I recently took responsibility for a sharepoint 2003 server & corresponding
SQL 2000 server. The backups are working through a maintenance plan, but
I'd like to implement a richer plan and am having difficulties developing
the best approach. understand I've not done much care & feeding of SQL in
my life. (lots of other infrastructure work, through). I have read the
technet articles on sql 2000 backup & restore and the pocket consultant:
database backup & recovery. Perhaps you can refer me to a better book?
I'd like to implement a weekly full db backup,
nightly differentials
nightly transaction log backups.
All of this would be done to a file server
When I tried to do this in the maintenance plan wizard, it didn't offer the
differential option. So then I looked at creating a backup job directly and
there the option no (apparent) to limit the number of backup files kept in
the file system. Am I missing something?
Then on the transaction logs, I see when I configure the job through the
backup tool, it allows me to select "remove inactive entries from
transaction log". This option is not available when I create the back
through a maintenance plan. Do I need to do this and why can't I do it
through both tools.
Thanks in advance.
\\Greg> Perhaps you can refer me to a better book?
SQL Server Books Online (the documentation that comes with the product)? It is very good.
> I'd like to implement a weekly full db backup,
> nightly differentials
> nightly transaction log backups.
Hmm, why only nightly log backups? For above, I'd expect something like hourly or every 10 minutes
or so.
> When I tried to do this in the maintenance plan wizard, it didn't offer the differential option.
Correct.
> So then I looked at creating a backup job directly and there the option no (apparent) to limit the
> number of backup files kept in the file system. Am I missing something?
Nope, you are correct again. You would have to roll your own. Google is your friend, and you are
likely to find code "out there" for this. For instance
http://www.karaszi.com/SQLServer/util_backup_script_like_MP.asp, which is 2005 (shouldn't be too
hard to make 2000) and do not include code to remove old backup files.
> Then on the transaction logs, I see when I configure the job through the backup tool, it allows me
> to select "remove inactive entries from transaction log". This option is not available when I
> create the back through a maintenance plan. Do I need to do this and why can't I do it through
> both tools.
The GUI is confusing and badly designed. Un-checking this option will add the NO_TRUNCATE option to
your backup command. This option is badly named and should have been named
ALLOW_LOG_BACKUP_OF_A_CORRUPT_DATABASE. As you imagine, this option is *not* something you want to
specify for other than extreme cases. Leaving this checked in the GUI is same as not specifying the
option, which is same as how Maint Plan does it. Some more reading:
http://www.karaszi.com/SQLServer/info_restore_no_truncate.asp
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"uSlackr" <gmartin@.gmartin.org> wrote in message news:%23jJDy2xeIHA.4164@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I recently took responsibility for a sharepoint 2003 server & corresponding SQL 2000 server. The
>backups are working through a maintenance plan, but I'd like to implement a richer plan and am
>having difficulties developing the best approach. understand I've not done much care & feeding of
>SQL in my life. (lots of other infrastructure work, through). I have read the technet articles on
>sql 2000 backup & restore and the pocket consultant: database backup & recovery. Perhaps you can
>refer me to a better book?
> I'd like to implement a weekly full db backup,
> nightly differentials
> nightly transaction log backups.
> All of this would be done to a file server
> When I tried to do this in the maintenance plan wizard, it didn't offer the differential option.
> So then I looked at creating a backup job directly and there the option no (apparent) to limit the
> number of backup files kept in the file system. Am I missing something?
> Then on the transaction logs, I see when I configure the job through the backup tool, it allows me
> to select "remove inactive entries from transaction log". This option is not available when I
> create the back through a maintenance plan. Do I need to do this and why can't I do it through
> both tools.
> Thanks in advance.
> \\Greg|||On Mar 1, 3:59=A0am, "Tibor Karaszi"
<tibor_please.no.email_kara...@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote:
> > Perhaps you can refer me to a better book?
> SQL Server Books Online (the documentation that comes with the product)? I=t is very good.
> > I'd like to implement a weekly full dbbackup,
> > nightly differentials
> > nightly transaction log backups.
> Hmm, why only nightly log backups? For above, I'd expect something like ho=urly or every 10 minutes
> or so.
> > When I tried to do this in the maintenance plan wizard, it didn't offer =the differential option.
> Correct.
> > So then I looked at creating abackupjob directly and there the option no= (apparent) to limit the
> > number ofbackupfiles kept in the file system. =A0Am I missing something?=
> Nope, you are correct again. You would have to roll your own. Google is yo=ur friend, and you are
> likely to find code "out there" for this. For instancehttp://www.karaszi.c=
om/SQLServer/util_backup_script_like_MP.asp, which is 2005 (shouldn't be too=
> hard to make 2000) and do not include code to remove oldbackupfiles.
> > Then on the transaction logs, I see when I configure the job through the=backuptool, it allows me
> > to select "remove inactive entries from transaction log". =A0This option= is not available when I
> > create the back through a maintenance plan. =A0Do I need to do this and =why can't I do it through
> > both tools.
