I dont see Server Management Studio on the XP with the Standard version

I have installed SQL 2005 Standard Edition on my Window XP many times and I dont see Server Management Studio.

Did I do something wrong?

Thanks.

you need to have Windows XP professional edition with SP2........refer the link,

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/910228 and if you have the necessary system requirements just go to tools folder and manually run the sqlrun_tools..........it will get installed........

|||

I didnt have to run as a separate step when I install the SQL Developer on XP SP2.

I do have XP SP2 on my PC and when I run the SQL 2005 Standard Edition, I didnt see the Server Management Studio.

So it is a separate step after a normal install?

Is it Performance Tool? Or a tool folder on the SQL 2005 STD Edition CD?

|||

there will be a tool folder may be you can insert the disk 2 and check it.....generally there will 2 folders in sql 2005 one is server and other is tool.........

|||

The default install ONLY installs the Server and network connections support.

To install SSMS, you need to put the media in again, and this time choose 'Client Tools' from the installation menu.

|||Management studio is not a performance tool, its just an replacement for Enterprise Manger

I am looking for some technical support/tutor help in KC, Kansas

I am looking for someone to help me with SQL server 2000 (enterprise &
standard editions) production DBA, all the environments are pretty simple,
windows NT & windows 2003. (if you know SQL server 2005 will be a plus). I
would prefer someone live in KC area also.
My situation is I just got a new contract job this week, it seems like no on
e
can help me to get started over there,
I am pretty much all on my own, so far I know I am only involve with Erwin &
Tivoli software,
My daily responsibilities are maintaining of the databases, backup and
restore procedures, DTS packages, schedule jobs, and some T-SQL; such as
store procedures and triggers.
I am in charge of 4 servers, about 200 databases, this company never had a
professional SQL DBA so everything is everywhere. The company resources use
95% on Oracle server so they didn't spend much effort on SQL Server.
Now, in addition, I am doing migration from SQL server 2000 to 2005. I would
need someone that have hands on experience and able to show me step to step
procedures.
I am not sure if this will help you to understand what I need help on,
but if you think you can help me or you know someone that can help me please
reply. Thanks
P/S: I will pay accordingly.
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200707/1Hi,
I am not actually in Kansas. Actually I'm quite a few miles away. But
if you don't mind getting help from Dublin (Ireland) I can support you
on both SQL Server 2000 and 2005! If you're interested let me know how
I can get in touch with you.
Jonathan
ajsql via droptable.com wrote:
> I am looking for someone to help me with SQL server 2000 (enterprise &
> standard editions) production DBA, all the environments are pretty simple,
> windows NT & windows 2003. (if you know SQL server 2005 will be a plus). I
> would prefer someone live in KC area also.
> My situation is I just got a new contract job this week, it seems like no
one
> can help me to get started over there,
> I am pretty much all on my own, so far I know I am only involve with Erwin
&
> Tivoli software,
> My daily responsibilities are maintaining of the databases, backup and
> restore procedures, DTS packages, schedule jobs, and some T-SQL; such as
> store procedures and triggers.
> I am in charge of 4 servers, about 200 databases, this company never had a
> professional SQL DBA so everything is everywhere. The company resources us
e
> 95% on Oracle server so they didn't spend much effort on SQL Server.
> Now, in addition, I am doing migration from SQL server 2000 to 2005. I wou
ld
> need someone that have hands on experience and able to show me step to ste
p
> procedures.
> I am not sure if this will help you to understand what I need help on,
> but if you think you can help me or you know someone that can help me plea
se
> reply. Thanks
> P/S: I will pay accordingly.
>

