hyphens change between w2K and w2K3 ???

On one system a search for 21-147 returns 1 result - which is the
correct way I need it to work.
However on my new system, this does an OR search, returning all results
with 21 in, and all results wth 147 in which clearly returns hundreds.
These are product part numbers, they /must/ be searchable as they look
on the printed litereature, prefereably only returning 1 correct
result!
I've tried all sorts of things, changing the collation, changing the
word breaker langauge etc
The only other diffrence now is that the first system is on Windows 2K,
and the new one that doesn't work is on Windows 2K3.
As a small fix, i looked for the - and replaced it with an AND. However
some part numbers are of the form N-234S and as such the initial letter
is removed by the noise list and the search returns no results.
This is REALLY important any help would be very greatly appreciated. I
have weeks to get htis working, or the entire web project is down the
pan.
Other info, using commerce server 2002.
Thanks in advance,
Martin
I think you'll have to use another character. For instance have two copies
of your data, one for show and one for indexing. Replace hyphenated words
and numbers with something like 123HYPHEN234.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Martin" <bigmarts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131125590.462357.125330@.z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
> On one system a search for 21-147 returns 1 result - which is the
> correct way I need it to work.
> However on my new system, this does an OR search, returning all results
> with 21 in, and all results wth 147 in which clearly returns hundreds.
> These are product part numbers, they /must/ be searchable as they look
> on the printed litereature, prefereably only returning 1 correct
> result!
> I've tried all sorts of things, changing the collation, changing the
> word breaker langauge etc
> The only other diffrence now is that the first system is on Windows 2K,
> and the new one that doesn't work is on Windows 2K3.
> As a small fix, i looked for the - and replaced it with an AND. However
> some part numbers are of the form N-234S and as such the initial letter
> is removed by the noise list and the search returns no results.
> This is REALLY important any help would be very greatly appreciated. I
> have weeks to get htis working, or the entire web project is down the
> pan.
> Other info, using commerce server 2002.
> Thanks in advance,
> Martin
>
|||That's crazy. Any other suggestions...? It works on one machine, I
must be able to get it to work again...? Can I not copy the
wordbreaker dll from a win 2K machine onto Win 2K3. And what does it
have to do with the OS anyway. Surely this is a DB issue. Wierd.
Also the reason we can't really get rid of the hyphens is due to the
fact that 21-147 and 21147 are two different parts. Silly I know, but I
have to work with it.
|||Are you using FreeText of Contains? I think a contains might work for you.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Martin" <bigmarts@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131363687.867237.149540@.g49g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> That's crazy. Any other suggestions...? It works on one machine, I
> must be able to get it to work again...? Can I not copy the
> wordbreaker dll from a win 2K machine onto Win 2K3. And what does it
> have to do with the OS anyway. Surely this is a DB issue. Wierd.
> Also the reason we can't really get rid of the hyphens is due to the
> fact that 21-147 and 21147 are two different parts. Silly I know, but I
> have to work with it.
>
|||It's a commerce server routine. I think it uses FREETEXT. But trying
it in query analyser works on the w2K machine for CONTAINS and
FREETEXT, but for niether on the W2K3 machine.
Any Microsoft people around? Can I use the W2K wordbreaker dll on the
2003 server machine...? It seems that this is what's causing the
problem.
Thanks,
MArtin

Hyperthreading SQL Server 7 - HELP!