> The GUI is confusing and badly designed. Un-checking this option will add =the NO_TRUNCATE option to
> yourbackupcommand. This option is badly named and should have been named
> ALLOW_LOG_BACKUP_OF_A_CORRUPT_DATABASE. As you imagine, this option is *no=t* something you want to
> specify for other than extreme cases. Leaving this checked in the GUI is s=ame as not specifying the
> option, which is same as how Maint Plan does it. Some more reading:http://=
www.karaszi.com/SQLServer/info_restore_no_truncate.asp
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVPhttp://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asph=
ttp://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "uSlackr" <gmar...@.gmartin.org> wrote in messagenews:%23jJDy2xeIHA.4164@.TK=2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> >I recently took responsibility for asharepoint2003 server & corresponding= SQL 2000 server. =A0The
> >backups are working through a maintenance plan, but I'd like to implement= a richer plan and am
> >having difficulties developing the best approach. =A0understand I've not =done much care & feeding of
> >SQL in my life. (lots of other infrastructure work, through). I have read= the technet articles on
> >sql 2000backup& restore and the pocket consultant: databasebackup& recove=ry. =A0Perhaps you can
> >refer me to a better book?
> > I'd like to implement a weekly full dbbackup,
> > nightly differentials
> > nightly transaction log backups.
> > All of this would be done to a file server
> > When I tried to do this in the maintenance plan wizard, it didn't offer =the differential option.
> > So then I looked at creating abackupjob directly and there the option no= (apparent) to limit the
> > number ofbackupfiles kept in the file system. =A0Am I missing something?=
> > Then on the transaction logs, I see when I configure the job through the=backuptool, it allows me
> > to select "remove inactive entries from transaction log". =A0This option= is not available when I
> > create the back through a maintenance plan. =A0Do I need to do this and =why can't I do it through
> > both tools.
> > Thanks in advance.
> > \\Greg- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
Greg,
Why read books on how to use the native tools?
Go to our website www.avepoint.com and see if our backup solutions are
sufficient.
Give me a call or drop me an email if you have any questions.
Thanks,
John Hohenadel
312-558-1694
john.hohenadel@.avepoint.com
Showing posts with label plan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label plan. Show all posts
Sunday, March 25, 2012
cleaning up backups
I recently took responsibility for a sharepoint 2003 server & corresponding
SQL 2000 server. The backups are working through a maintenance plan, but
I'd like to implement a richer plan and am having difficulties developing
the best approach. understand I've not done much care & feeding of SQL in
my life. (lots of other infrastructure work, through). I have read the
technet articles on sql 2000 backup & restore and the pocket consultant:
database backup & recovery. Perhaps you can refer me to a better book?
I'd like to implement a weekly full db backup,
nightly differentials
nightly transaction log backups.
All of this would be done to a file server
When I tried to do this in the maintenance plan wizard, it didn't offer the
differential option. So then I looked at creating a backup job directly and
there the option no (apparent) to limit the number of backup files kept in
the file system. Am I missing something?
Then on the transaction logs, I see when I configure the job through the
backup tool, it allows me to select "remove inactive entries from
transaction log". This option is not available when I create the back
through a maintenance plan. Do I need to do this and why can't I do it
through both tools.
Thanks in advance.
\\Greg
On Mar 1, 3:59Xam, "Tibor Karaszi"
<tibor_please.no.email_kara...@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote:
> SQL Server Books Online (the documentation that comes with the product)? It is very good.
>
> Hmm, why only nightly log backups? For above, I'd expect something like hourly or every 10 minutes
> or so.
>
> Correct.
>
> Nope, you are correct again. You would have to roll your own. Google is your friend, and you are
> likely to find code "out there" for this. For instancehttp://www.karaszi.com/SQLServer/util_backup_script_like_MP.asp, which is 2005 (shouldn't be too
> hard to make 2000) and do not include code to remove oldbackupfiles.
>
> The GUI is confusing and badly designed. Un-checking this option will add the NO_TRUNCATE option to
> yourbackupcommand. This option is badly named and should have been named
> ALLOW_LOG_BACKUP_OF_A_CORRUPT_DATABASE. As you imagine, this option is *not* something you want to
> specify for other than extreme cases. Leaving this checked in the GUI is same as not specifying the
> option, which is same as how Maint Plan does it. Some more reading:http://www.karaszi.com/SQLServer/info_restore_no_truncate.asp
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVPhttp://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asphttp://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "uSlackr" <gmar...@.gmartin.org> wrote in messagenews:%23jJDy2xeIHA.4164@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gb l...
>
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Greg,
Why read books on how to use the native tools?
Go to our website www.avepoint.com and see if our backup solutions are
sufficient.
Give me a call or drop me an email if you have any questions.
Thanks,
John Hohenadel
312-558-1694
john.hohenadel@.avepoint.com
SQL 2000 server. The backups are working through a maintenance plan, but
I'd like to implement a richer plan and am having difficulties developing
the best approach. understand I've not done much care & feeding of SQL in
my life. (lots of other infrastructure work, through). I have read the
technet articles on sql 2000 backup & restore and the pocket consultant:
database backup & recovery. Perhaps you can refer me to a better book?
I'd like to implement a weekly full db backup,
nightly differentials
nightly transaction log backups.
All of this would be done to a file server
When I tried to do this in the maintenance plan wizard, it didn't offer the
differential option. So then I looked at creating a backup job directly and
there the option no (apparent) to limit the number of backup files kept in
the file system. Am I missing something?
Then on the transaction logs, I see when I configure the job through the
backup tool, it allows me to select "remove inactive entries from
transaction log". This option is not available when I create the back
through a maintenance plan. Do I need to do this and why can't I do it
through both tools.
Thanks in advance.
