By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
457,731 Members | 840 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 457,731 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Once a week or once a month

P: n/a
Running a SQL 7 system on a Windows 2000 server using Access 2000 on client
machines as a front end. System administrator currently reboots the server
once a month. Yesterday we had some weird thing with the database where
users were getting ODBC errors when trying to access it. Rebooted the
server, everything was fine. Suggested to the sa that he reboot the server
once a week. He said he already does it once a month, and that's sufficient.

My POV is that: a) doing it once a week might prevent situations such as the
one yesterday; b) even without situations like the one yesterday,
performance may be degrading over the course of the month, without our being
aware of it, and rebooting once a week might help performance.

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks!

Neil
Dec 6 '07 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
29 Replies


P: n/a
Just because the reboot fixed the issue doesn't mean that a preventative
reboot will stop it from occuring.

A reboot might not have been needed to resolve the issue in the first place.
Possibly a configuration change
or bouncing a service could have resolved it. My advice is to spend some
time researching the issue and if
you cant find a way to resolve it then find a way to detect it and have it
perform the least intrusive form of corrective action.

-Mike

"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:5C*******************@newssvr29.news.prodigy. net...
Running a SQL 7 system on a Windows 2000 server using Access 2000 on
client machines as a front end. System administrator currently reboots the
server once a month. Yesterday we had some weird thing with the database
where users were getting ODBC errors when trying to access it. Rebooted
the server, everything was fine. Suggested to the sa that he reboot the
server once a week. He said he already does it once a month, and that's
sufficient.

My POV is that: a) doing it once a week might prevent situations such as
the one yesterday; b) even without situations like the one yesterday,
performance may be degrading over the course of the month, without our
being aware of it, and rebooting once a week might help performance.

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks!

Neil

Dec 6 '07 #2

P: n/a
Why does he reboot at all?

--
Tom

----------------------------------------------------
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:5C*******************@newssvr29.news.prodigy. net...
Running a SQL 7 system on a Windows 2000 server using Access 2000 on client
machines as a front end. System administrator currently reboots the server
once a month. Yesterday we had some weird thing with the database where
users were getting ODBC errors when trying to access it. Rebooted the
server, everything was fine. Suggested to the sa that he reboot the server
once a week. He said he already does it once a month, and that's sufficient.

My POV is that: a) doing it once a week might prevent situations such as the
one yesterday; b) even without situations like the one yesterday,
performance may be degrading over the course of the month, without our being
aware of it, and rebooting once a week might help performance.

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks!

Neil
Dec 6 '07 #3

P: n/a
OK, that's fine. But my POV is that rebooting in general, and resetting the
system memory, is a good thing to do. I take it that you disagree?

"Michael Abair" <ma****@autotask.comwrote in message
news:eT**************@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Just because the reboot fixed the issue doesn't mean that a preventative
reboot will stop it from occuring.

A reboot might not have been needed to resolve the issue in the first
place. Possibly a configuration change
or bouncing a service could have resolved it. My advice is to spend some
time researching the issue and if
you cant find a way to resolve it then find a way to detect it and have it
perform the least intrusive form of corrective action.

-Mike

"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:5C*******************@newssvr29.news.prodigy. net...
>Running a SQL 7 system on a Windows 2000 server using Access 2000 on
client machines as a front end. System administrator currently reboots
the server once a month. Yesterday we had some weird thing with the
database where users were getting ODBC errors when trying to access it.
Rebooted the server, everything was fine. Suggested to the sa that he
reboot the server once a week. He said he already does it once a month,
and that's sufficient.

My POV is that: a) doing it once a week might prevent situations such as
the one yesterday; b) even without situations like the one yesterday,
performance may be degrading over the course of the month, without our
being aware of it, and rebooting once a week might help performance.

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks!

Neil


Dec 6 '07 #4

P: n/a
See my response to Michael in this thread.

"Tom Moreau" <to*@dont.spam.me.cips.cawrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Why does he reboot at all?

--
Tom

----------------------------------------------------
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:5C*******************@newssvr29.news.prodigy. net...
Running a SQL 7 system on a Windows 2000 server using Access 2000 on
client
machines as a front end. System administrator currently reboots the server
once a month. Yesterday we had some weird thing with the database where
users were getting ODBC errors when trying to access it. Rebooted the
server, everything was fine. Suggested to the sa that he reboot the server
once a week. He said he already does it once a month, and that's
sufficient.