I am looking for some technical support/tutor help in KC, Kansas

I am looking for someone to help me with SQL server 2000 (enterprise &
standard editions) production DBA, all the environments are pretty simple,
windows NT & windows 2003. (if you know SQL server 2005 will be a plus). I
would prefer someone live in KC area also.
My situation is I just got a new contract job this week, it seems like no one
can help me to get started over there,
I am pretty much all on my own, so far I know I am only involve with Erwin &
Tivoli software,
My daily responsibilities are maintaining of the databases, backup and
restore procedures, DTS packages, schedule jobs, and some T-SQL; such as
store procedures and triggers.
I am in charge of 4 servers, about 200 databases, this company never had a
professional SQL DBA so everything is everywhere. The company resources use
95% on Oracle server so they didn't spend much effort on SQL Server.
Now, in addition, I am doing migration from SQL server 2000 to 2005. I would
need someone that have hands on experience and able to show me step to step
procedures.
I am not sure if this will help you to understand what I need help on,
but if you think you can help me or you know someone that can help me please
reply. Thanks
P/S: I will pay accordingly.
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200707/1Hi,
I am not actually in Kansas. Actually I'm quite a few miles away. But
if you don't mind getting help from Dublin (Ireland) I can support you
on both SQL Server 2000 and 2005! If you're interested let me know how
I can get in touch with you.
Jonathan
ajsql via SQLMonster.com wrote:
> I am looking for someone to help me with SQL server 2000 (enterprise &
> standard editions) production DBA, all the environments are pretty simple,
> windows NT & windows 2003. (if you know SQL server 2005 will be a plus). I
> would prefer someone live in KC area also.
> My situation is I just got a new contract job this week, it seems like no one
> can help me to get started over there,
> I am pretty much all on my own, so far I know I am only involve with Erwin &
> Tivoli software,
> My daily responsibilities are maintaining of the databases, backup and
> restore procedures, DTS packages, schedule jobs, and some T-SQL; such as
> store procedures and triggers.
> I am in charge of 4 servers, about 200 databases, this company never had a
> professional SQL DBA so everything is everywhere. The company resources use
> 95% on Oracle server so they didn't spend much effort on SQL Server.
> Now, in addition, I am doing migration from SQL server 2000 to 2005. I would
> need someone that have hands on experience and able to show me step to step
> procedures.
> I am not sure if this will help you to understand what I need help on,
> but if you think you can help me or you know someone that can help me please
> reply. Thanks
> P/S: I will pay accordingly.
>

i acn't login to a sql server with Database Engine Tuning Advisor

I'm trying to connect an instance (sql2005 standard edition) with the Database Engine Tuning Advisor (DETA), but it always fails.
I get this message:
"Failed to open a new connection.Failed to initialize MSDB database for tuning
(exit code: -1073741819).(DTAClient)"

The msdb database is exist on this server. What can i do?I compared the msdb database to an another db (where this feature is works) and I found some missing objects:
DTA% tables(22) and sp_DTA% store procedures(63)

I don't remember any option where I can set this objects (exist or not) and I didn't see any error when I installed this server.
?|||

This is most likely a security issue. The login account you are using from the tuning advisor doesn't have sufficient privileges to MSDB. The account you use for database tuning should have read/write access to msdb, because the DTA stores session information there (see BOL topic Considerations for Using Database Engine Tuning Advisor).

Hyper-Threading with SQL 2000 Standard

We just purchased a quad processor server running windows
2003. The processors are xeon so they have HTT
capability. Will SQL200 recognize all eight logical
processor or will it only see four. I wan't to find out
before we install SQL 2000. Thanks.With sp3 it should use all eight.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
"Stephen" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:297901c3af9b$78aa3c40$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> We just purchased a quad processor server running windows
> 2003. The processors are xeon so they have HTT
> capability. Will SQL200 recognize all eight logical
> processor or will it only see four. I wan't to find out
> before we install SQL 2000. Thanks.|||Here's a good white-paper on hyper-threading for various Windows OS'
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/server/evaluation/performance/reports/hyperthread.asp
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor.please_reply_to_public_forum.karaszi@.cornerstone.se> wrote in message news:<OS1YGh6rDHA.2456@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>...
> With sp3 it should use all eight.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> Archive at: http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=microsoft.public.sqlserver
>
> "Stephen" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:297901c3af9b$78aa3c40$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> > We just purchased a quad processor server running windows
> > 2003. The processors are xeon so they have HTT
> > capability. Will SQL200 recognize all eight logical
> > processor or will it only see four. I wan't to find out
> > before we install SQL 2000. Thanks.