\\Greg
On Mar 1, 3:59Xam, "Tibor Karaszi"
<tibor_please.no.email_kara...@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote:
> SQL Server Books Online (the documentation that comes with the product)? It is very good.
>
> Hmm, why only nightly log backups? For above, I'd expect something like hourly or every 10 minutes
> or so.
>
> Correct.
>
> Nope, you are correct again. You would have to roll your own. Google is your friend, and you are
> likely to find code "out there" for this. For instancehttp://www.karaszi.com/SQLServer/util_backup_script_like_MP.asp, which is 2005 (shouldn't be too
> hard to make 2000) and do not include code to remove oldbackupfiles.
>
> The GUI is confusing and badly designed. Un-checking this option will add the NO_TRUNCATE option to
> yourbackupcommand. This option is badly named and should have been named
> ALLOW_LOG_BACKUP_OF_A_CORRUPT_DATABASE. As you imagine, this option is *not* something you want to
> specify for other than extreme cases. Leaving this checked in the GUI is same as not specifying the
> option, which is same as how Maint Plan does it. Some more reading:http://www.karaszi.com/SQLServer/info_restore_no_truncate.asp
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVPhttp://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asphttp://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
>
> "uSlackr" <gmar...@.gmartin.org> wrote in messagenews:%23jJDy2xeIHA.4164@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gb l...
>
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Greg,
Why read books on how to use the native tools?
Go to our website www.avepoint.com and see if our backup solutions are
sufficient.
Give me a call or drop me an email if you have any questions.
Thanks,
John Hohenadel
312-558-1694
john.hohenadel@.avepoint.com
clean up bak files on file server
I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and stores
the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan I have is
not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How can I get my
Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4 days old? This is
only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers are working
correctly.
Mike,
In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
RLF
"Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and stores
>the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan I have is
>not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How can I get my
>Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4 days old? This is
>only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers are working
>correctly.
>
>
|||I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
> Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
> overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
> RLF
> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
> news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
|||Its called "Maintenance Cleanup Task"
- - - - - - - - -
Thanks
Yogish
"Mike" wrote:
> I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
>
|||Mike,
No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following
purpose:
The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and Restore,
SQL Server Agent, and Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard allows you
to specify the type and age of the data to be deleted.
In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it is
not deleting backups, but is deleting the history records that track your
backups, restores, and so forth. It is cleaning up tables in msdb.
RLF
"Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
|||Where can i find the clean up task at?
Sorry for the questions but I'm a developer that is now doing DBA work, so
I'm learning as I go and so far so good, except for a few minor things.
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:uKQV6dheIHA.6092@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following
> purpose:
> The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and Restore,
> SQL Server Agent, and Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard allows you
> to specify the type and age of the data to be deleted.
> In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it is
> not deleting backups, but is deleting the history records that track your
> backups, restores, and so forth. It is cleaning up tables in msdb.
> RLF
> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
> news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
|||I found it.
"Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
news:urmeVgheIHA.536@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Where can i find the clean up task at?
>
> Sorry for the questions but I'm a developer that is now doing DBA work, so
> I'm learning as I go and so far so good, except for a few minor things.
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:uKQV6dheIHA.6092@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
|||I created a clean up task and its still not working. I have all of my .bak
files in sub folders with the db name, and I noticed that the task is only
looking in a root directory with the .bak files, is there a way to have it
search all sub folders within a directory?
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:uKQV6dheIHA.6092@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following
> purpose:
> The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and Restore,
> SQL Server Agent, and Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard allows you
> to specify the type and age of the data to be deleted.
> In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it is
> not deleting backups, but is deleting the history records that track your
> backups, restores, and so forth. It is cleaning up tables in msdb.
> RLF
> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
> news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan I have is
not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How can I get my
Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4 days old? This is
only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers are working
correctly.
Mike,
In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
RLF
"Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and stores
>the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan I have is
>not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How can I get my
>Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4 days old? This is
>only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers are working
>correctly.
>
>
|||I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
> Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
> overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
> RLF
> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
> news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
|||Its called "Maintenance Cleanup Task"
- - - - - - - - -
Thanks
Yogish
"Mike" wrote:
> I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
>
|||Mike,
No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following
purpose:
The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and Restore,
SQL Server Agent, and Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard allows you
to specify the type and age of the data to be deleted.
In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it is
not deleting backups, but is deleting the history records that track your
backups, restores, and so forth. It is cleaning up tables in msdb.
RLF
"Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
|||Where can i find the clean up task at?
Sorry for the questions but I'm a developer that is now doing DBA work, so
I'm learning as I go and so far so good, except for a few minor things.
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:uKQV6dheIHA.6092@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following
> purpose:
> The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and Restore,
> SQL Server Agent, and Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard allows you
> to specify the type and age of the data to be deleted.
> In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it is
> not deleting backups, but is deleting the history records that track your
> backups, restores, and so forth. It is cleaning up tables in msdb.
> RLF
> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
> news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
|||I found it.
"Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
news:urmeVgheIHA.536@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Where can i find the clean up task at?
>
> Sorry for the questions but I'm a developer that is now doing DBA work, so
> I'm learning as I go and so far so good, except for a few minor things.
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:uKQV6dheIHA.6092@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
|||I created a clean up task and its still not working. I have all of my .bak
files in sub folders with the db name, and I noticed that the task is only
looking in a root directory with the .bak files, is there a way to have it
search all sub folders within a directory?