My POV is that: a) doing it once a week might prevent situations such as
the
one yesterday; b) even without situations like the one yesterday,
performance may be degrading over the course of the month, without our
being
aware of it, and rebooting once a week might help performance.

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks!

Neil


Dec 6 '07 #5

P: n/a
Neil (no****@nospam.net) writes:
OK, that's fine. But my POV is that rebooting in general, and resetting
the system memory, is a good thing to do. I take it that you disagree?
I do. Unless there is some known issues, there is rarely any reason to
reboot SQL Server regularly. OK, so you have SQL 7, and this version is a
bit old. Nevertheless, it has the same basic architecture as subsequent
SQL Server versions. The predecessors 6.x were less stable. (In 6.0 there
was a bug that compelled you to restart the bug about every 48th day.
There was some counter somewhere that wrapped around after 49 days.)

As for rebooting helping performance, it may be the other way round.
When you reboot, the entire plan cache will be thrown away, and until
the plan has built up, the server will spend more time compiling. But
that's the only thing. Say that you have a table with date column,
into which the current date is typically inserted, and queries against
this table are typically for the recent days. If the query is a stored
procedure or is parameterised, the plan will be built using that date.
But if statistics are out of date, the estimates will be wrong, and you
may get a bad plan. Had you never restarted the server, the old good
plan would have remained in cache.

But, OK, the reverse can happen: the old plan was bad, but statistics
have been updated recently, so now you get a good plan.

As for your problem the other day, you did not include any error message,
but I would guess that it was a temporary network problem, and it would
have gone away even if you had not restarted SQL Server.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, es****@sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx
Dec 6 '07 #6

P: n/a
Why does the system memory need to be reset? I've seen SQL Servers stay up
for months and not need a reboot. That's what High Availability is all
about.

--
Tom

----------------------------------------------------
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:NQ*****************@newssvr11.news.prodigy.ne t...
OK, that's fine. But my POV is that rebooting in general, and resetting the
system memory, is a good thing to do. I take it that you disagree?

"Michael Abair" <ma****@autotask.comwrote in message
news:eT**************@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Just because the reboot fixed the issue doesn't mean that a preventative
reboot will stop it from occuring.

A reboot might not have been needed to resolve the issue in the first
place. Possibly a configuration change
or bouncing a service could have resolved it. My advice is to spend some
time researching the issue and if
you cant find a way to resolve it then find a way to detect it and have it
perform the least intrusive form of corrective action.

-Mike

"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:5C*******************@newssvr29.news.prodigy. net...
>Running a SQL 7 system on a Windows 2000 server using Access 2000 on
client machines as a front end. System administrator currently reboots
the server once a month. Yesterday we had some weird thing with the
database where users were getting ODBC errors when trying to access it.
Rebooted the server, everything was fine. Suggested to the sa that he
reboot the server once a week. He said he already does it once a month,
and that's sufficient.

My POV is that: a) doing it once a week might prevent situations such as
the one yesterday; b) even without situations like the one yesterday,
performance may be degrading over the course of the month, without our
being aware of it, and rebooting once a week might help performance.

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks!

Neil


Dec 6 '07 #7

P: n/a
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:NQ*****************@newssvr11.news.prodigy.ne t...
OK, that's fine. But my POV is that rebooting in general, and resetting
the system memory, is a good thing to do. I take it that you disagree?
Yes. I disagree.

I've run systems with uptimes measured in years.

I see no value in rebooting a correctly setup system.

"Michael Abair" <ma****@autotask.comwrote in message
news:eT**************@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>Just because the reboot fixed the issue doesn't mean that a preventative
reboot will stop it from occuring.

A reboot might not have been needed to resolve the issue in the first
place. Possibly a configuration change
or bouncing a service could have resolved it. My advice is to spend some
time researching the issue and if
you cant find a way to resolve it then find a way to detect it and have
it perform the least intrusive form of corrective action.

