asp sql server: sqlserver

Showing posts with label sqlserver. Show all posts

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Connection Problem

Hi All,
I use the following code lines for connecting to SQL Server 2005 using
JDBC in Java:
Class.forName("com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLSer verDriver");
String connectionUrl =
"jdbc:sqlserver://SERVER;user=USER;databaseName=db;AuthenticationMet hod=auto";
but I got the error: Login failed for user 'USER'
I want to use windows authentication and I am pretty sure I use the
correct username. Can you please help me?
Thanks a lot.
AuthenticationMethod=auto is correct but you would not
supply a user in the connection string to have the
connection use Windows authentication. If you supply the
user, it will use SQL authentication, not windows.
-Sue
On 9 Oct 2006 00:56:14 -0700, "sara" <sarasara82@.gmail.com>
wrote:

>Hi All,
>I use the following code lines for connecting to SQL Server 2005 using
>JDBC in Java:
>Class.forName("com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLSe rverDriver");
> String connectionUrl =
>"jdbc:sqlserver://SERVER;user=USER;databaseName=db;AuthenticationMet hod=auto";
>but I got the error: Login failed for user 'USER'
>I want to use windows authentication and I am pretty sure I use the
>correct username. Can you please help me?
>Thanks a lot.
sql sql

Thursday, March 22, 2012

Connection pooling & Windows authentication

Hey all,
I'm connecting to SqlServer 2000 from an ASP.NET web application.
The web application runs under a specific Identity (impersonating to a
specific windows account), the connection string contains
"IntegratedSecurity=SSPI",
and as far as I can see, it (the connection string) is constant.
Will my web application be using the connection pooling mechanism? I'm
asking this because I've been reading that if the conenction string
is constant, the connection pool will be used, however, I haven't found
anything about windows authentication, where the username and password
aren't specified in the connection string, but are managed by windows,
therefore I can't really say if the connection srting is different or not.
Thanks, Gai.
As far as I know, if you create a connection to the sql server and then
impersonate a new user and make a new connection, a new connection pool gets
created even if the connection string is the same.
Hopes this helps
Marc
"Gai" <gaitamir@.IBezint> wrote in message
news:#otPhYh0EHA.2568@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hey all,
> I'm connecting to SqlServer 2000 from an ASP.NET web application.
> The web application runs under a specific Identity (impersonating to a
> specific windows account), the connection string contains
> "IntegratedSecurity=SSPI",
> and as far as I can see, it (the connection string) is constant.
> Will my web application be using the connection pooling mechanism? I'm
> asking this because I've been reading that if the conenction string
> is constant, the connection pool will be used, however, I haven't found
> anything about windows authentication, where the username and password
> aren't specified in the connection string, but are managed by windows,
> therefore I can't really say if the connection srting is different or not.
> Thanks, Gai.
>
|||Yes, but again, I'm impersonating a single user (not the running user, but
DomainA\UsernameA).
Hope it's more clear now.
Thanks any way, Gai.
"Marc Mertens" <marc.mertens@.azlan.com> wrote in message
news:eGpFc6s0EHA.1260@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> As far as I know, if you create a connection to the sql server and then
> impersonate a new user and make a new connection, a new connection pool
gets[vbcol=seagreen]
> created even if the connection string is the same.
> Hopes this helps
> Marc
> "Gai" <gaitamir@.IBezint> wrote in message
> news:#otPhYh0EHA.2568@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
not.
>

