settings:
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Report Server Status
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Instance Name RS2005
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Instance ID MSSQL.2
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Running
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > --
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Report Server Virtual Directory
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Name ReportServer$RS2005
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Website Default Website
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Report Manager Virtual Directory Settings
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Name Reports$RS2005
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Website Default Web Site
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Windows Service Identity
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Service Nmae ReportServer$RS2005
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Service Account LocalSystem
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Built-in Account Local System
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>