SQLAgentMail: become

Showing posts with label become. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Question on sql server certification

I am planning to certify on sql server 2000 and become an MCDBA. I am new to sql server certification track. My understanding is I need to take 4 exams(3 must and 1 optional). I have few questions
1>> Can I take one exam and still be certified
2>> When yukon certification track may come
3>>Whats the sql server certification upgrade path? I mean if I am 2000 certified, how many exams I need to take to upgrade to yukon - the next version
4>> Can you ssuggest some good materials,urls etc for 2000 certification
Thx in advanc
Ami> 1>> Can I take one exam and still be certified?
Yes, but not as MCDBA - just MCP (Microsoft Certified Professional).
> 2>> When yukon certification track may come?
> 3>>Whats the sql server certification upgrade path? I mean if I am 2000
certified, how many exams I need to take to upgrade to yukon - the next
version.
Both questions can't be answered at this time. You will have to wait, IMO,
for at least one year before we will ge more info.
> 4>> Can you ssuggest some good materials,urls etc for 2000 certification.
http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/mcdba/requirements.asp
--
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Associate Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
More than just Training
www.SolidQualityLearning.com|||Ditto to what Amit said and...
Look up www.Transender.com on the internet, they sell
practise exams which are the best in the business.
There is an actual Microsoft MCDBA Newsgroup, you may get
some better stuff from there.
J
>--Original Message--
>I am planning to certify on sql server 2000 and become an
MCDBA. I am new to sql server certification track. My
understanding is I need to take 4 exams(3 must and 1
optional). I have few questions:
>1>> Can I take one exam and still be certified?
>2>> When yukon certification track may come?
>3>>Whats the sql server certification upgrade path? I
mean if I am 2000 certified, how many exams I need to take
to upgrade to yukon - the next version.
>4>> Can you ssuggest some good materials,urls etc for
2000 certification.
>Thx in advance
>Amit
>.
>

Question on SQL Server 2000 - 2005

I am a DB2 DBA that has been asked to become familiar enough with SQL
Server in order to become actively involved in its installation,
implementation, and to review database backup/recovery procedures. SQL
Server will be used by a vendor packaged application.

The problem is that we are awaiting word on whether it will be SQL
Server 2000 or 2005 we will be working with. I have been told that
there are considerable differences between the two versions.

There is an upcoming local 5 day class on Administering SQL Server 2000
that I would like to take. (outline below)

Question is, are the differences between the two versions so drastic as
to render this class less than useful, especially in terms of
installation and basic db maintenance functions?

Many thanks in advance.
Gerry

Course Outline: 2072 Administering a Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Database

Lesson 1: SQL Server Overview

What Is SQL Server
SQL Server Integration
SQL Server Databases
SQL Server Security
Working with SQL Server

Top

Lesson 2: Planning to Install SQL Server

Hardware Installation Considerations
SQL Server 2000 Editions
Software Installation Considerations
Methods of Installing SQL Server
Verifying the Installation
Configuring SQL Server Enterprise Manager
Troubleshooting

Lesson 3: Managing Database Files

Introduction to Data Structures
Creating Databases
Managing Databases
Placing Database Files and Logs
Optimizing the Database Using Hardware-based RAID
Optimizing the Database Using Filegroups
Optimizing the Database Using Filegroups with Hardware-based
RAID
Capacity Planning
Performance Considerations

Lesson 4: Managing Security

Implementing an Authentication Mode
Assigning Logins to Users and Roles
Assigning Permissions to Users and Roles
Managing Security Within SQL Server
Managing Application Security
Managing SQL Server Security in the Enterprise

Lesson 5: Performing Administrative Tasks

Configuration Tasks
Routine SQL Server Administrative Tasks
Automating Routine Maintenance Tasks
Creating Alerts
Troubleshooting SQL Server Automation
Automating Multiserver Jobs

Top

Lesson 6: Backing Up Databases

Preventing Data Loss
Setting and Changing a Database Recovery Model
SQL Server Backup
When to Back Up Databases
Performing Backups
Types of Backup Methods
Planning a Backup Strategy
Performance Considerations

Lesson 7: Restoring Databases

SQL Server Recovery Process
Preparing to Restore a Database
Restoring Backups
Restoring Databases from Different Backup Types
Restoring Damaged System Databases

Lesson 8: Monitoring SQL Server for Performance

Why to Monitor SQL Server
Performance Monitoring and Tuning
Tools for Monitoring SQL Server
Common Monitoring and Tuning Tasks

Lesson 9: Transferring Data

Introduction to Transferring Data
Tools for Importing and Exporting Data in SQL Server
Introduction to DTS
Transforming Data with DTS

Top

Lesson 10: Maintaining High Availability

Introduction to Availability
Increasing Availability Using Failover Clustering
Standby Servers and Log Shipping

Lesson 11: Introducing Replication

Introduction to Distributed Data
Introduction to SQL Server Replication
SQL Server Replication Agents
SQL Server Replication Types
Physical Replication ModelsIn my humble opinion you better get training on SQL 2005. But knowledge
of SQL 2000 will add on to SQL 2005|||(datapro01@.yahoo.com) writes:
> Question is, are the differences between the two versions so drastic as
> to render this class less than useful, especially in terms of
> installation and basic db maintenance functions?