Connection pooling & Windows authentication

Hey all,
I'm connecting to SqlServer 2000 from an ASP.NET web application.
The web application runs under a specific Identity (impersonating to a
specific windows account), the connection string contains
"IntegratedSecurity=SSPI",
and as far as I can see, it (the connection string) is constant.
Will my web application be using the connection pooling mechanism? I'm
asking this because I've been reading that if the conenction string
is constant, the connection pool will be used, however, I haven't found
anything about windows authentication, where the username and password
aren't specified in the connection string, but are managed by windows,
therefore I can't really say if the connection srting is different or not.
Thanks, Gai.Gai
Visit on this web site
http://www.able-consulting.com/ADO_Conn.htm#OLEDBProviderForSQLServer -- CONNECTIONS
"Gai" <gaitamir@.IBezint> wrote in message
news:%23we0Fah0EHA.1396@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hey all,
> I'm connecting to SqlServer 2000 from an ASP.NET web application.
> The web application runs under a specific Identity (impersonating to a
> specific windows account), the connection string contains
> "IntegratedSecurity=SSPI",
> and as far as I can see, it (the connection string) is constant.
> Will my web application be using the connection pooling mechanism? I'm
> asking this because I've been reading that if the conenction string
> is constant, the connection pool will be used, however, I haven't found
> anything about windows authentication, where the username and password
> aren't specified in the connection string, but are managed by windows,
> therefore I can't really say if the connection srting is different or not.
> Thanks, Gai.
>

Connection pooling & Windows authentication

Hey all,
I'm connecting to SqlServer 2000 from an ASP.NET web application.
The web application runs under a specific Identity (impersonating to a
specific windows account), the connection string contains
"IntegratedSecurity=SSPI",
and as far as I can see, it (the connection string) is constant.
Will my web application be using the connection pooling mechanism? I'm
asking this because I've been reading that if the conenction string
is constant, the connection pool will be used, however, I haven't found
anything about windows authentication, where the username and password
aren't specified in the connection string, but are managed by windows,
therefore I can't really say if the connection srting is different or not.
Thanks, Gai.As far as I know, if you create a connection to the sql server and then
impersonate a new user and make a new connection, a new connection pool gets
created even if the connection string is the same.
Hopes this helps
Marc
"Gai" <gaitamir@.IBezint> wrote in message
news:#otPhYh0EHA.2568@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hey all,
> I'm connecting to SqlServer 2000 from an ASP.NET web application.
> The web application runs under a specific Identity (impersonating to a
> specific windows account), the connection string contains
> "IntegratedSecurity=SSPI",
> and as far as I can see, it (the connection string) is constant.
> Will my web application be using the connection pooling mechanism? I'm
> asking this because I've been reading that if the conenction string
> is constant, the connection pool will be used, however, I haven't found
> anything about windows authentication, where the username and password
> aren't specified in the connection string, but are managed by windows,
> therefore I can't really say if the connection srting is different or not.
> Thanks, Gai.
>|||Yes, but again, I'm impersonating a single user (not the running user, but
DomainA\UsernameA).
Hope it's more clear now.
Thanks any way, Gai.
"Marc Mertens" <marc.mertens@.azlan.com> wrote in message
news:eGpFc6s0EHA.1260@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> As far as I know, if you create a connection to the sql server and then
> impersonate a new user and make a new connection, a new connection pool
gets
> created even if the connection string is the same.
> Hopes this helps
> Marc
> "Gai" <gaitamir@.IBezint> wrote in message
> news:#otPhYh0EHA.2568@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
not.[vbcol=seagreen]
>sql sql

Connection Pool in SQLserver 2005

What is the performance cost of not using connection pool when connecting to
a sqlserver 2005 using windows identity.
We are planning an application where the users windows identity is forwarded
through all layers all the way into the sqlserver.
This gives security and auditing advantages.
But a pros/cons evaluation is always proper to do.
The cons include: the sqlserver connection pool cannot be used...(?) If
there is more problems, pls let me know.
This rises the question: what is the price for not using connection pools.
Who is paying: the sqlserver or the business layer on the IIS server or both?
regards
Jens Chr
If the users are constantly in/out of the server, you can still benefit from
using connection pooling. It's just that each user will have their own
connection pool. (Set the max connections in the pool to 2, and set the pool
timeout up to 10-20 minutes -or longer.)
Of course, this will require a bit more memory on the IIS box, and a bit
more on the SQL Server, but will greatly improve responsiveness.
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"jcjj" <jcjj@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CD85E9F3-21BE-42B6-AC23-EDBF0234C713@.microsoft.com...
> What is the performance cost of not using connection pool when connecting
> to
> a sqlserver 2005 using windows identity.
> We are planning an application where the users windows identity is
> forwarded
> through all layers all the way into the sqlserver.
> This gives security and auditing advantages.
> But a pros/cons evaluation is always proper to do.
> The cons include: the sqlserver connection pool cannot be used...(?) If
> there is more problems, pls let me know.
> This rises the question: what is the price for not using connection pools.
> Who is paying: the sqlserver or the business layer on the IIS server or
> both?
> regards
> Jens Chr