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:uKQV6dheIHA.6092@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following
> purpose:
> The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and Restore,
> SQL Server Agent, and Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard allows you
> to specify the type and age of the data to be deleted.
> In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it is
> not deleting backups, but is deleting the history records that track your
> backups, restores, and so forth. It is cleaning up tables in msdb.
> RLF
> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
> news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
clean up bak files on file server
I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and stores
the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan I have is
not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How can I get my
Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4 days old? This is
only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers are working
correctly.Mike,
In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
RLF
"Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and stores
>the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan I have is
>not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How can I get my
>Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4 days old? This is
>only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers are working
>correctly.
>
>|||I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
> Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
> overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
> RLF
> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
> news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and
>>stores the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan I
>>have is not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How can I
>>get my Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4 days old?
>>This is only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers are
>>working correctly.
>>
>|||Its called "Maintenance Cleanup Task"
--
- - - - - - - - -
Thanks
Yogish
"Mike" wrote:
> I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> > Mike,
> >
> > In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
> > Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
> > overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
> >
> > RLF
> >
> > "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
> > news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> >>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and
> >>stores the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan I
> >>have is not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How can I
> >>get my Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4 days old?
> >>This is only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers are
> >>working correctly.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>|||Mike,
No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following
purpose:
The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and Restore,
SQL Server Agent, and Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard allows you
to specify the type and age of the data to be deleted.
In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it is
not deleting backups, but is deleting the history records that track your
backups, restores, and so forth. It is cleaning up tables in msdb.
RLF
"Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Mike,
>> In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
>> Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
>> overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
>> RLF
>> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
>> news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and
>>stores the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan
>>I have is not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How can
>>I get my Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4 days
>>old? This is only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers
>>are working correctly.
>>
>>
>|||Where can i find the clean up task at?
Sorry for the questions but I'm a developer that is now doing DBA work, so
I'm learning as I go and so far so good, except for a few minor things.
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:uKQV6dheIHA.6092@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following
> purpose:
> The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and Restore,
> SQL Server Agent, and Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard allows you
> to specify the type and age of the data to be deleted.
> In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it is
> not deleting backups, but is deleting the history records that track your
> backups, restores, and so forth. It is cleaning up tables in msdb.
> RLF
> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
> news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
>> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
>> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Mike,
>> In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
>> Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
>> overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
>> RLF
>> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
>> news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and
>>stores the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan
>>I have is not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How
>>can I get my Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4
>>days old? This is only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000
>>servers are working correctly.
>>
>>
>>
>|||I found it.
"Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
news:urmeVgheIHA.536@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Where can i find the clean up task at?
>
> Sorry for the questions but I'm a developer that is now doing DBA work, so
> I'm learning as I go and so far so good, except for a few minor things.
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:uKQV6dheIHA.6092@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Mike,
>> No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following
>> purpose:
>> The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and
>> Restore, SQL Server Agent, and Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard
>> allows you to specify the type and age of the data to be deleted.
>> In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it
>> is not deleting backups, but is deleting the history records that track
>> your backups, restores, and so forth. It is cleaning up tables in msdb.
>> RLF
>> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
>> news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
>> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
>> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Mike,
>> In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
>> Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
>> overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
>> RLF
>> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
>> news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and
>>stores the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean
>>plan I have is not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days.
>>How can I get my Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that
>>are 4 days old? This is only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql
>>2000 servers are working correctly.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>|||I created a clean up task and its still not working. I have all of my .bak
files in sub folders with the db name, and I noticed that the task is only
looking in a root directory with the .bak files, is there a way to have it
search all sub folders within a directory?
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:uKQV6dheIHA.6092@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following
> purpose:
> The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and Restore,
> SQL Server Agent, and Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard allows you
> to specify the type and age of the data to be deleted.
> In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it is
> not deleting backups, but is deleting the history records that track your
> backups, restores, and so forth. It is cleaning up tables in msdb.
> RLF
> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
> news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
>> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
>> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Mike,
>> In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
>> Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
>> overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
>> RLF
>> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
>> news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and
>>stores the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan
>>I have is not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How
>>can I get my Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4
>>days old? This is only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000
>>servers are working correctly.
>>
>>
>>
>|||As of sp1, the cleanup task has an option to traverse subdirectories.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message news:uuFilmheIHA.4144@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I created a clean up task and its still not working. I have all of my .bak files in sub folders
>with the db name, and I noticed that the task is only looking in a root directory with the .bak
>files, is there a way to have it search all sub folders within a directory?
>
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:uKQV6dheIHA.6092@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Mike,
>> No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following purpose:
>> The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and Restore, SQL Server Agent, and
>> Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard allows you to specify the type and age of the data to
>> be deleted.
>> In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it is not deleting backups,
>> but is deleting the history records that track your backups, restores, and so forth. It is
>> cleaning up tables in msdb.
>> RLF
>> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
>> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
>> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Mike,
>> In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance Cleanup Task. The
>> expiry date on backups only marks when they can be overwritten. The cleanup task is what
>> actually deletes files.
>> RLF
>> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and stores the databases on a
>>nas device. The problem is that the clean plan I have is not removing the .bak files that are
>>older then 4 days. How can I get my Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4
>>days old? This is only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers are working
>>correctly.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan I have is
not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How can I get my
Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4 days old? This is
only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers are working
correctly.Mike,
In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
RLF
"Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and stores
>the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan I have is
>not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How can I get my
>Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4 days old? This is
>only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers are working
>correctly.
