feature?

I was setting up a new SQL 2005 sp2 (x64) box and restoring dbs. I restored
DB1, then moved on to DB2. I was restoring from a file, so I added the
file, forgot to change the db name in the dropdown, so it still said DB1,
changed the file paths, and clicked ok. So of course when I clicked ok and
it started the restore, I got an error telling me the file contained a db
other than DB1. Realizing my mistake, I then selected DB2 from the
dropdown, and clicked ok. The db restored just fine, but the message I got
at the end told me that DB1 had been restored...when in fact it was DB2 that
was restored.
AndreAndre wrote:
> I was setting up a new SQL 2005 sp2 (x64) box and restoring dbs. I restored
> DB1, then moved on to DB2. I was restoring from a file, so I added the
> file, forgot to change the db name in the dropdown, so it still said DB1,
> changed the file paths, and clicked ok. So of course when I clicked ok and
> it started the restore, I got an error telling me the file contained a db
> other than DB1. Realizing my mistake, I then selected DB2 from the
> dropdown, and clicked ok. The db restored just fine, but the message I got
> at the end told me that DB1 had been restored...when in fact it was DB2 that
> was restored.
> Andre
>
I think it's just a matter of a missing "refresh" of the GUI. I'm not
using the GUI for restores myself so I'm not familiar with how it
appears, but you can be quite sure that it is DB2 you've restored - and
not DB1. You'd only be able to restore DB2 on top of DB1 if you explicit
had told it to replace the database.
--
Regards
Steen Schlüter Persson
Database Administrator / System Administrator

Faulty Restore

Until recently we received backups of a clients database
and restored it with no problems. They are running SQL
2000 on NT 4.0. About a month ago we noticed some problem
with the backups, DBCC CHECKDB revealed consistency
errors in the databases after restore. We are running SQL
2000 SP3a on XP Pro. They can restore there backup
locally but when ever we restore them we get errors.
Any help would be very much appreciated.
If there are consistency errors with the restored db it is most likely they
exist in the original one. They need to fix the errors in the original db
before you can get good backups.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Geoff Aukett" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1c6c901c4222c$4b313d00$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> Until recently we received backups of a clients database
> and restored it with no problems. They are running SQL
> 2000 on NT 4.0. About a month ago we noticed some problem
> with the backups, DBCC CHECKDB revealed consistency
> errors in the databases after restore. We are running SQL
> 2000 SP3a on XP Pro. They can restore there backup
> locally but when ever we restore them we get errors.
> Any help would be very much appreciated.
|||Thats what is so odd, their DBA assures us that they
restore and checkout ok at their end?

>--Original Message--
>If there are consistency errors with the restored db it
is most likely they
>exist in the original one. They need to fix the errors
in the original db
>before you can get good backups.
>--
>Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
>"Geoff Aukett" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message[vbcol=seagreen]
>news:1c6c901c4222c$4b313d00$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
database[vbcol=seagreen]
problem[vbcol=seagreen]
SQL
>
>.
>
|||It's possible the backup file itself can get corrupted but in my experience
when this happens you get file errors in most cases. Have they actually run
a full DBCC CHECKDB abd DBCC CHECKCATALOG lately?
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
<anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1cd0401c422b6$a765dec0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thats what is so odd, their DBA assures us that they
> restore and checkout ok at their end?
> is most likely they
> in the original db
> wrote in message
> database
> problem
> SQL