Connection Pool in SQLserver 2005

What is the performance cost of not using connection pool when connecting to
a sqlserver 2005 using windows identity.
We are planning an application where the users windows identity is forwarded
through all layers all the way into the sqlserver.
This gives security and auditing advantages.
But a pros/cons evaluation is always proper to do.
The cons include: the sqlserver connection pool cannot be used...(?) If
there is more problems, pls let me know.
This rises the question: what is the price for not using connection pools.
Who is paying: the sqlserver or the business layer on the IIS server or both
?
regards
Jens ChrIf the users are constantly in/out of the server, you can still benefit from
using connection pooling. It's just that each user will have their own
connection pool. (Set the max connections in the pool to 2, and set the pool
timeout up to 10-20 minutes -or longer.)
Of course, this will require a bit more memory on the IIS box, and a bit
more on the SQL Server, but will greatly improve responsiveness.
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
You can't help someone get up a hill without getting a little closer to the
top yourself.
- H. Norman Schwarzkopf
"jcjj" <jcjj@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CD85E9F3-21BE-42B6-AC23-EDBF0234C713@.microsoft.com...
> What is the performance cost of not using connection pool when connecting
> to
> a sqlserver 2005 using windows identity.
> We are planning an application where the users windows identity is
> forwarded
> through all layers all the way into the sqlserver.
> This gives security and auditing advantages.
> But a pros/cons evaluation is always proper to do.
> The cons include: the sqlserver connection pool cannot be used...(?) If
> there is more problems, pls let me know.
> This rises the question: what is the price for not using connection pools.
> Who is paying: the sqlserver or the business layer on the IIS server or
> both?
> regards
> Jens Chrsql sql

Monday, March 19, 2012

connection is successful for empty userid

Hi,
In my application , the connection to SQLServer is established
through a DSN name, UserId and Password(both UsrId and Password are
non empty) . The "SQLConnect" function is used for this purpose. The
problem is that the connection to the Database is success when I give
an empty UserId. But this problem is not there when the UserId is
invalid(non empty).In all the cases except for empty UserId , the
connection works as expectd.
Why is it connecting for empty UserId?
Is it because that default windows authentication is used for
connection when UserId is empty?
If so is there any way to avoid this (through a C/C++ program)?
pls help
Thanks
KaimalIf the connection is success full and accessing the data base objects (table
,
view, stored procedure, etc) fails then this likely failing due to a
ownership chain problem. Recommend reading (SQL Server Books on Line) BOL
topics.
Using Ownership Chains
Logins
sp_grantdbaccess
sp_grantlogin or sp_addlogin
TSQL GRANT statement
I think what you are asking is to allow Public or Guest permission to your
database. Is this what you are after?
SQL Server's default behaviour is to lock all database objects. You have to
grant permission to the objects before they are accessible.
"Kaimal" wrote:

> Hi,
> In my application , the connection to SQLServer is established
> through a DSN name, UserId and Password(both UsrId and Password are
> non empty) . The "SQLConnect" function is used for this purpose. The
> problem is that the connection to the Database is success when I give
> an empty UserId. But this problem is not there when the UserId is
> invalid(non empty).In all the cases except for empty UserId , the
> connection works as expectd.
> Why is it connecting for empty UserId?
> Is it because that default windows authentication is used for
> connection when UserId is empty?
> If so is there any way to avoid this (through a C/C++ program)?
> pls help
> Thanks
> Kaimal
>|||> Is it because that default windows authentication is used for
> connection when UserId is empty?
>
Yes.