Everything that works in SQL 2000 works in SQL 2005, at least almost. But
SQL 2005 may offer new and better ways that what you learn on the SQL 2000
class.

The one area where the SQL 2000 class may be more confusing than helpful
if you settle on SQL 2005, is installation. The setup program is different,
there are different configuration issues etc.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodin...ions/books.mspx|||Thanks for the replies and the info. New Horizons is telling me that
the training materials for 2005 have not yet been released. At least to
them.

I will certainly do my best to understand the installation differences
between the versions.

Monday, March 12, 2012

Question on ProcCache

Hi,
DBCC PROCCACHE is giving me that info. How can i know if
the ProcCache is FULL or closed to be ? Can it become
FULL ?
How does it effect Proc performance or general performance?
num proc buffs num proc buffs used num proc buffs active
proc cache size proc cache used proc cache active
-- -- -- --
-- -- --
16642 16642 10492
11736 11736 5586
Thanks !
DonHave you looked at the documentation on DBCC PROCCACHE? You can find this
in Books Online or, if you don't have it installed:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/tsqlref/ts_dbcc_61d1.asp
--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"Don" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:295fe01c46524$2f422ab0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> DBCC PROCCACHE is giving me that info. How can i know if
> the ProcCache is FULL or closed to be ? Can it become
> FULL ?
> How does it effect Proc performance or general performance?
> num proc buffs num proc buffs used num proc buffs active
> proc cache size proc cache used proc cache active
> -- -- -- --
> -- -- --
> 16642 16642 10492
> 11736 11736 5586
> Thanks !
> Don
>|||Performance will typically not be affected as the Lazywriter will be
flushing out aged pages. Pls read Books Online Memory architecture and
Lazywriter for more details.
Thanks,
Vikram Jayaram
Microsoft, SQL Server
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Subscribe to MSDN & use http://msdn.microsoft.com/newsgroups.

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Question on FOR XML issue

Hi, all.

I'm trying to become smarter about the use of the FOR XML clause in SQL
Server. There's one question I'd like to ask that I've not found
directly answered elsewhere, probably due to my own inaccurate or
feeble (or both) searching, so I thought I'd ask the good folks here
for a little information if I may.

I've played with the FOR XML AUTO, ELEMENTS variation of the XML
capability, and it is marvelous for what I would call "cleanly"
hierarchical data, and by that I naively mean always one-to-many
relationships.

The data I'm trying to model has, at a basic level, several one-to-many
relationships, eg Parent has many children of type X, and many children
of type Y. X and Y, themselves, are unrelated. When I write the query
to dump this data, however, SQL Server tries to wrap Y records as
children of X records, which is not correct. Another way of thinking
about it might be a list of PERSONS, and there is a BOOKS table of
favorite books for each person, and a table of favorite TV shows for
each person. BOOKS and TV are unrelated.

Select Person.Lastname,Parent.Firstname,Books.Title,TV.Sh owTitle
from Person
join BOOKS
on Person.PersonID=Books.PersonID
join TV
on Person.PersonID=TV.PersonID
for XML AUTO, ELEMENTS

And I'd like to see:

<PERSON>
<Lastname>somevalue</Lastname>
<Firstanme>somevalue</Lastname>
<BOOKS>
<TITLE>Moby Dick</TITLE>
</BOOKS>
<BOOKS>
<TITLE>Hunt for Red October</TITLE>
</BOOKS>
<TV>
<ShowTItle>Laverne and Shirley</ShowTitle>
</TV>
</PERSON
But I get something more on the order of this:

<PERSON>
<Lastname>somevalue</Lastname>
<Firstname>somevalue</Firstname>
<BOOKS>
<TITLE>MOBY DICK</TITLE>
<TV>
<SHOWTITLE>Laverne and Shirley</ShowTitle>
</TV>
</BOOKS>
</PERSON
At a first glance, it doesn't seem to me there's a way to solve
this, because the joins inevitably create the appearance of a
relationship between the two "inner" pieces of data even though it
doesn't really exist. Perhaps I'm merely writing the query incorrectly,
but as I try to think of ways to rearrange it, it seems I'm just moving
the same problem around. Is there a way to solve it? Would it be
smarter just to break the queries up into separate XML exports, eg a
BOOKS.XML and a TV.XML, then combine them?

If I'm being unyieldingly stupid in not seeing the answer to this,
please accept my humble apologies in advance.

Your help is greatly appreciated. I would ask that replies be posted to
the newsgroup; the email referenced in this message is dead.

Thanks again,
David<intrepid_dw@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111166461.577036.179350@.l41g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi, all.
> I'm trying to become smarter about the use of the FOR XML clause in SQL
> Server. There's one question I'd like to ask that I've not found
> directly answered elsewhere, probably due to my own inaccurate or
> feeble (or both) searching, so I thought I'd ask the good folks here
> for a little information if I may.
> I've played with the FOR XML AUTO, ELEMENTS variation of the XML
> capability, and it is marvelous for what I would call "cleanly"
> hierarchical data, and by that I naively mean always one-to-many
> relationships.