>
>|||I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
> Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
> overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
> RLF
> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
> news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and
>>stores the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan I
>>have is not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How can I
>>get my Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4 days old?
>>This is only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers are
>>working correctly.
>>
>|||Its called "Maintenance Cleanup Task"
--
- - - - - - - - -
Thanks
Yogish
"Mike" wrote:
> I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> > Mike,
> >
> > In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
> > Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
> > overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
> >
> > RLF
> >
> > "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
> > news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> >>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and
> >>stores the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan I
> >>have is not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How can I
> >>get my Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4 days old?
> >>This is only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers are
> >>working correctly.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>|||Mike,
No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following
purpose:
The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and Restore,
SQL Server Agent, and Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard allows you
to specify the type and age of the data to be deleted.
In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it is
not deleting backups, but is deleting the history records that track your
backups, restores, and so forth. It is cleaning up tables in msdb.
RLF
"Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Mike,
>> In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
>> Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
>> overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
>> RLF
>> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
>> news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and
>>stores the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan
>>I have is not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How can
>>I get my Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4 days
>>old? This is only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers
>>are working correctly.
>>
>>
>|||Where can i find the clean up task at?
Sorry for the questions but I'm a developer that is now doing DBA work, so
I'm learning as I go and so far so good, except for a few minor things.
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:uKQV6dheIHA.6092@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following
> purpose:
> The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and Restore,
> SQL Server Agent, and Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard allows you
> to specify the type and age of the data to be deleted.
> In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it is
> not deleting backups, but is deleting the history records that track your
> backups, restores, and so forth. It is cleaning up tables in msdb.
> RLF
> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
> news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
>> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
>> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Mike,
>> In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
>> Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
>> overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
>> RLF
>> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
>> news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and
>>stores the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan
>>I have is not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How
>>can I get my Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4
>>days old? This is only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000
>>servers are working correctly.
>>
>>
>>
>|||I found it.
"Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
news:urmeVgheIHA.536@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Where can i find the clean up task at?
>
> Sorry for the questions but I'm a developer that is now doing DBA work, so
> I'm learning as I go and so far so good, except for a few minor things.
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:uKQV6dheIHA.6092@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Mike,
>> No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following
>> purpose:
>> The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and
>> Restore, SQL Server Agent, and Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard
>> allows you to specify the type and age of the data to be deleted.
>> In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it
>> is not deleting backups, but is deleting the history records that track
>> your backups, restores, and so forth. It is cleaning up tables in msdb.
>> RLF
>> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
>> news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
>> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
>> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Mike,
>> In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
>> Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
>> overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
>> RLF
>> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
>> news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and
>>stores the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean
>>plan I have is not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days.
>>How can I get my Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that
>>are 4 days old? This is only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql
>>2000 servers are working correctly.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>|||I created a clean up task and its still not working. I have all of my .bak
files in sub folders with the db name, and I noticed that the task is only
looking in a root directory with the .bak files, is there a way to have it
search all sub folders within a directory?
"Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
news:uKQV6dheIHA.6092@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following
> purpose:
> The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and Restore,
> SQL Server Agent, and Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard allows you
> to specify the type and age of the data to be deleted.
> In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it is
> not deleting backups, but is deleting the history records that track your
> backups, restores, and so forth. It is cleaning up tables in msdb.
> RLF
> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
> news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
>> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
>> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Mike,
>> In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance
>> Cleanup Task. The expiry date on backups only marks when they can be
>> overwritten. The cleanup task is what actually deletes files.
>> RLF
>> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message
>> news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and
>>stores the databases on a nas device. The problem is that the clean plan
>>I have is not removing the .bak files that are older then 4 days. How
>>can I get my Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4
>>days old? This is only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000
>>servers are working correctly.
>>
>>
>>
>|||As of sp1, the cleanup task has an option to traverse subdirectories.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message news:uuFilmheIHA.4144@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I created a clean up task and its still not working. I have all of my .bak files in sub folders
>with the db name, and I noticed that the task is only looking in a root directory with the .bak
>files, is there a way to have it search all sub folders within a directory?
>
> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:uKQV6dheIHA.6092@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Mike,
>> No, it is not the same. The Clean up History plan has the following purpose:
>> The History Cleanup task deletes historical data about Backup and Restore, SQL Server Agent, and
>> Maintenance Plan operations. This wizard allows you to specify the type and age of the data to
>> be deleted.
>> In case that is not clear (and I can understand why it might not be) it is not deleting backups,
>> but is deleting the history records that track your backups, restores, and so forth. It is
>> cleaning up tables in msdb.
>> RLF
>> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message news:uS02iPheIHA.5208@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>I have a Clean up History plan, is that the same as 'clean up task'?
>> If so then that isn't deleting the files from my nas location
>> "Russell Fields" <russellfields@.nomail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23%23qqdEheIHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Mike,
>> In your SQL Server 2005 maintenance plan, you need to add a Maintenance Cleanup Task. The
>> expiry date on backups only marks when they can be overwritten. The cleanup task is what
>> actually deletes files.