> If so is there any way to avoid this (through a C/C++ program)?
AFAIK, you'll need to check for the empty userid in your application code
and allow the connection only when not empty.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Kaimal" <rbkaimal@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:19aff12c.0504220154.142bf7e3@.posting.google.com...
> Hi,
> In my application , the connection to SQLServer is established
> through a DSN name, UserId and Password(both UsrId and Password are
> non empty) . The "SQLConnect" function is used for this purpose. The
> problem is that the connection to the Database is success when I give
> an empty UserId. But this problem is not there when the UserId is
> invalid(non empty).In all the cases except for empty UserId , the
> connection works as expectd.
> Why is it connecting for empty UserId?
> Is it because that default windows authentication is used for
> connection when UserId is empty?
> If so is there any way to avoid this (through a C/C++ program)?
> pls help
> Thanks
> Kaimal|||checking for empty UserId wil not help . I have to verify for the user
id depending on the authentication set in the ODBC driver. Here user is
free to set a blank id or other way round for a particular DSN.
The actal problem is that i have set a non empty UserId and Password for
a my DSN and the connection is established when i gave empty userid for
this DSN.
i would like to know about any ODBC function to this default connect.
can any thing be done with SQLSetConnectAttr function?
Thanks
Kaimal
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.examnotes.net ***|||Allowing a "empty UserId and Password" is not a good Idea. You potentially
are opening up your SQL Server and database to security threats similar to
the Code Red virus. I think what you are after is an application base
security model. Check out the BOL sp_addapprole.
"Ragesh Kaimal" wrote:

> checking for empty UserId wil not help . I have to verify for the user
> id depending on the authentication set in the ODBC driver. Here user is
> free to set a blank id or other way round for a particular DSN.
> The actal problem is that i have set a non empty UserId and Password for
> a my DSN and the connection is established when i gave empty userid for
> this DSN.
> i would like to know about any ODBC function to this default connect.
> can any thing be done with SQLSetConnectAttr function?
> Thanks
> Kaimal
>
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.examnotes.net ***
>

Connection is busy with results for another hstmt & Win2003 SP1

I wrote a web app using an ASP front end (not .NET) connecting to a SQL
Server 2000 (no SP) back end. Both the web server and the database
server are Windows 2003 boxes. The app was running fine two weeks ago
before I went on vacation. While I was gone my net admin applied
Windows 2003 SP1 to the web server. Upon my return I was informed that
the app is no longer working, getting the following error:

[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver]Connection is busy with results for
another hstmt

Since that is presumably the only thing that changed in my absence I
believe the SP somehow messed up the way the ODBC was working. I tried
moving the SQL Server database to a different Windows 2003 box which
also received the SP1 update and also includes SP3 for SQL Server, but
get the same error.

I am hitting the database like so:

set GetData = CreateObject("ADODB.Command")
GetData.ActiveConnection = SQLConn
GetData.CommandText = "<stored procedure call>"
Set DataRS= GetData.Execute (,,adCmdText)

I appear to get the error when I execute the second call. I am
learning ASP as I go, so maybe this is a trivial problem.Jegg (jsauri@.gmail.com) writes:
> I wrote a web app using an ASP front end (not .NET) connecting to a SQL
> Server 2000 (no SP) back end. Both the web server and the database
> server are Windows 2003 boxes. The app was running fine two weeks ago
> before I went on vacation. While I was gone my net admin applied
> Windows 2003 SP1 to the web server. Upon my return I was informed that
> the app is no longer working, getting the following error:
> [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver]Connection is busy with results for
> another hstmt
> Since that is presumably the only thing that changed in my absence I
> believe the SP somehow messed up the way the ODBC was working. I tried
> moving the SQL Server database to a different Windows 2003 box which
> also received the SP1 update and also includes SP3 for SQL Server, but
> get the same error.
> I am hitting the database like so:
> set GetData = CreateObject("ADODB.Command")
> GetData.ActiveConnection = SQLConn
> GetData.CommandText = "<stored procedure call>"
> Set DataRS= GetData.Execute (,,adCmdText)
> I appear to get the error when I execute the second call. I am
> learning ASP as I go, so maybe this is a trivial problem.