Faulty Restore

Until recently we received backups of a clients database
and restored it with no problems. They are running SQL
2000 on NT 4.0. About a month ago we noticed some problem
with the backups, DBCC CHECKDB revealed consistency
errors in the databases after restore. We are running SQL
2000 SP3a on XP Pro. They can restore there backup
locally but when ever we restore them we get errors.
Any help would be very much appreciated.If there are consistency errors with the restored db it is most likely they
exist in the original one. They need to fix the errors in the original db
before you can get good backups.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Geoff Aukett" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1c6c901c4222c$4b313d00$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> Until recently we received backups of a clients database
> and restored it with no problems. They are running SQL
> 2000 on NT 4.0. About a month ago we noticed some problem
> with the backups, DBCC CHECKDB revealed consistency
> errors in the databases after restore. We are running SQL
> 2000 SP3a on XP Pro. They can restore there backup
> locally but when ever we restore them we get errors.
> Any help would be very much appreciated.|||Thats what is so odd, their DBA assures us that they
restore and checkout ok at their end?
>--Original Message--
>If there are consistency errors with the restored db it
is most likely they
>exist in the original one. They need to fix the errors
in the original db
>before you can get good backups.
>--
>Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
>"Geoff Aukett" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message
>news:1c6c901c4222c$4b313d00$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
>> Until recently we received backups of a clients
database
>> and restored it with no problems. They are running SQL
>> 2000 on NT 4.0. About a month ago we noticed some
problem
>> with the backups, DBCC CHECKDB revealed consistency
>> errors in the databases after restore. We are running
SQL
>> 2000 SP3a on XP Pro. They can restore there backup
>> locally but when ever we restore them we get errors.
>> Any help would be very much appreciated.
>
>.
>|||It's possible the backup file itself can get corrupted but in my experience
when this happens you get file errors in most cases. Have they actually run
a full DBCC CHECKDB abd DBCC CHECKCATALOG lately?
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
<anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1cd0401c422b6$a765dec0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Thats what is so odd, their DBA assures us that they
> restore and checkout ok at their end?
> >--Original Message--
> >If there are consistency errors with the restored db it
> is most likely they
> >exist in the original one. They need to fix the errors
> in the original db
> >before you can get good backups.
> >
> >--
> >Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> >
> >
> >"Geoff Aukett" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
> wrote in message
> >news:1c6c901c4222c$4b313d00$a301280a@.phx.gbl...
> >> Until recently we received backups of a clients
> database
> >> and restored it with no problems. They are running SQL
> >> 2000 on NT 4.0. About a month ago we noticed some
> problem
> >> with the backups, DBCC CHECKDB revealed consistency
> >> errors in the databases after restore. We are running
> SQL
> >> 2000 SP3a on XP Pro. They can restore there backup
> >> locally but when ever we restore them we get errors.
> >>
> >> Any help would be very much appreciated.
> >
> >
> >.
> >

Faulty Restore

Until recently we received backups of a clients database
and restored it with no problems. They are running SQL
2000 on NT 4.0. About a month ago we noticed some problem
with the backups, DBCC CHECKDB revealed consistency
errors in the databases after restore. We are running SQL
2000 SP3a on XP Pro. They can restore there backup
locally but when ever we restore them we get errors.
Any help would be very much appreciated.If there are consistency errors with the restored db it is most likely they
exist in the original one. They need to fix the errors in the original db
before you can get good backups.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Geoff Aukett" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1c6c901c4222c$4b313d00$a301280a@.phx
.gbl...
> Until recently we received backups of a clients database
> and restored it with no problems. They are running SQL
> 2000 on NT 4.0. About a month ago we noticed some problem
> with the backups, DBCC CHECKDB revealed consistency
> errors in the databases after restore. We are running SQL
> 2000 SP3a on XP Pro. They can restore there backup
> locally but when ever we restore them we get errors.
> Any help would be very much appreciated.|||Thats what is so odd, their DBA assures us that they
restore and checkout ok at their end?

>--Original Message--
>If there are consistency errors with the restored db it
is most likely they
>exist in the original one. They need to fix the errors
in the original db
>before you can get good backups.
>--
>Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
>"Geoff Aukett" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message
> news:1c6c901c4222c$4b313d00$a301280a@.phx
.gbl...
database[vbcol=seagreen]
problem[vbcol=seagreen]
SQL[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>.
>|||It's possible the backup file itself can get corrupted but in my experience
when this happens you get file errors in most cases. Have they actually run
a full DBCC CHECKDB abd DBCC CHECKCATALOG lately?
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
<anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1cd0401c422b6$a765dec0$a401280a@.phx
.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thats what is so odd, their DBA assures us that they
> restore and checkout ok at their end?
>
> is most likely they
> in the original db
> wrote in message
> database
> problem
> SQL