-Mike

"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:5C*******************@newssvr29.news.prodigy .net...
>>Running a SQL 7 system on a Windows 2000 server using Access 2000 on
client machines as a front end. System administrator currently reboots
the server once a month. Yesterday we had some weird thing with the
database where users were getting ODBC errors when trying to access it.
Rebooted the server, everything was fine. Suggested to the sa that he
reboot the server once a week. He said he already does it once a month,
and that's sufficient.

My POV is that: a) doing it once a week might prevent situations such as
the one yesterday; b) even without situations like the one yesterday,
performance may be degrading over the course of the month, without our
being aware of it, and rebooting once a week might help performance.

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks!

Neil



Dec 6 '07 #8

P: n/a

"Erland Sommarskog" <es****@sommarskog.sewrote in message
news:Xn*********************@127.0.0.1...
Neil (no****@nospam.net) writes:
>OK, that's fine. But my POV is that rebooting in general, and resetting
the system memory, is a good thing to do. I take it that you disagree?

I do. Unless there is some known issues, there is rarely any reason to
reboot SQL Server regularly. OK, so you have SQL 7, and this version is a
bit old. Nevertheless, it has the same basic architecture as subsequent
SQL Server versions. The predecessors 6.x were less stable. (In 6.0 there
was a bug that compelled you to restart the bug about every 48th day.
There was some counter somewhere that wrapped around after 49 days.)

As for rebooting helping performance, it may be the other way round.
When you reboot, the entire plan cache will be thrown away, and until
the plan has built up, the server will spend more time compiling. But
that's the only thing. Say that you have a table with date column,
into which the current date is typically inserted, and queries against
this table are typically for the recent days. If the query is a stored
procedure or is parameterised, the plan will be built using that date.
But if statistics are out of date, the estimates will be wrong, and you
may get a bad plan. Had you never restarted the server, the old good
plan would have remained in cache.

But, OK, the reverse can happen: the old plan was bad, but statistics
have been updated recently, so now you get a good plan.

As for your problem the other day, you did not include any error message,
but I would guess that it was a temporary network problem, and it would
have gone away even if you had not restarted SQL Server.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, es****@sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx
Thanks, Erland. Once again, your response is thorough and informative.
Dec 7 '07 #9

P: n/a

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mo****************@greenms.comwrote in message
news:13*************@corp.supernews.com...
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:NQ*****************@newssvr11.news.prodigy.ne t...
>OK, that's fine. But my POV is that rebooting in general, and resetting
the system memory, is a good thing to do. I take it that you disagree?

Yes. I disagree.

I've run systems with uptimes measured in years.

I see no value in rebooting a correctly setup system.

>"Michael Abair" <ma****@autotask.comwrote in message
news:eT**************@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>Just because the reboot fixed the issue doesn't mean that a preventative
reboot will stop it from occuring.

A reboot might not have been needed to resolve the issue in the first
place. Possibly a configuration change
or bouncing a service could have resolved it. My advice is to spend
some time researching the issue and if
you cant find a way to resolve it then find a way to detect it and have
it perform the least intrusive form of corrective action.

-Mike

"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:5C*******************@newssvr29.news.prodig y.net...
Running a SQL 7 system on a Windows 2000 server using Access 2000 on
client machines as a front end. System administrator currently reboots
the server once a month. Yesterday we had some weird thing with the
database where users were getting ODBC errors when trying to access it.
Rebooted the server, everything was fine. Suggested to the sa that he
reboot the server once a week. He said he already does it once a month,
and that's sufficient.

My POV is that: a) doing it once a week might prevent situations such
as the one yesterday; b) even without situations like the one
yesterday, performance may be degrading over the course of the month,
without our being aware of it, and rebooting once a week might help
performance.

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks!

Neil

Thanks.
Dec 7 '07 #10

P: n/a
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:NQ*****************@newssvr11.news.prodigy.ne t...
OK, that's fine. But my POV is that rebooting in general, and resetting
the
system memory, is a good thing to do. I take it that you disagree?

"Michael Abair" <ma****@autotask.comwrote in message
news:eT**************@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>Just because the reboot fixed the issue doesn't mean that a preventative
reboot will stop it from occuring.

A reboot might not have been needed to resolve the issue in the first
place. Possibly a configuration change
or bouncing a service could have resolved it. My advice is to spend some
time researching the issue and if
you cant find a way to resolve it then find a way to detect it and have
it
perform the least intrusive form of corrective action.

