Account problem when creating a new publication

I've got SQL Server Developer installed on my laptop. I'm trying to get
merge replication to work, but when I try to create a new publisher, when I
select the option to make SQL Server on my laptop its own distributor, I
then get an error msg. saying I've chosen a local system account, and
replication will not work. It then sends me to a publications properties
form to select a new account. I have no other accounts, this is just run
from my laptop. Can some kind soul help me and tell me what I need to do
to get this working?
My end result is to be able to get merge replication set up so I can sync.
with a handheld device using SQL Server 2000 CE.
Thanks in advance for any assistance.
The account that SQL Server and the Agent need to run in something other
than a Local account.
"DaveM" <nosebop@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:OFNJHikLFHA.2824@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I've got SQL Server Developer installed on my laptop. I'm trying to get
> merge replication to work, but when I try to create a new publisher, when
I
> select the option to make SQL Server on my laptop its own distributor, I
> then get an error msg. saying I've chosen a local system account, and
> replication will not work. It then sends me to a publications properties
> form to select a new account. I have no other accounts, this is just
run
> from my laptop. Can some kind soul help me and tell me what I need to do
> to get this working?
> My end result is to be able to get merge replication set up so I can sync.
> with a handheld device using SQL Server 2000 CE.
> Thanks in advance for any assistance.
>
>

Accessing SQL Server 2005 through Vista

I just bought a new HP laptop that has Vista installed. Not happy about the OS but it is what it is...

I need to use Enterprise Manager, or an equivalent, to access a remote server, running SQL 2005.

With XP, I always installed and used SQL Server 2000 Client features.

Vista does not play well with SQL 2000 so I am looking for an alternative to simply be able to access, and perform DTS functions, a remote SQL 2005 system.

Does SQL Server 2005 Express offer client alias features?

Can anyone recommend another approach or product?

Thank you,

SteveVista sucks, no doubt about it. I had to install it at work, but it will be a LONG time before I choose to install it at home.
That said, what errors or issues to you run into running Enterprise Manager on Vista? This is one thing that I have not had a problem with.|||Thanks blindman,

Are you referring to EM in SQL 2000 or 2005? I've tried both with different issues.

Steve|||EM is 2000. SSMS is 2005. I am running both on a Vista desktop.|||blindman,

I have installed SMSS and it is running. However, when I try to open or modify any tables or views, SQL stalls out.

I can see the databases, the table names but when I try to open any table, regardless of size, it shoes (expanding) but then stalls out.

I have created an exception in Windows firewall...

Thanks for any insight,

Steve|||Is the SQL Server local or remote?|||remote.

I have comfirmed that it is set up to allow remote connections.

thanks|||If SSMS opens correctly under Vista, but merely stalls out when trying to connect to a remote database server, then my guess is that you have a network issue.

Accessing SQL Server 2005 through Vista

I just bought a new HP laptop that has Vista installed.

I need to use Enterprise Manager, or an equivalent, to access a remote server, running SQL 2005.

With XP, I always installed and used SQL Server 2000 Client features.

Vista does not play well with SQL 2000 so I am looking for an alternative to simply be able to access, and perform DTS functions, a remote SQL 2005 system.

Does SQL Server 2005 Express offer client alias features?

Can anyone recommend another approach or product?

Thank you,

Steve

Just install the SQL 2005 client tools with the DTS add tool (available from microsoft.com/sql).|||SQL 2000 is not supported on Vista and you have depend only on SQL 2005 - http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/faq-sql_on_vista.mspx fyi on vista support.|||

SQL Server Configuration Manager lets you define aliases for servers in the SQL Native Client Configuration | Aliases node. You can register servers in Management Studio to simplify connecting to them as well.

Hope this helps,

Steve

Accessing SQL Server 2005 through Vista

I just bought a new HP laptop that has Vista installed.

I need to use Enterprise Manager, or an equivalent, to access a remote server, running SQL 2005.

With XP, I always installed and used SQL Server 2000 Client features.

Vista does not play well with SQL 2000 so I am looking for an alternative to simply be able to access, and perform DTS functions, a remote SQL 2005 system.

Does SQL Server 2005 Express offer client alias features?

Can anyone recommend another approach or product?

Thank you,

Steve

Just install the SQL 2005 client tools with the DTS add tool (available from microsoft.com/sql).|||SQL 2000 is not supported on Vista and you have depend only on SQL 2005 - http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/faq-sql_on_vista.mspx fyi on vista support.|||

SQL Server Configuration Manager lets you define aliases for servers in the SQL Native Client Configuration | Aliases node. You can register servers in Management Studio to simplify connecting to them as well.