>> RLF
>> "Mike" <Mike@.Ihatespam.net> wrote in message news:ul47jBheIHA.4696@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I have a maintanence plan that does a backup of all my databases and stores the databases on a
>>nas device. The problem is that the clean plan I have is not removing the .bak files that are
>>older then 4 days. How can I get my Clean up plan be able to delete the .bak files that are 4
>>days old? This is only happening with my SQL 2005 servers, my sql 2000 servers are working
>>correctly.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Clean old backup with retaindays
Hi,
i have 3 sql server, one with sql2000 and other with sql2005.
on each server i have a maintenance plan. this plan save all base to a
network share on another server.
all plans have the option retaindays at 2.
the sql2000 server clean correctly the old backup. but the sql2005 servers
don' t do it.
all the sql service are running under the same account.
i applied patch on a sql2005 at 3152, the other is always at 3042. but
nothing change.
everydays i muste clean manually the backup...retaindays don't work!
someone have an idea about this bug ?
Ty
ChristopheChristophe,
It's not a bug, it's a feature. :) I assume that you are using the
Maintenance Plans. One thing to know is that the option RETAINDAYS does not
actually delete anything, it is just marking the file to tell SQL Server not
to overwrite this file before the retain time is up.
If you are using SQL 2000 Legacy Maintenance Plans, check the Complete
Backup and Transaction Log Backup tabs and make sure that "Remove files
older than" is set.
If you are using SQL 2005 Maintenance plans, you also need to include the
Maintenance Cleanup task to specify file deletions.
RLF
"Christophe" <Christophe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C14216B5-32AA-4D94-972C-122D864DEA51@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> i have 3 sql server, one with sql2000 and other with sql2005.
> on each server i have a maintenance plan. this plan save all base to a
> network share on another server.
> all plans have the option retaindays at 2.
> the sql2000 server clean correctly the old backup. but the sql2005 servers
> don' t do it.
> all the sql service are running under the same account.
> i applied patch on a sql2005 at 3152, the other is always at 3042. but
> nothing change.
> everydays i muste clean manually the backup...retaindays don't work!
> someone have an idea about this bug ?
> Ty
> Christophe|||ty very much ! ;)
"Russell Fields" wrote:
> Christophe,
> It's not a bug, it's a feature. :) I assume that you are using the
> Maintenance Plans. One thing to know is that the option RETAINDAYS does not
> actually delete anything, it is just marking the file to tell SQL Server not
> to overwrite this file before the retain time is up.
> If you are using SQL 2000 Legacy Maintenance Plans, check the Complete
> Backup and Transaction Log Backup tabs and make sure that "Remove files
> older than" is set.
> If you are using SQL 2005 Maintenance plans, you also need to include the
> Maintenance Cleanup task to specify file deletions.
> RLF
>
> "Christophe" <Christophe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:C14216B5-32AA-4D94-972C-122D864DEA51@.microsoft.com...
> > Hi,
> >
> > i have 3 sql server, one with sql2000 and other with sql2005.
> > on each server i have a maintenance plan. this plan save all base to a
> > network share on another server.
> > all plans have the option retaindays at 2.
> > the sql2000 server clean correctly the old backup. but the sql2005 servers
> > don' t do it.
> > all the sql service are running under the same account.
> > i applied patch on a sql2005 at 3152, the other is always at 3042. but
> > nothing change.
> >
> > everydays i muste clean manually the backup...retaindays don't work!
> > someone have an idea about this bug ?
> >
> > Ty
> > Christophe
>
>
i have 3 sql server, one with sql2000 and other with sql2005.
on each server i have a maintenance plan. this plan save all base to a
network share on another server.
all plans have the option retaindays at 2.
the sql2000 server clean correctly the old backup. but the sql2005 servers
don' t do it.
all the sql service are running under the same account.
i applied patch on a sql2005 at 3152, the other is always at 3042. but
nothing change.
everydays i muste clean manually the backup...retaindays don't work!
someone have an idea about this bug ?
Ty
ChristopheChristophe,
It's not a bug, it's a feature. :) I assume that you are using the
Maintenance Plans. One thing to know is that the option RETAINDAYS does not
actually delete anything, it is just marking the file to tell SQL Server not
to overwrite this file before the retain time is up.
If you are using SQL 2000 Legacy Maintenance Plans, check the Complete
Backup and Transaction Log Backup tabs and make sure that "Remove files
older than" is set.
If you are using SQL 2005 Maintenance plans, you also need to include the
Maintenance Cleanup task to specify file deletions.
RLF
"Christophe" <Christophe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C14216B5-32AA-4D94-972C-122D864DEA51@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> i have 3 sql server, one with sql2000 and other with sql2005.
> on each server i have a maintenance plan. this plan save all base to a
> network share on another server.
> all plans have the option retaindays at 2.
> the sql2000 server clean correctly the old backup. but the sql2005 servers
> don' t do it.
> all the sql service are running under the same account.
> i applied patch on a sql2005 at 3152, the other is always at 3042. but
> nothing change.
> everydays i muste clean manually the backup...retaindays don't work!
> someone have an idea about this bug ?
> Ty
> Christophe|||ty very much ! ;)
"Russell Fields" wrote:
> Christophe,
> It's not a bug, it's a feature. :) I assume that you are using the
> Maintenance Plans. One thing to know is that the option RETAINDAYS does not
> actually delete anything, it is just marking the file to tell SQL Server not
> to overwrite this file before the retain time is up.