-Mike

"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:5C*******************@newssvr29.news.prodigy .net...
>>Running a SQL 7 system on a Windows 2000 server using Access 2000 on
client machines as a front end. System administrator currently reboots
the server once a month. Yesterday we had some weird thing with the
database where users were getting ODBC errors when trying to access it.
Rebooted the server, everything was fine. Suggested to the sa that he
reboot the server once a week. He said he already does it once a month,
and that's sufficient.

My POV is that: a) doing it once a week might prevent situations such as
the one yesterday; b) even without situations like the one yesterday,
performance may be degrading over the course of the month, without our
being aware of it, and rebooting once a week might help performance.

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks!

Neil

"Tom Moreau" <to*@dont.spam.me.cips.cawrote in message
news:uu**************@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
Why does the system memory need to be reset? I've seen SQL Servers stay
up
for months and not need a reboot. That's what High Availability is all
about.

--
Tom

----------------------------------------------------
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau


Just as a general practice with Windows apps, that memory gets lost or
corrupted over time. Perhaps not with SQL Server. But there are other apps
running on it. PC Anywhere is installed as a host on that machine. I don't
know how much memory degradation, if any, occurs from that app. Occasionally
the machine is used to test the front end app (though it's not the primary
machine for that purpose).
Dec 7 '07 #11

P: n/a
If memory is truly getting lost or corrupted, then I'd troubleshoot the
specific problem.

--
Tom

----------------------------------------------------
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:s2*******************@newssvr14.news.prodigy. net...
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:NQ*****************@newssvr11.news.prodigy.ne t...
OK, that's fine. But my POV is that rebooting in general, and resetting
the
system memory, is a good thing to do. I take it that you disagree?

"Michael Abair" <ma****@autotask.comwrote in message
news:eT**************@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>Just because the reboot fixed the issue doesn't mean that a preventative
reboot will stop it from occuring.

A reboot might not have been needed to resolve the issue in the first
place. Possibly a configuration change
or bouncing a service could have resolved it. My advice is to spend some
time researching the issue and if
you cant find a way to resolve it then find a way to detect it and have
it
perform the least intrusive form of corrective action.

-Mike

"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:5C*******************@newssvr29.news.prodigy .net...
>>Running a SQL 7 system on a Windows 2000 server using Access 2000 on
client machines as a front end. System administrator currently reboots
the server once a month. Yesterday we had some weird thing with the
database where users were getting ODBC errors when trying to access it.
Rebooted the server, everything was fine. Suggested to the sa that he
reboot the server once a week. He said he already does it once a month,
and that's sufficient.

My POV is that: a) doing it once a week might prevent situations such as
the one yesterday; b) even without situations like the one yesterday,
performance may be degrading over the course of the month, without our
being aware of it, and rebooting once a week might help performance.

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks!

Neil

"Tom Moreau" <to*@dont.spam.me.cips.cawrote in message
news:uu**************@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
Why does the system memory need to be reset? I've seen SQL Servers stay
up
for months and not need a reboot. That's what High Availability is all
about.

--
Tom

----------------------------------------------------
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau


Just as a general practice with Windows apps, that memory gets lost or
corrupted over time. Perhaps not with SQL Server. But there are other apps
running on it. PC Anywhere is installed as a host on that machine. I don't
know how much memory degradation, if any, occurs from that app. Occasionally
the machine is used to test the front end app (though it's not the primary
machine for that purpose).
Dec 7 '07 #12

P: n/a
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:s2*******************@newssvr14.news.prodigy. net...
>
Just as a general practice with Windows apps, that memory gets lost or
corrupted over time. Perhaps not with SQL Server. But there are other apps
running on it. PC Anywhere is installed as a host on that machine.
Unless there's a specific need for PCAnywhere, I'd get rid of it and
administer the machine via remote desktop.

Works much better.

I don't know how much memory degradation, if any, occurs from that app.
Occasionally the machine is used to test the front end app (though it's
not the primary machine for that purpose).
Well in that csae you've got other issues with the machine.

Which if it's a purely dev machine or one where shutdowns don't impact the
business, you may be ok.

The prod environments I work in tend to be 24/7 so shutdowns are very
infrequent.