The gist of the error message is that you have a command that generated
one or more results, that you have not picked up, and you cannot submit
the next stored procedure for execution.

If that procedure generates result sets, you probably want that data.
Then again, it could be a stray debug result set that should not be
there.

Here are some general rules:
o Unless you want explicit row counts back from INSERT/UPDAET/DELETE
operations, submit a SET NOCOUNT ON when you connect. These rowcounts
are actually kind of result sets, and these need to be consumed.
SET NOCOUNT ON eliminates those.
o If you call a stored procedure that is not supposed to return data,
specify the option adExecuteNoRecords.
o When you run a procedure that can return data, be sure to get all
record sets, by looping over .NextRecordset.

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

Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp|||Thanks for the info. I did have nocount set to on. However, I did not
know about the adExecuteNoRecords option. That actually will come in
very handy.

On a whim I did manage to elimate the error by adding "DataRS = empty"
after the first stored procedure call. I did not have to do this with
any of the others presumably because I loop through the result set
until EOF (there was known to be only one possible record in the first
result set so I did not do this).

Thanks for your speedy reply!

Sunday, March 11, 2012

Connection is busy with results for another hstmt

I have my java based application that works fine with SQL
server 6.5.
I upgraded DB to SQL Server 2000 and now the application
give me "Connection is busy with results for another
hstmt " ODBC error after I do couple of queries or updates
through the application.
Is it anything to do with ODBC drivers or I have to change
setup of SQL Server?
Thank you
Athar
SQL Server only supports a single active statement per connection. Are you
using the MS JDBC driver to access SQL Server?
If you aren't actually trying to use multiple statements per connection,
then you might be able to workaround the error by making sure the statement
is closed before using another one. I'm not familiar with the JDBC
interface, but in ODBC, you'd call SQLMoreResults() until it returned
SQL_NO_DATA to make sure you've processed all of the results on the wire.
In ADO.NET you will get the same error if you haven't called Close() or
Dispose() on the SqlDataReader before trying to Execute another SqlCommand
on the same SqlConnection.
If you are trying to use multiple statements per connection (at the same
time), then you need to use multiple connections instead.
SQL Server 2005 has a new feature called MARS (Multiple Active Result Sets)
which will allow multiple statements per connection.
Brannon
"Athar" <aikram@.celestica.com> wrote in message
news:185a01c47bdf$ee142e80$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> I have my java based application that works fine with SQL
> server 6.5.
> I upgraded DB to SQL Server 2000 and now the application
> give me "Connection is busy with results for another
> hstmt " ODBC error after I do couple of queries or updates
> through the application.
> Is it anything to do with ODBC drivers or I have to change
> setup of SQL Server?
> Thank you
> Athar

Connection is busy with results for another hstmt

I have my Java based application that works fine with SQL
server 6.5.
I upgraded DB to SQL Server 2000 and now the application
give me "Connection is busy with results for another
hstmt " ODBC error after I do couple of queries or updates
through the application.
Is it anything to do with ODBC drivers or I have to change
setup of SQL Server?
Thank you
AtharSQL Server only supports a single active statement per connection. Are you
using the MS JDBC driver to access SQL Server?
If you aren't actually trying to use multiple statements per connection,
then you might be able to workaround the error by making sure the statement
is closed before using another one. I'm not familiar with the JDBC
interface, but in ODBC, you'd call SQLMoreResults() until it returned
SQL_NO_DATA to make sure you've processed all of the results on the wire.
In ADO.NET you will get the same error if you haven't called Close() or
Dispose() on the SqlDataReader before trying to Execute another SqlCommand
on the same SqlConnection.
If you are trying to use multiple statements per connection (at the same
time), then you need to use multiple connections instead.
SQL Server 2005 has a new feature called MARS (Multiple Active Result Sets)
which will allow multiple statements per connection.
Brannon
"Athar" <aikram@.celestica.com> wrote in message
news:185a01c47bdf$ee142e80$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> I have my Java based application that works fine with SQL
> server 6.5.
> I upgraded DB to SQL Server 2000 and now the application
> give me "Connection is busy with results for another
> hstmt " ODBC error after I do couple of queries or updates
> through the application.
> Is it anything to do with ODBC drivers or I have to change
> setup of SQL Server?
> Thank you
> Athar