hyperthreaded processors running on win2k

My company is currently deploying new hardware for our new hosting site. We
have all new servers. 4 of them are running Win2k standard server and are
web servers, and 3 of them are win2k advanced servers running SQL Server
2000.
These servers have dual Xeons, so if hyperthreading is on, win2k sees 4
procs.
We have been working on tracking down speed issues for quite a while and
recently realized (by accident) , that the webservers run WAY faster when
hyperthreading is turned off. We are using MS Application Center Test for
load testing, so that's how we determined the performance gain.
I've been trying to find a clear cut answer about whether or not you should
use hyperthreading on win2k server, but I haven't found one. Although I have
seen several references to this issue and seen posts of people saying to
shut if off. It seems win2k doesn't know the difference between logical and
physical processors, so maybe that's why it's not good for win2k. ?
Does anyone know where I could find more info on this? We're going to turn
off hyperthreading on the webservers obviously because they perform better,
but I'm wondering if we will see performance gains by also shutting of
hyperthreading on the win2k SQL Servers. ?
Any insight into this would be great.
Thanks.
Personally, I have had fairly good experience with Hyperthreading. First,
make sure you are on build 816 or later. There were some significant
HT-friendly modifications in that build. The easiest way is to download the
818 security hotfix and apply it. That way, you do not have to open a case
to get it. Regardless, you must be on SP2 or higher to get SQL to count the
processors correctly for licensing purposes.
Finally, 2 virtual HT processors run about 20-30% faster using SQL than the
same processer set to non HT. SQL still counts them as full processors for
parallelism, meaning that you can over-parallel a query and drag system
performance down. I manually set MAX DEGREE OF PARALLELISM (MAXDOP) to no
higher than the actual physical processor count.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Mark" <maxmann@.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:uyOJwARJEHA.1312@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> My company is currently deploying new hardware for our new hosting site.
We
> have all new servers. 4 of them are running Win2k standard server and are
> web servers, and 3 of them are win2k advanced servers running SQL Server
> 2000.
> These servers have dual Xeons, so if hyperthreading is on, win2k sees 4
> procs.
> We have been working on tracking down speed issues for quite a while and
> recently realized (by accident) , that the webservers run WAY faster when
> hyperthreading is turned off. We are using MS Application Center Test for
> load testing, so that's how we determined the performance gain.
> I've been trying to find a clear cut answer about whether or not you
should
> use hyperthreading on win2k server, but I haven't found one. Although I
have
> seen several references to this issue and seen posts of people saying to
> shut if off. It seems win2k doesn't know the difference between logical
and
> physical processors, so maybe that's why it's not good for win2k. ?
> Does anyone know where I could find more info on this? We're going to
turn
> off hyperthreading on the webservers obviously because they perform
better,
> but I'm wondering if we will see performance gains by also shutting of
> hyperthreading on the win2k SQL Servers. ?
>
> Any insight into this would be great.
> Thanks.
>

hyperthreaded processors running on win2k

My company is currently deploying new hardware for our new hosting site. We
have all new servers. 4 of them are running Win2k standard server and are
web servers, and 3 of them are win2k advanced servers running SQL Server
2000.
These servers have dual Xeons, so if hyperthreading is on, win2k sees 4
procs.
We have been working on tracking down speed issues for quite a while and
recently realized (by accident) , that the webservers run WAY faster when
hyperthreading is turned off. We are using MS Application Center Test for
load testing, so that's how we determined the performance gain.
I've been trying to find a clear cut answer about whether or not you should
use hyperthreading on win2k server, but I haven't found one. Although I have
seen several references to this issue and seen posts of people saying to
shut if off. It seems win2k doesn't know the difference between logical and
physical processors, so maybe that's why it's not good for win2k. ?
Does anyone know where I could find more info on this? We're going to turn
off hyperthreading on the webservers obviously because they perform better,
but I'm wondering if we will see performance gains by also shutting of
hyperthreading on the win2k SQL Servers. ?
Any insight into this would be great.
Thanks.Personally, I have had fairly good experience with Hyperthreading. First,
make sure you are on build 816 or later. There were some significant
HT-friendly modifications in that build. The easiest way is to download the
818 security hotfix and apply it. That way, you do not have to open a case
to get it. Regardless, you must be on SP2 or higher to get SQL to count the
processors correctly for licensing purposes.
Finally, 2 virtual HT processors run about 20-30% faster using SQL than the
same processer set to non HT. SQL still counts them as full processors for
parallelism, meaning that you can over-parallel a query and drag system
performance down. I manually set MAX DEGREE OF PARALLELISM (MAXDOP) to no
higher than the actual physical processor count.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Mark" <maxmann@.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:uyOJwARJEHA.1312@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> My company is currently deploying new hardware for our new hosting site.
We
> have all new servers. 4 of them are running Win2k standard server and are
> web servers, and 3 of them are win2k advanced servers running SQL Server
> 2000.
> These servers have dual Xeons, so if hyperthreading is on, win2k sees 4
> procs.
> We have been working on tracking down speed issues for quite a while and
> recently realized (by accident) , that the webservers run WAY faster when
> hyperthreading is turned off. We are using MS Application Center Test for
> load testing, so that's how we determined the performance gain.
> I've been trying to find a clear cut answer about whether or not you
should
> use hyperthreading on win2k server, but I haven't found one. Although I
have
> seen several references to this issue and seen posts of people saying to
> shut if off. It seems win2k doesn't know the difference between logical
and
> physical processors, so maybe that's why it's not good for win2k. ?
> Does anyone know where I could find more info on this? We're going to
turn
> off hyperthreading on the webservers obviously because they perform
better,
> but I'm wondering if we will see performance gains by also shutting of
> hyperthreading on the win2k SQL Servers. ?
>
> Any insight into this would be great.
> Thanks.
>