<snip
I don't have an answer myself, but you might get a better response in
microsoft.public.sqlserver.xml

Simon|||(intrepid_dw@.hotmail.com) writes:
> The data I'm trying to model has, at a basic level, several one-to-many
> relationships, eg Parent has many children of type X, and many children
> of type Y. X and Y, themselves, are unrelated. When I write the query
> to dump this data, however, SQL Server tries to wrap Y records as
> children of X records, which is not correct. Another way of thinking
> about it might be a list of PERSONS, and there is a BOOKS table of
> favorite books for each person, and a table of favorite TV shows for
> each person. BOOKS and TV are unrelated.

I'm by no means an expert in XML, but I would guess that you need to
use FOR XML EXPLICIT in this case. Below is an example for your situation.
I should add that I mainly made this example for my own exercise, so
this may not be the "proper" way to write it.

SELECT 1 as Tag,
NULL as Parent,
OrderID as [Order!1!OrderID],
NULL as [Customer!2!CustomerID!element],
NULL as [Customer!2!CompanyName!element],
NULL as [Customer!2!City!element],
NULL as [Employee!3!FirstName!element],
NULL as [Employee!3!LastName!element]
FROM Orders
WHERE OrderID BETWEEN 11000 AND 11020
UNION ALL
select 2, 1,
Orders.OrderID, c.CustomerID, c.CompanyName, c.City, NULL, NULL
from Orders
join Customers c ON Orders.CustomerID = c.CustomerID
WHERE Orders.OrderID BETWEEN 11000 AND 11020
UNION ALL
select 3, 1, o.OrderID, NULL, NULL, NULL, e.FirstName, e.LastName
from Orders o
join Employees e ON o.EmployeeID = e.EmployeeID
WHERE o.OrderID BETWEEN 11000 AND 11020
ORDER BY [Order!1!OrderID], Tag
FOR XML EXPLICIT

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp|||Erland:

The more I study this, the more I think you're right on the money. I
suspected that the problem was at either end of the spectrum; either I
wrote the query horribly wrong to begin with, and was missing something
obvious, or I needed to use the EXPLICIT alternative and the universal
table. Unfortunately, the universal table and query that would be
necessary for the data I'm actually modeling would be HUGE and just
about incomprehensible.

I think what I'm going to do is to design queries to return the "pure"
one-to-many relationships, and then merge the resultant XML into a
larger file. That's not at all complicated and strikes me as a
substantially smarter alternative than trying to write the ELEMENTS
version of this query.

As an irrelevant aside, its interesting to design an XML layout for
existing data because it out almost reminds me of designing a grammar,
eg decompositions, generations of repetitive sections, etc.

Thanks for your assistance, Erland!

-David

Erland Sommarskog wrote:
> (intrepid_dw@.hotmail.com) writes:
> > The data I'm trying to model has, at a basic level, several
one-to-many
> > relationships, eg Parent has many children of type X, and many
children
> > of type Y. X and Y, themselves, are unrelated. When I write the
query
> > to dump this data, however, SQL Server tries to wrap Y records as
> > children of X records, which is not correct. Another way of
thinking
> > about it might be a list of PERSONS, and there is a BOOKS table of
> > favorite books for each person, and a table of favorite TV shows
for
> > each person. BOOKS and TV are unrelated.
> I'm by no means an expert in XML, but I would guess that you need to
> use FOR XML EXPLICIT in this case. Below is an example for your
situation.
> I should add that I mainly made this example for my own exercise, so
> this may not be the "proper" way to write it.
> SELECT 1 as Tag,
> NULL as Parent,
> OrderID as [Order!1!OrderID],
> NULL as [Customer!2!CustomerID!element],
> NULL as [Customer!2!CompanyName!element],
> NULL as [Customer!2!City!element],
> NULL as [Employee!3!FirstName!element],
> NULL as [Employee!3!LastName!element]
> FROM Orders
> WHERE OrderID BETWEEN 11000 AND 11020
> UNION ALL
> select 2, 1,
> Orders.OrderID, c.CustomerID, c.CompanyName, c.City, NULL,
NULL
> from Orders
> join Customers c ON Orders.CustomerID = c.CustomerID
> WHERE Orders.OrderID BETWEEN 11000 AND 11020
> UNION ALL
> select 3, 1, o.OrderID, NULL, NULL, NULL, e.FirstName, e.LastName
> from Orders o
> join Employees e ON o.EmployeeID = e.EmployeeID
> WHERE o.OrderID BETWEEN 11000 AND 11020
> ORDER BY [Order!1!OrderID], Tag
> FOR XML EXPLICIT
>
> --
> Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
> Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Question on sql server certification

Question on sql server certification

Question on sql server certification

Question on SQL Server 2000 - 2005

Monday, March 12, 2012

Question on ProcCache

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Question on FOR XML issue

SQLAgentMail

Blog Archive

About Me