Hope this helps,

Steve

Accessing only one database on the SQL server

I have outsider-developer who is using her own laptop (not part of domain) t
o work on a project, I need to get her an access to our SQL database so she
can develop an application she is working on. I created new db, then new sql
user, she had SQL tools on
her laptop so then I registered server for here using this user I just creat
ed, then I gave access to this new created db… my question is what is the
minimun requirments (right/priviladges) so she can work with this new db but
prevent her with accessin
g other databases on the same server… other words I’m looking for scena
rio where she has full control over her db and no control over rest of the d
bs on the same serverPlace her in the dbo role for that database only and she should not have
rights to any other unless you give them to her.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"TOM P." <TOMP@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F7748074-FA4B-4C87-851A-82E5E2D5A4E6@.microsoft.com...
> I have outsider-developer who is using her own laptop (not part of domain)
to work on a project, I need to get her an access to our SQL database so she
can develop an application she is working on. I created new db, then new sql
user, she had SQL tools on her laptop so then I registered server for here
using this user I just created, then I gave access to this new created db.
my question is what is the minimun requirments (right/priviladges) so she
can work with this new db but prevent her with accessing other databases on
the same server. other words I'm looking for scenario where she has full
control over her db and no control over rest of the dbs on the same server|||Thanks, so this user should have only access to this particular DB, public a
nd db_owner roles no server role whatsoever... right?
"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:

> Place her in the dbo role for that database only and she should not have
> rights to any other unless you give them to her.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "TOM P." <TOMP@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:F7748074-FA4B-4C87-851A-82E5E2D5A4E6@.microsoft.com...
> to work on a project, I need to get her an access to our SQL database so s
he
> can develop an application she is working on. I created new db, then new s
ql
> user, she had SQL tools on her laptop so then I registered server for here
> using this user I just created, then I gave access to this new created db.
> my question is what is the minimun requirments (right/priviladges) so she
> can work with this new db but prevent her with accessing other databases o
n
> the same server. other words I'm looking for scenario where she has full
> control over her db and no control over rest of the dbs on the same server
>
>|||Yes that is correct. If they only belong to a database role they will not
have permissions outside that database.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"TOM P." <TOMP@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:AB24E7E1-4095-450B-8A87-97A4C7CD02DD@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks, so this user should have only access to this particular DB, public
and db_owner roles no server role whatsoever... right?[vbcol=seagreen]
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
>
domain)[vbcol=seagreen]
she[vbcol=seagreen]
sql[vbcol=seagreen]
here[vbcol=seagreen]
db.[vbcol=seagreen]
she[vbcol=seagreen]
on[vbcol=seagreen]
full[vbcol=seagreen]
server[vbcol=seagreen]

Accessing one db by two sql server instances (eg. native vs vmware)

Hi there
As many people do nowadays, I have 2 XP installations on my laptop -
one
running natively and one in vmware box running on ubuntu (situation
even more common with osx on intelmacs).
Since I would like to be able to work on same development projects in
both these environments, depending on the situation, I was wondering
how should I cope with DBs synchronization between two sql server
instances running under those two environments.
The simplest solution would be deploy the database in native windows
sql server installation, and attach the _same_ database files when
running from vmware (via sharing their folder on mounted ntfs
partition). So the DB files would attached to two servers, but of
course they would never be accessed at the same time.
Would it be possible at all without any data corruption assuming I
would run the same server versions (same SPs applied etc. - for the
time being it's 2kSP4)?
thanks
HP> So the DB files would attached to two servers, but of
> course they would never be accessed at the same time.
This should work fine. Regular backups won't hurt either.
Note that the Best Practice in development is to keep database DDL scripts
under source control rather than only in a physical database.
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"HP" <ha5en1@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1187778620.953857.97210@.x40g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Hi there
> As many people do nowadays, I have 2 XP installations on my laptop -
> one
> running natively and one in vmware box running on ubuntu (situation
> even more common with osx on intelmacs).
> Since I would like to be able to work on same development projects in
> both these environments, depending on the situation, I was wondering
> how should I cope with DBs synchronization between two sql server
> instances running under those two environments.
> The simplest solution would be deploy the database in native windows
> sql server installation, and attach the _same_ database files when
> running from vmware (via sharing their folder on mounted ntfs
> partition). So the DB files would attached to two servers, but of
> course they would never be accessed at the same time.
> Would it be possible at all without any data corruption assuming I
> would run the same server versions (same SPs applied etc. - for the
> time being it's 2kSP4)?
> thanks
> HP
>