Thursday, March 8, 2012

Connection faileed Package abort

Hello,

I am connecting with various sqlservers in a package to get the information. If connection failed with any sqlserver, package failed after 3 tries.

I would like that if connection failed with any sqlserver, package should not end rather move ahead and connecto next sqlserver.

I already tried to increase the number of error from 3 to 1000 but still package failed as soon sqlserver connection failed.

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks.

Farhan

There's quite a numbers of options for "on error resume next" style execution in SSIS. Consider precedence constraints,

the System::Propagate OnError event handler variable, and the

MaximumErrorCount and ForceExecutionResult properties.

One way to continue execution despite failure is to use Completion or Failure precedence constraints rather than Success constraints. When using Completion style precedence, execution will continue, and the package will fail by default due its max error count having been exceeded.

Another way to continue despite task errors is by setting ForcedExecutionResult of the tasks. Here again, execution will continue post failure, and the package will exit with a failure status due to the default max failure count (unless you set ForceExecutionResult on the package itself). This is effectively completition style precedence, except different events are fired. The OnTaskFailed event is not fired here, since the task "did not fail".

Another option is non-bubbling errors via System::Propogate in an OnError event handler. This approach will keep the error(s) from bubbling up the container

hierarchy, excepting validation errors. The task may fail, but the

package will succeed, because the task's execution errors never bubbled

up.

To use non-bubbling errors, create an error event handler on the failing task(s), and set the System::Propagate variable to false. Use this option in combination with completion based constraints when you want a package result of success despite failed tasks and want the failed tasks logged as such. Also, using the non-propagating error tactic, the OnTaskFailed event is fired, so you can hook that for logging purposes if need be.|||

Many thanks, I will give it a try.

You are the only who have replied, glad someone out there who knows and wants to help.

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Connection error to SqlServer

When opened my table :
Unspecified error
(MS Visual Database Tools)

what is this error?

please help me.

Please give more details about what you are doing when you encounter this error.

Mike

|||when I opened Microsoft SQL Server Managment Studio (Express Edition) and choose a table to open (by right click on it and select open table) this error message was appeared.
here is the detailed error:

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

Unspecified error
(MS Visual Database Tools)

Program Location:

at Microsoft.VisualStudio.DataTools.Interop.IDTTableDesignerFactory.BrowseTable(Object dsRef, Object pServiceProvider)
at Microsoft.SqlServer.Management.UI.VSIntegration.Editors.OpenTableNode.CreateDesigner(IDTDocToolFactoryProvider factoryProvider, IVsDataConnection dataConnection)
at Microsoft.SqlServer.Management.UI.VSIntegration.Editors.VsDataDesignerNode.CreateDesigner()
at Microsoft.SqlServer.Management.UI.VSIntegration.Editors.VsDataDesignerNode.Open()
at Microsoft.SqlServer.Management.UI.VSIntegration.Editors.VirtualProject.Microsoft.SqlServer.Management.UI.VSIntegration.Editors.ISqlVirtualProject.CreateDesigner(Urn origUrn, DocumentType editorType, DocumentOptions aeOptions, IManagedConnection con)
at Microsoft.SqlServer.Management.UI.VSIntegration.Editors.ISqlVirtualProject.CreateDesigner(Urn origUrn, DocumentType editorType, DocumentOptions aeOptions, IManagedConnection con)
at Microsoft.SqlServer.Management.UI.VSIntegration.Editors.VsDocumentMenuItem.CreateDesignerWindow(IManagedConnection mc, DocumentOptions options)

And

when i draw diagram for my database, this error message was appeared:
-
A connection was successfully established with the server, but then an error occurred during the login process. (provider: TCP Provider, error: 0 - An established connection was aborted by the software in your host machine.) (.Net SqlClient Data Provider)|||

This seems like a problem specific to Management Studio Express so I'm going to move this thread to the tools forum.