Also if you're doing a soft-reboot, that's a bit "nicer" to the hardware
than a hard-reboot which can shorten the lifespan of components.

>


--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
Dec 7 '07 #13

P: n/a

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mo****************@greenms.comwrote in message
news:13************@corp.supernews.com...
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:s2*******************@newssvr14.news.prodigy. net...
>>
Just as a general practice with Windows apps, that memory gets lost or
corrupted over time. Perhaps not with SQL Server. But there are other
apps running on it. PC Anywhere is installed as a host on that machine.

Unless there's a specific need for PCAnywhere, I'd get rid of it and
administer the machine via remote desktop.

Works much better.

>I don't know how much memory degradation, if any, occurs from that app.
Occasionally the machine is used to test the front end app (though it's
not the primary machine for that purpose).

Well in that csae you've got other issues with the machine.

Which if it's a purely dev machine or one where shutdowns don't impact the
business, you may be ok.

The prod environments I work in tend to be 24/7 so shutdowns are very
infrequent.

Also if you're doing a soft-reboot, that's a bit "nicer" to the hardware
than a hard-reboot which can shorten the lifespan of components.

>>

--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com
http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html


One problem with remote desktop is that you can't transfer files or transfer
the clipboard contents (or can you?). I use those two functions all the
time.

Dec 7 '07 #14

P: n/a
Neil wrote:
One problem with remote desktop is that you can't transfer files or transfer
the clipboard contents (or can you?). I use those two functions all the
time.
The clipboard contents are auto-copied whenever they change on either
side. I don't think you can transfer files, but you can work around
that with an FTP server.
Dec 7 '07 #15

P: n/a
Neil (no****@nospam.net) writes:
One problem with remote desktop is that you can't transfer files or
transfer the clipboard contents (or can you?). I use those two functions
all the time.
You can. You can configure this under Local Resources. I think clipboard
is shared by default, so if you put something on the clipboard on the
remote machine, it makes it to the local machine automatically.

The way to transfer files, is a little funny, though. You make the local
drives available to the remote machine, so that they appear as shared
there. Since this is a security issue, it's not recommendable to always
expose your disks.

We don't use PC Anywhere in our shop, but we use PC Duo which is a
similar product. About all customers has PC Duo clients on their
servers, and that's how we connect to them. The major advantage is
that with Remote Desktop, is that if someone else connect, you may lose
your session. With PC-Duo you can see that someone else is there.
And moving files is easier with PC-Duo than Remote Desktop.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, es****@sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx
Dec 7 '07 #16

P: n/a

"Erland Sommarskog" <es****@sommarskog.sewrote in message
news:Xn**********************@127.0.0.1...
Neil (no****@nospam.net) writes:
>One problem with remote desktop is that you can't transfer files or
transfer the clipboard contents (or can you?). I use those two functions
all the time.

You can. You can configure this under Local Resources. I think clipboard
is shared by default, so if you put something on the clipboard on the
remote machine, it makes it to the local machine automatically.

The way to transfer files, is a little funny, though. You make the local
drives available to the remote machine, so that they appear as shared
there. Since this is a security issue, it's not recommendable to always
expose your disks.

We don't use PC Anywhere in our shop, but we use PC Duo which is a
similar product. About all customers has PC Duo clients on their
servers, and that's how we connect to them. The major advantage is
that with Remote Desktop, is that if someone else connect, you may lose
your session. With PC-Duo you can see that someone else is there.
And moving files is easier with PC-Duo than Remote Desktop.

So you'd recommend PC Duo over Remote Desktop? Is the performance as good?
Dec 7 '07 #17

P: n/a

"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:q5****************@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net ...
>
>>


One problem with remote desktop is that you can't transfer files or
transfer the clipboard contents (or can you?). I use those two functions
all the time.
You can transfer the clipboard settings in Win2K.

(Though I think you need Server 2003 for the file transfer function (it maps
the drives from your client to the server. I use that a lot.)

