REG. RESTORE DATABASE FROM SQL 2005

I am facing problem while restoring database:
"An excepting occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch.
Too many backup device specified for backup or restore; only 64 are
allowed
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
sham,
Since BACKUP DATABASE only supports 64 backup devices, you should not need
more than 64 to restore. If you paste in your RESTORE command here, maybe
it will be apparent what is wrong.
RLF
"sham kulkarni" <sham252664@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uNS92ctIIHA.2480@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I am facing problem while restoring database:
> "An excepting occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch.
> Too many backup device specified for backup or restore; only 64 are
> allowed
>
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
|||Russel, I think the OP tries to restored sql server 2005 database on sql
server 2000 version
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:ujgOF1tIIHA.1204@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> sham,
> Since BACKUP DATABASE only supports 64 backup devices, you should not need
> more than 64 to restore. If you paste in your RESTORE command here, maybe
> it will be apparent what is wrong.
> RLF
> "sham kulkarni" <sham252664@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uNS92ctIIHA.2480@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
|||Uri,
I did not think that of that possibility. Of course, if that is the case,
then it certainly will not work. But that is a strange message to get in
this case. I would have expected something like this:
Msg 3169, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
The backed-up database has on-disk structure version 611. The server
supports version 539 and cannot restore or upgrade this database.
RLF
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:uxQBlqFJIHA.4592@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Russel, I think the OP tries to restored sql server 2005 database on sql
> server 2000 version
>
>
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:ujgOF1tIIHA.1204@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>
sql

REG. RESTORE DATABASE FROM SQL 2005

I am facing problem while restoring database:
"An excepting occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch.
Too many backup device specified for backup or restore; only 64 are
allowed
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***sham,
Since BACKUP DATABASE only supports 64 backup devices, you should not need
more than 64 to restore. If you paste in your RESTORE command here, maybe
it will be apparent what is wrong.
RLF
"sham kulkarni" <sham252664@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uNS92ctIIHA.2480@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I am facing problem while restoring database:
> "An excepting occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch.
> Too many backup device specified for backup or restore; only 64 are
> allowed
>
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***|||Russel, I think the OP tries to restored sql server 2005 database on sql
server 2000 version
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:ujgOF1tIIHA.1204@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> sham,
> Since BACKUP DATABASE only supports 64 backup devices, you should not need
> more than 64 to restore. If you paste in your RESTORE command here, maybe
> it will be apparent what is wrong.
> RLF
> "sham kulkarni" <sham252664@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uNS92ctIIHA.2480@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>|||Uri,
I did not think that of that possibility. Of course, if that is the case,
then it certainly will not work. But that is a strange message to get in
this case. I would have expected something like this:
Msg 3169, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
The backed-up database has on-disk structure version 611. The server
supports version 539 and cannot restore or upgrade this database.
RLF
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:uxQBlqFJIHA.4592@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Russel, I think the OP tries to restored sql server 2005 database on sql
> server 2000 version
>
>
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:ujgOF1tIIHA.1204@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>

REG. RESTORE DATABASE FROM SQL 2005

I am facing problem while restoring database:
"An excepting occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch.
Too many backup device specified for backup or restore; only 64 are
allowed
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***sham,
Since BACKUP DATABASE only supports 64 backup devices, you should not need
more than 64 to restore. If you paste in your RESTORE command here, maybe
it will be apparent what is wrong.
RLF
"sham kulkarni" <sham252664@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uNS92ctIIHA.2480@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I am facing problem while restoring database:
> "An excepting occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch.
> Too many backup device specified for backup or restore; only 64 are
> allowed
>
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***|||Russel, I think the OP tries to restored sql server 2005 database on sql
server 2000 version
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:ujgOF1tIIHA.1204@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> sham,
> Since BACKUP DATABASE only supports 64 backup devices, you should not need
> more than 64 to restore. If you paste in your RESTORE command here, maybe
> it will be apparent what is wrong.
> RLF
> "sham kulkarni" <sham252664@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uNS92ctIIHA.2480@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I am facing problem while restoring database:
>> "An excepting occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch.
>> Too many backup device specified for backup or restore; only 64 are
>> allowed
>>
>> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
>|||Uri,
I did not think that of that possibility. Of course, if that is the case,
then it certainly will not work. But that is a strange message to get in
this case. I would have expected something like this:
Msg 3169, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
The backed-up database has on-disk structure version 611. The server
supports version 539 and cannot restore or upgrade this database.
RLF
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:uxQBlqFJIHA.4592@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Russel, I think the OP tries to restored sql server 2005 database on sql
> server 2000 version
>
>
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:ujgOF1tIIHA.1204@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> sham,
>> Since BACKUP DATABASE only supports 64 backup devices, you should not
>> need more than 64 to restore. If you paste in your RESTORE command here,
>> maybe it will be apparent what is wrong.
>> RLF
>> "sham kulkarni" <sham252664@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:uNS92ctIIHA.2480@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I am facing problem while restoring database:
>> "An excepting occured while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch.
>> Too many backup device specified for backup or restore; only 64 are
>> allowed
>>
>> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
>>
>

Redundant DR Site Cluster Restore

Hello,
We are restoring our production SQL cluster to an isolated DR site. The
server and SAN hardware are the same, the domain is the same, all of the IP
addresses are the same because the network is isolated.
Typically, we back our production servers up to tape and restore them on top
of a vanilla OS using NetBackup for our Windows DR restores. This usually
works fine, but we are always required to remove the restored server to the
domain, add it to a workgroup, and re-add the server back to the domain to
get rid of the " The trust
relationship between this workstation and the primary domain failed" error.
I have restored the OS of both nodes of the cluster to servers in the DR
site. The cluster service obviously will not start because of the "trust
error" which can't be resolved until the server is removed from the domain
and re-added.
My question is, if I do this to a node in the server, what will happen to
the cluster service/quorum/etc after I remove it from the domain. I'm going
to readd it immediately, but I'm wondering if it will cause any issues or if
there are any precautions I need to take? Or will the cluster just come up
assuming no other changes have been made?
Just go in and take all of the resource groups offline. Then stop the
cluster service in the service control applet. Once that is done, get the
servers added back to the domain. Once added back in, start the cluster
service, connect to your cluster, and start up all other groups.
Mike
Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"jason" <jason@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:ADAEB407-C959-45A4-941D-A29629DB6533@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> We are restoring our production SQL cluster to an isolated DR site. The
> server and SAN hardware are the same, the domain is the same, all of the
> IP
> addresses are the same because the network is isolated.
> Typically, we back our production servers up to tape and restore them on
> top
> of a vanilla OS using NetBackup for our Windows DR restores. This usually
> works fine, but we are always required to remove the restored server to
> the
> domain, add it to a workgroup, and re-add the server back to the domain to
> get rid of the " The trust
> relationship between this workstation and the primary domain failed"
> error.
> I have restored the OS of both nodes of the cluster to servers in the DR
> site. The cluster service obviously will not start because of the "trust
> error" which can't be resolved until the server is removed from the domain
> and re-added.
> My question is, if I do this to a node in the server, what will happen to
> the cluster service/quorum/etc after I remove it from the domain. I'm
> going
> to readd it immediately, but I'm wondering if it will cause any issues or
> if
> there are any precautions I need to take? Or will the cluster just come
> up
> assuming no other changes have been made?