Mike

|||I could not find solution for error that send to last posts and Sad

Other part of error when right click on server name and select properties :
-
A connection was successfully established with the server, but then an error occurred during the login process. (provider: TCP Provider, error: 0 - An established connection was aborted by the software in your host machine.) (.Net SqlClient Data Provider)

Connection error to SqlServer

When opened my table :
Unspecified error
(MS Visual Database Tools)

what is this error?

please help me.

Please give more details about what you are doing when you encounter this error.

Mike

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

Unspecified error
(MS Visual Database Tools)

Program Location:

And

This seems like a problem specific to Management Studio Express so I'm going to move this thread to the tools forum.

Mike

|||I could not find solution for error that send to last posts and Sad

Connection error to SqlServer

When opened my table :
Unspecified error
(MS Visual Database Tools)

what is this error?

please help me.

Please give more details about what you are doing when you encounter this error.

Mike

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

Unspecified error
(MS Visual Database Tools)

Program Location:

And

This seems like a problem specific to Management Studio Express so I'm going to move this thread to the tools forum.

Mike

|||I could not find solution for error that send to last posts and Sad

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Connection Error 18452 - Login failed for user '(null)'

Hello everybody,
one of our users gets an error message when trying to connect to our SQL
Server database:
Connection failed:
SQLState: '28000'
SQL Server Error 18452
[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]Login failed for user
'(null)'. Reason: Not associated with a trusted SQL Server connection.
The problem occured suddenly during work. The user can connect to the server
using another computer and other users can connect using his computer.
Knowledge base didn't help so I'm asking you.
Configuration
Client: Windows XP professional (2002/SP1)
ODBC driver: SQL Server (2000.81.9042.00)
Client configuration: TCP/IP
Server: Windows 2000 Server
SQL Server 7.0
Seems the network setup for the user is somehow corrupted, since the message
states the user to be '(null)'.
Any suggestions?
Thanks in advance,
Markus Wolff
This is always an authentication problem somewhere. The null indicates that
user cannot be validated and a null is being passsed to SQL Server.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
|||Rand, what about a solution or al least pointing to one?
"Rand Boyd [MSFT]" wrote:

> This is always an authentication problem somewhere. The null indicates that
> user cannot be validated and a null is being passsed to SQL Server.
> Rand
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
>
|||It really depends on where the process is failing. You would
want to check the event logs on the PC having the problems
connecting. Check for any network related issues or
problems. Make sure that PC is contacting the domain
controllers without any problems and that they are
successfully logging into the network.
-Sue
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:25:02 -0800, "JC"
<JC@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>Rand, what about a solution or al least pointing to one?
>"Rand Boyd [MSFT]" wrote:
|||Login failed for user <null> usually means that on the SQL box, the user
account could not be found in the local security database or in the domain
controller's user database.
For example, on machine1 I log in as machine1\user1. Then I try to log into
SQL on machine2. On machine2 SQL takes the SID of the user and calls
LookupAccountSID API. This attempts to convert the SID to the user name.
LookupAccountSID first looks in local security database on machine2, and
does not find machine1\User1, then looks on domain controller, and still
does not find the SID.
So in general this points to problems with the user account. Perhaps the
user has the same account name defined on their local machine and when they
log in they don't realize that they are logging in as the local User1 versus
the domain User1. Go to the problematic machine and check the user
accounts. If this does not work, perhaps have the domain admin drop the
user account and recreate it.
Matt
"Sue Hoegemeier" <Sue_H@.nomail.please> wrote in message
news:jd4sr0ds5vna1pc5ph4ri66j5hmri6d51p@.4ax.com...
> It really depends on where the process is failing. You would
> want to check the event logs on the PC having the problems
> connecting. Check for any network related issues or
> problems. Make sure that PC is contacting the domain
> controllers without any problems and that they are
> successfully logging into the network.
> -Sue
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:25:02 -0800, "JC"
> <JC@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>