Could you clarify the following.
We are looking to buy a quad xeon box (ie 8 virtual processors). From
reading MS documentation it looks like W2K Server won't cut it - we
will need to move to W2K Advanced Server, correct?
Secondly, will Sql Server 7 support 8 virtual processors under such a
scenario?
Thirdly, based on our proposed box 4 x 2.0 GHz Xeon + 2 Gb RAM - for
more performance would you increase the processor speed (eg to 2.5GHz)
or add more RAM (eg to 4 Gb, or more)?
Many Thanks,
StewartI think win2k server ONLY supports 2 physical procs, so you'll neet Advanced
Server...I think you'll also need sql 7 Enterprise to support 4 procs...
Please make sure SQL 7 Enterprise will run on W2k Advanced Server... ( I
think it will, but be safe and double check..)
"Stewart" <windsurfin_stew@.yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:9373ee00.0308112138.1cb2f916@.posting.google.com...
> Could you clarify the following.
> We are looking to buy a quad xeon box (ie 8 virtual processors). From
> reading MS documentation it looks like W2K Server won't cut it - we
> will need to move to W2K Advanced Server, correct?
> Secondly, will Sql Server 7 support 8 virtual processors under such a
> scenario?
> Thirdly, based on our proposed box 4 x 2.0 GHz Xeon + 2 Gb RAM - for
> more performance would you increase the processor speed (eg to 2.5GHz)
> or add more RAM (eg to 4 Gb, or more)?
> Many Thanks,
> Stewart|||Win 2K server supports 4 Procs.
Here is a good doc on Microsoft , Win2K and hyperthreading
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/docs/hyperthreading.doc
--
--
Allan Mitchell (Microsoft SQL Server MVP)
MCSE,MCDBA
www.SQLDTS.com
I support PASS - the definitive, global community
for SQL Server professionals - http://www.sqlpass.org
"Wayne Snyder" <wsnyder@.computeredservices.com> wrote in message
news:ue9wXLLYDHA.1640@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I think win2k server ONLY supports 2 physical procs, so you'll neet
Advanced
> Server...I think you'll also need sql 7 Enterprise to support 4 procs...
> Please make sure SQL 7 Enterprise will run on W2k Advanced Server... ( I
> think it will, but be safe and double check..)
> "Stewart" <windsurfin_stew@.yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:9373ee00.0308112138.1cb2f916@.posting.google.com...
> > Could you clarify the following.
> >
> > We are looking to buy a quad xeon box (ie 8 virtual processors). From
> > reading MS documentation it looks like W2K Server won't cut it - we
> > will need to move to W2K Advanced Server, correct?
> >
> > Secondly, will Sql Server 7 support 8 virtual processors under such a
> > scenario?
> >
> > Thirdly, based on our proposed box 4 x 2.0 GHz Xeon + 2 Gb RAM - for
> > more performance would you increase the processor speed (eg to 2.5GHz)
> > or add more RAM (eg to 4 Gb, or more)?
> >
> > Many Thanks,
> >
> > Stewart
>|||As for your performance question. You will definitely buy more power by
adding memory instead of CPU here. Go with 4GB RAM.
"Allan Mitchell" <allan@.no-spam.sqldts.com> wrote in message
news:e3GbgjLYDHA.1280@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Win 2K server supports 4 Procs.
> Here is a good doc on Microsoft , Win2K and hyperthreading
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/docs/hyperthreading.doc
> --
> --
> Allan Mitchell (Microsoft SQL Server MVP)
> MCSE,MCDBA
> www.SQLDTS.com
> I support PASS - the definitive, global community
> for SQL Server professionals - http://www.sqlpass.org
>
> "Wayne Snyder" <wsnyder@.computeredservices.com> wrote in message
> news:ue9wXLLYDHA.1640@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I think win2k server ONLY supports 2 physical procs, so you'll neet
> Advanced
> > Server...I think you'll also need sql 7 Enterprise to support 4
procs...
> > Please make sure SQL 7 Enterprise will run on W2k Advanced Server... ( I
> > think it will, but be safe and double check..)
> > "Stewart" <windsurfin_stew@.yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:9373ee00.0308112138.1cb2f916@.posting.google.com...
> > > Could you clarify the following.
> > >
> > > We are looking to buy a quad xeon box (ie 8 virtual processors). From
> > > reading MS documentation it looks like W2K Server won't cut it - we
> > > will need to move to W2K Advanced Server, correct?
> > >
> > > Secondly, will Sql Server 7 support 8 virtual processors under such a
> > > scenario?
> > >
> > > Thirdly, based on our proposed box 4 x 2.0 GHz Xeon + 2 Gb RAM - for
> > > more performance would you increase the processor speed (eg to 2.5GHz)
> > > or add more RAM (eg to 4 Gb, or more)?
> > >
> > > Many Thanks,
> > >
> > > Stewart
> >
> >
>|||SQL Server 7.0 Standard Edition will only support 4 processors, and it can't
tell the difference between physical and logical processors. So, if you
want it to use all 8 logical processors on your proposed configuration
you'll want to purchase Enterprise Edition. In addition, 2GB of memory is
marginal for this sized configuration if you are really worried about
maximum performance. So you'll want more memory and Enterprise Edition to
support that additional memory. With 7.0 the best you can do for memory is
the /3GB switch. So the maximum useful memory on the system is going to be
4GB.
An alternative is to stick with Standard Edition and just have it use one
logical processor on each physical processor. Background tasks (Windows
processes, SQL Agent, etc.) will make some use of the additional logical
processors. Keep in mind that the additional logical processors don't
double system performance anyway, most of the data I've heard suggests
they'll give you about a 20% boost. And if you make heavy use of parallel
query then they might actually lead to some pathological conditions that
degrade performance. Finally, with Standard Edition you'd still be limited
to 2GB of memory, which in the long run is your most likely bottleneck.
--
Hal Berenson, SQL Server MVP
True Mountain Group LLC
"Stewart" <windsurfin_stew@.yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:9373ee00.0308112138.1cb2f916@.posting.google.com...
> Could you clarify the following.
> We are looking to buy a quad xeon box (ie 8 virtual processors). From
> reading MS documentation it looks like W2K Server won't cut it - we
> will need to move to W2K Advanced Server, correct?
> Secondly, will Sql Server 7 support 8 virtual processors under such a
> scenario?
> Thirdly, based on our proposed box 4 x 2.0 GHz Xeon + 2 Gb RAM - for
> more performance would you increase the processor speed (eg to 2.5GHz)
> or add more RAM (eg to 4 Gb, or more)?
> Many Thanks,
> Stewart