>


--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
Dec 8 '07 #18

P: n/a
Neil (no****@nospam.net) writes:
So you'd recommend PC Duo over Remote Desktop? Is the performance as good?
It depends on the purpose. When I want to connect to machine at work,
I definitely prefer Remote Desktop over PC-Duo. At least in the past I
have had issue with PC-Duo redrawing the screen like crazy, or it has
stopped redrawing. A crazy one I remember was that if I connect to my
machine with PC-Duo, and I had Query Analyzer up with a query grid, it
would halt somewhere. I was able to get it to resume if I minimiezed QA.
Now, since PC-Duo had not drawn the entire screen, I had to find the
minimize button as if I was blind-folded. Even more fun, if other windows
were on top of QA. But I should stress that this was quite a few years
and versions of PC-Duo ago.

So for performance and access to a workstation I prefer Remote Desktop.

But if several people need to access the same server console, I think
PC Duo is better. It's also better if you need to move files in any
direction.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, es****@sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx
Dec 8 '07 #19

P: n/a

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mo****************@greenms.comwrote in message
news:13*************@corp.supernews.com...
>
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:q5****************@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net ...
>>
>>>


One problem with remote desktop is that you can't transfer files or
transfer the clipboard contents (or can you?). I use those two functions
all the time.

You can transfer the clipboard settings in Win2K.
"Can" transfer, or they're transferred automatically?

Dec 9 '07 #20

P: n/a
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:RP****************@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net ...
>
"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mo****************@greenms.comwrote in
message news:13*************@corp.supernews.com...
>>
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:q5****************@newssvr22.news.prodigy.ne t...
>>>

One problem with remote desktop is that you can't transfer files or
transfer the clipboard contents (or can you?). I use those two functions
all the time.

You can transfer the clipboard settings in Win2K.

"Can" transfer, or they're transferred automatically?
Transferred automatically.

>


--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
Dec 9 '07 #21

P: n/a
On Dec 6, 2:05 pm, "Neil" <nos...@nospam.netwrote:
Running a SQL 7 system on a Windows 2000 server using Access 2000 on client
machines as a front end. System administrator currently reboots the server
once a month. Yesterday we had some weird thing with the database where
users were getting ODBC errors when trying to access it. Rebooted the
server, everything was fine. Suggested to the sa that he reboot the server
once a week. He said he already does it once a month, and that's sufficient.

My POV is that: a) doing it once a week might prevent situations such as the
one yesterday; b) even without situations like the one yesterday,
performance may be degrading over the course of the month, without our being
aware of it, and rebooting once a week might help performance.

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks!

Neil
Neil, along with the great suggestions I would explore upgrading your
box and software. Even look at client configurations, how do they
login, are they booting up daily or are the client machines left on
over night or several days thus causing the problem in itself. Does
your SA have that power to dictate what is sufficient? What does it
harm? Granted rebooting and shutting down a server box is not good for
the long term.

HTH...
Dec 9 '07 #22

P: n/a
OK, here's another one: no way to sent Ctrl+Alt+Del. With PCAnywhere, I can
send a Ctrl+Alt+Del and bring up Task Manager. How would one do that in
remote desktop?

"Ed Murphy" <em*******@socal.rr.comwrote in message
news:47**********************@roadrunner.com...
Neil wrote:
>One problem with remote desktop is that you can't transfer files or
transfer the clipboard contents (or can you?). I use those two functions
all the time.

The clipboard contents are auto-copied whenever they change on either
side. I don't think you can transfer files, but you can work around
that with an FTP server.

Dec 20 '07 #23

P: n/a
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:Py***************@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
OK, here's another one: no way to sent Ctrl+Alt+Del. With PCAnywhere, I
can send a Ctrl+Alt+Del and bring up Task Manager. How would one do that
in remote desktop?
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/186624

CTRL-ALT-END

>
"Ed Murphy" <em*******@socal.rr.comwrote in message
news:47**********************@roadrunner.com...
>Neil wrote:
>>One problem with remote desktop is that you can't transfer files or
transfer the clipboard contents (or can you?). I use those two functions
all the time.

The clipboard contents are auto-copied whenever they change on either
side. I don't think you can transfer files, but you can work around
that with an FTP server.



--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
Dec 21 '07 #24

P: n/a
Hey, thanks, that's great.

I was also wondering about toggling between full screen and windowed mode
(Alt+Enter in PCAnywhere). I see that's CTRL+ALT+BREAK in TS. But, while
I'm glad that TS has a shortcut for that, that's a bit unwieldy, especially
since Break on my laptop is Fn+Break!! Guess I'll just have to use the mouse
to toggle.