> If you are using SQL 2000 Legacy Maintenance Plans, check the Complete
> Backup and Transaction Log Backup tabs and make sure that "Remove files
> older than" is set.
> If you are using SQL 2005 Maintenance plans, you also need to include the
> Maintenance Cleanup task to specify file deletions.
> RLF
>
> "Christophe" <Christophe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:C14216B5-32AA-4D94-972C-122D864DEA51@.microsoft.com...
> > Hi,
> >
> > i have 3 sql server, one with sql2000 and other with sql2005.
> > on each server i have a maintenance plan. this plan save all base to a
> > network share on another server.
> > all plans have the option retaindays at 2.
> > the sql2000 server clean correctly the old backup. but the sql2005 servers
> > don' t do it.
> > all the sql service are running under the same account.
> > i applied patch on a sql2005 at 3152, the other is always at 3042. but
> > nothing change.
> >
> > everydays i muste clean manually the backup...retaindays don't work!
> > someone have an idea about this bug ?
> >
> > Ty
> > Christophe
>
>
Thursday, February 16, 2012
checking data and index linkages on msdb and master
Hi, I am running a maintenance plan daily, and under default configurations,
it's failing to Check data and index linkages on the "master" and "msdb"
database because it's not in single user mode. Am I not able to do this?
If so, do I need to change it to single user? Will that harm anything else?
_____
DC GIt's failing because you've set the job up to automatically repair minor
errors. You should not do this - always investigate integrity problems
before taking any corrective action (i.e. restoring from your backups)
--
Paul Randal
DBCC Technical Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"DC Gringo" <glevine@.visiontechnology.net> wrote in message
news:ueA0bX0lDHA.1244@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi, I am running a maintenance plan daily, and under default
configurations,
> it's failing to Check data and index linkages on the "master" and "msdb"
> database because it's not in single user mode. Am I not able to do this?
> If so, do I need to change it to single user? Will that harm anything
else?
> _____
> DC G
>
it's failing to Check data and index linkages on the "master" and "msdb"
database because it's not in single user mode. Am I not able to do this?
If so, do I need to change it to single user? Will that harm anything else?
_____
DC GIt's failing because you've set the job up to automatically repair minor
errors. You should not do this - always investigate integrity problems
before taking any corrective action (i.e. restoring from your backups)
--
Paul Randal
DBCC Technical Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"DC Gringo" <glevine@.visiontechnology.net> wrote in message
news:ueA0bX0lDHA.1244@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi, I am running a maintenance plan daily, and under default
configurations,
> it's failing to Check data and index linkages on the "master" and "msdb"
> database because it's not in single user mode. Am I not able to do this?
> If so, do I need to change it to single user? Will that harm anything
else?
> _____
> DC G
>
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Checkdb vs Integrity with indexes
Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and running
the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb output
shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
Thanks
Ron
What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH NO_INFOMSGS?
Do the outputs match then?
Paul Randal
Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
running
> the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
output
> shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
> Thanks
> Ron
|||No different results.
Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both are
doing the same thing.
I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would like
to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
"Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH NO_INFOMSGS?
> Do the outputs match then?
> --
> Paul Randal
> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> running
> output
>
>
|||Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
CHECKDB.
Paul Randal
Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
> No different results.
> Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
> different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both
are
> doing the same thing.
> I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would
like[vbcol=seagreen]
> to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
> "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
NO_INFOMSGS?[vbcol=seagreen]
rights.[vbcol=seagreen]
|||Here the Integrity output:
1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
(null)
(null)
** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing 2005-02-13
04:00:00
DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your
system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
"Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
> CHECKDB.
> --
> Paul Randal
> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
> are
> like
> NO_INFOMSGS?
> rights.
>
>
|||Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC commend...
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Here the Integrity output:
> 1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
>
> (null)
> (null)
> ** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
> Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
> Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing 2005-02-13
> 04:00:00
> DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
> 'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your
> system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>
> "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
|||I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it doesn't
look like the Integrity output.
I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC commend...
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> http://www.sqlug.se/
>
> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||> I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
> the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
All the maintenance wizard does is execute SQL commands. I ran a profiler trace to capture the
command executed by the maintenance wizard:
dbcc checkdb WITH NO_INFOMSGS
If you are curious, you can use profiler while the maint wizard is executing to capture the commands
that it executing against SQL Server.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A051C9CE-671A-46FF-BD75-DAE4A408B081@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it doesn't
> look like the Integrity output.
> I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
> the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
|||You can also find the SQL commands that the maintenance plan
runs for whatever options are selected in the following
article:
http://www.sql-server-performance.co...ance_plans.asp
-Sue
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 06:55:06 -0800, Ron
<Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it doesn't
>look like the Integrity output.
>I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
>the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
>"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
|||And to answer your question, the integrity job uses DBCC CHECKDB so it's
doing exactly the same as a manual DBCC CHECKDB.
Paul Randal
Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Sue Hoegemeier" <Sue_H@.nomail.please> wrote in message
news:qd8411pgobfai7a405kjpisvroftt9a9ap@.4ax.com...
> You can also find the SQL commands that the maintenance plan
> runs for whatever options are selected in the following
> article:
>
http://www.sql-server-performance.co...ance_plans.asp[vbcol=seagreen]
> -Sue
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 06:55:06 -0800, Ron
> <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
doesn't[vbcol=seagreen]
commend...[vbcol=seagreen]
2005-02-13[vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE 01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE 01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE 01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE 01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE 01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE 01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE 01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
database[vbcol=seagreen]
your[vbcol=seagreen]
runs DBCC[vbcol=seagreen]
rights.[vbcol=seagreen]
produces[vbcol=seagreen]
both[vbcol=seagreen]
would[vbcol=seagreen]
no[vbcol=seagreen]
('database') and[vbcol=seagreen]
checkdb[vbcol=seagreen]
detail.