hyperthreaded processors running on win2k

My company is currently deploying new hardware for our new hosting site. We
have all new servers. 4 of them are running Win2k standard server and are
web servers, and 3 of them are win2k advanced servers running SQL Server
2000.
These servers have dual Xeons, so if hyperthreading is on, win2k sees 4
procs.
We have been working on tracking down speed issues for quite a while and
recently realized (by accident) , that the webservers run WAY faster when
hyperthreading is turned off. We are using MS Application Center Test for
load testing, so that's how we determined the performance gain.
I've been trying to find a clear cut answer about whether or not you should
use hyperthreading on win2k server, but I haven't found one. Although I have
seen several references to this issue and seen posts of people saying to
shut if off. It seems win2k doesn't know the difference between logical and
physical processors, so maybe that's why it's not good for win2k. ?
Does anyone know where I could find more info on this? We're going to turn
off hyperthreading on the webservers obviously because they perform better,
but I'm wondering if we will see performance gains by also shutting of
hyperthreading on the win2k SQL Servers. ?
Any insight into this would be great.
Thanks.Personally, I have had fairly good experience with Hyperthreading. First,
make sure you are on build 816 or later. There were some significant
HT-friendly modifications in that build. The easiest way is to download the
818 security hotfix and apply it. That way, you do not have to open a case
to get it. Regardless, you must be on SP2 or higher to get SQL to count the
processors correctly for licensing purposes.
Finally, 2 virtual HT processors run about 20-30% faster using SQL than the
same processer set to non HT. SQL still counts them as full processors for
parallelism, meaning that you can over-parallel a query and drag system
performance down. I manually set MAX degree OF PARALLELISM (MAXDOP) to no
higher than the actual physical processor count.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Mark" <maxmann@.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:uyOJwARJEHA.1312@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> My company is currently deploying new hardware for our new hosting site.
We
> have all new servers. 4 of them are running Win2k standard server and are
> web servers, and 3 of them are win2k advanced servers running SQL Server
> 2000.
> These servers have dual Xeons, so if hyperthreading is on, win2k sees 4
> procs.
> We have been working on tracking down speed issues for quite a while and
> recently realized (by accident) , that the webservers run WAY faster when
> hyperthreading is turned off. We are using MS Application Center Test for
> load testing, so that's how we determined the performance gain.
> I've been trying to find a clear cut answer about whether or not you
should
> use hyperthreading on win2k server, but I haven't found one. Although I
have
> seen several references to this issue and seen posts of people saying to
> shut if off. It seems win2k doesn't know the difference between logical
and
> physical processors, so maybe that's why it's not good for win2k. ?
> Does anyone know where I could find more info on this? We're going to
turn
> off hyperthreading on the webservers obviously because they perform
better,
> but I'm wondering if we will see performance gains by also shutting of
> hyperthreading on the win2k SQL Servers. ?
>
> Any insight into this would be great.
> Thanks.
>