Neil
"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mo****************@greenms.comwrote in message
news:13*************@corp.supernews.com...
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:Py***************@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>OK, here's another one: no way to sent Ctrl+Alt+Del. With PCAnywhere, I
can send a Ctrl+Alt+Del and bring up Task Manager. How would one do that
in remote desktop?

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/186624

CTRL-ALT-END

>>
"Ed Murphy" <em*******@socal.rr.comwrote in message
news:47**********************@roadrunner.com...
>>Neil wrote:

One problem with remote desktop is that you can't transfer files or
transfer the clipboard contents (or can you?). I use those two
functions all the time.

The clipboard contents are auto-copied whenever they change on either
side. I don't think you can transfer files, but you can work around
that with an FTP server.


--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com
http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html


Dec 21 '07 #25

P: n/a
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:YX******************@newssvr23.news.prodigy.n et...
Hey, thanks, that's great.

I was also wondering about toggling between full screen and windowed mode
(Alt+Enter in PCAnywhere). I see that's CTRL+ALT+BREAK in TS. But, while
I'm glad that TS has a shortcut for that, that's a bit unwieldy,
especially since Break on my laptop is Fn+Break!! Guess I'll just have to
use the mouse to toggle.
Yeah there were a few there that I didn't even know about.

Very useful.

Neil
>>

--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html




--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html
Dec 21 '07 #26

P: n/a

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mo****************@greenms.comwrote in message
news:13*************@corp.supernews.com...
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:YX******************@newssvr23.news.prodigy.n et...
>Hey, thanks, that's great.

I was also wondering about toggling between full screen and windowed mode
(Alt+Enter in PCAnywhere). I see that's CTRL+ALT+BREAK in TS. But, while
I'm glad that TS has a shortcut for that, that's a bit unwieldy,
especially since Break on my laptop is Fn+Break!! Guess I'll just have to
use the mouse to toggle.

Yeah there were a few there that I didn't even know about.

Very useful.
You'd think (just a thought) that MS would give use a dropdown with some of
the functions. Or maybe just a list of shortcuts so we could have them
handy. I guess that's too much to ask for...:-(
Dec 21 '07 #27

P: n/a

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mo****************@greenms.comwrote in message
news:13*************@corp.supernews.com...
"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:YX******************@newssvr23.news.prodigy.n et...
>Hey, thanks, that's great.

I was also wondering about toggling between full screen and windowed mode
(Alt+Enter in PCAnywhere). I see that's CTRL+ALT+BREAK in TS. But, while
I'm glad that TS has a shortcut for that, that's a bit unwieldy,
especially since Break on my laptop is Fn+Break!! Guess I'll just have to
use the mouse to toggle.

Yeah there were a few there that I didn't even know about.

Very useful.

Hey, you know, I just found out that there's an option when you connect
through RDC to apply Windows key combinations to the remote computer!
Doesn't seem to work for Ctrl-Alt-Del. But seems to work for Alt-Tab.
Haven't tried it with others yet. But that's a great thing.
Dec 24 '07 #28

P: n/a
On Dec 23 2007, 5:07*pm, "Neil" <nos...@nospam.netwrote:
.
Hey, you know, I just found out that there's an option when you connect
through RDC to apply Windows key combinations to the remote computer!
Doesn't seem to work for Ctrl-Alt-Del.
It's replaced by Ctrl+Alt+End

P
Jan 4 '08 #29

P: n/a

"Piero 'Giops' Giorgi" <gi**********@gmail.comwrote in message
news:3b**********************************@u10g2000 prn.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 23 2007, 5:07 pm, "Neil" <nos...@nospam.netwrote:
..
Hey, you know, I just found out that there's an option when you connect
through RDC to apply Windows key combinations to the remote computer!
Doesn't seem to work for Ctrl-Alt-Del.
It's replaced by Ctrl+Alt+End

===============

Thanks, but what I was saying was that there's anoption when you connect to
apply the actual Windows key combinations to the remote computer, not the
assigned shortcuts. I was saying that it doesn't work for Ctrl+Alt+Del. In
that case you have to use Ctrl+Alt+End. But with the others, you can use the
actual keys.
Jan 4 '08 #30

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.