Connection Error 18452 - Login failed for user '(null)'

Hello everybody,
one of our users gets an error message when trying to connect to our SQL
Server database:
Connection failed:
SQLState: '28000'
SQL Server Error 18452
[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]Login failed for
user
'(null)'. Reason: Not associated with a trusted SQL Server connection.
The problem occured suddenly during work. The user can connect to the server
using another computer and other users can connect using his computer.
Knowledge base didn't help so I'm asking you.
Configuration
Client: Windows XP professional (2002/SP1)
ODBC driver: SQL Server (2000.81.9042.00)
Client configuration: TCP/IP
Server: Windows 2000 Server
SQL Server 7.0
Seems the network setup for the user is somehow corrupted, since the message
states the user to be '(null)'.
Any suggestions?
Thanks in advance,
Markus WolffThis is always an authentication problem somewhere. The null indicates that
user cannot be validated and a null is being passsed to SQL Server.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.|||Rand, what about a solution or al least pointing to one?
"Rand Boyd [MSFT]" wrote:

> This is always an authentication problem somewhere. The null indicates tha
t
> user cannot be validated and a null is being passsed to SQL Server.
> Rand
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
>|||It really depends on where the process is failing. You would
want to check the event logs on the PC having the problems
connecting. Check for any network related issues or
problems. Make sure that PC is contacting the domain
controllers without any problems and that they are
successfully logging into the network.
-Sue
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:25:02 -0800, "JC"
<JC@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>Rand, what about a solution or al least pointing to one?
>"Rand Boyd [MSFT]" wrote:
>|||Login failed for user <null> usually means that on the SQL box, the user
account could not be found in the local security database or in the domain
controller's user database.
For example, on machine1 I log in as machine1\user1. Then I try to log into
SQL on machine2. On machine2 SQL takes the SID of the user and calls
LookupAccountSID API. This attempts to convert the SID to the user name.
LookupAccountSID first looks in local security database on machine2, and
does not find machine1\User1, then looks on domain controller, and still
does not find the SID.
So in general this points to problems with the user account. Perhaps the
user has the same account name defined on their local machine and when they
log in they don't realize that they are logging in as the local User1 versus
the domain User1. Go to the problematic machine and check the user
accounts. If this does not work, perhaps have the domain admin drop the
user account and recreate it.
Matt
"Sue Hoegemeier" <Sue_H@.nomail.please> wrote in message
news:jd4sr0ds5vna1pc5ph4ri66j5hmri6d51p@.
4ax.com...
> It really depends on where the process is failing. You would
> want to check the event logs on the PC having the problems
> connecting. Check for any network related issues or
> problems. Make sure that PC is contacting the domain
> controllers without any problems and that they are
> successfully logging into the network.
> -Sue
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:25:02 -0800, "JC"
> <JC@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Connection Problem

Thursday, March 22, 2012

Connection pooling & Windows authentication

Connection pooling & Windows authentication

Connection pooling & Windows authentication

Connection pooling & Windows authentication

Connection pooling & Windows authentication

Connection Pool in SQLserver 2005

Connection Pool in SQLserver 2005

Monday, March 19, 2012

connection is successful for empty userid

Connection is busy with results for another hstmt & Win2003 SP1

Sunday, March 11, 2012

Connection is busy with results for another hstmt

Connection is busy with results for another hstmt

Thursday, March 8, 2012

Connection faileed Package abort

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Connection error to SqlServer

Connection error to SqlServer

Connection error to SqlServer

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Connection Error 18452 - Login failed for user '(null)'

Connection Error 18452 - Login failed for user '(null)'

Connection Error 18452 - Login failed for user '(null)'

Connection Error 18452 - Login failed for user '(null)'

asp sql server

Blog Archive

About Me