>
the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb output
shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
Thanks
Ron
What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH NO_INFOMSGS?
Do the outputs match then?
Paul Randal
Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
running
> the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
output
> shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
> Thanks
> Ron
|||No different results.
Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both are
doing the same thing.
I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would like
to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
"Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH NO_INFOMSGS?
> Do the outputs match then?
> --
> Paul Randal
> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> running
> output
>
>
|||Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
CHECKDB.
Paul Randal
Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
> No different results.
> Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
> different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both
are
> doing the same thing.
> I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would
like[vbcol=seagreen]
> to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
> "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
NO_INFOMSGS?[vbcol=seagreen]
rights.[vbcol=seagreen]
|||Here the Integrity output:
1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
(null)
(null)
** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing 2005-02-13
04:00:00
DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your
system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
"Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
> CHECKDB.
> --
> Paul Randal
> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
> are
> like
> NO_INFOMSGS?
> rights.
>
>
|||Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC commend...
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Here the Integrity output:
> 1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
>
> (null)
> (null)
> ** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
> Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
> Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing 2005-02-13
> 04:00:00
> DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
> 'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your
> system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>
> "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
|||I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it doesn't
look like the Integrity output.
I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC commend...
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> http://www.sqlug.se/
>
> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||> I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
> the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
All the maintenance wizard does is execute SQL commands. I ran a profiler trace to capture the
command executed by the maintenance wizard:
dbcc checkdb WITH NO_INFOMSGS
If you are curious, you can use profiler while the maint wizard is executing to capture the commands
that it executing against SQL Server.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A051C9CE-671A-46FF-BD75-DAE4A408B081@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it doesn't
> look like the Integrity output.
> I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
> the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
|||You can also find the SQL commands that the maintenance plan
runs for whatever options are selected in the following
article:
http://www.sql-server-performance.co...ance_plans.asp
-Sue
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 06:55:06 -0800, Ron
<Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it doesn't
>look like the Integrity output.
>I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
>the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
>"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
|||And to answer your question, the integrity job uses DBCC CHECKDB so it's
doing exactly the same as a manual DBCC CHECKDB.
Paul Randal
Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Sue Hoegemeier" <Sue_H@.nomail.please> wrote in message
news:qd8411pgobfai7a405kjpisvroftt9a9ap@.4ax.com...
> You can also find the SQL commands that the maintenance plan
> runs for whatever options are selected in the following
> article:
>
http://www.sql-server-performance.co...ance_plans.asp[vbcol=seagreen]
> -Sue
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 06:55:06 -0800, Ron
> <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
doesn't[vbcol=seagreen]
commend...[vbcol=seagreen]
2005-02-13[vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE 01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE 01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE 01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE 01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE 01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE 01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE 01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
[SQLSTATE[vbcol=seagreen]
01000][vbcol=seagreen]
database[vbcol=seagreen]
your[vbcol=seagreen]
runs DBCC[vbcol=seagreen]
rights.[vbcol=seagreen]
produces[vbcol=seagreen]
both[vbcol=seagreen]
would[vbcol=seagreen]
no[vbcol=seagreen]
('database') and[vbcol=seagreen]
checkdb[vbcol=seagreen]
detail.
>
Checkdb vs Integrity with indexes
Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and running
the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb output
shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
Thanks
RonWhat about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH NO_INFOMSGS?
Do the outputs match then?
--
Paul Randal
Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
running
> the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
output
> shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
> Thanks
> Ron|||No different results.
Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both are
doing the same thing.
I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would like
to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
"Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH NO_INFOMSGS?
> Do the outputs match then?
> --
> Paul Randal
> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
> running
> > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
> output
> > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Ron
>
>|||Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
CHECKDB.
--
Paul Randal
Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
> No different results.
> Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
> different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both
are
> doing the same thing.
> I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would
like
> to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
> "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
NO_INFOMSGS?
> > Do the outputs match then?
> >
> > --
> > Paul Randal
> > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> >
> > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
> >
> > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
> > running
> > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
> > output
> > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Ron
> >
> >
> >|||Here the Integrity output:
1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
(null)
(null)
** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing 2005-02-13
04:00:00
DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your
system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
"Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
> CHECKDB.
> --
> Paul Randal
> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
> > No different results.
> >
> > Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
> > different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both
> are
> > doing the same thing.
> >
> > I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would
> like
> > to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
> >
> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> >
> > > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
> NO_INFOMSGS?
> > > Do the outputs match then?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Paul Randal
> > > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> > >
> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
> > >
> > > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> > > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
> > > running
> > > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
> > > output
> > > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > > Ron
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>|||Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC commend...
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...
> Here the Integrity output:
> 1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
>
> (null)
> (null)
> ** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
> Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
> Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing 2005-02-13
> 04:00:00
> DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
> 'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your
> system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>
> "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
>> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
>> CHECKDB.
>> --
>> Paul Randal
>> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
>> > No different results.
>> >
>> > Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
>> > different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both
>> are
>> > doing the same thing.
>> >
>> > I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would
>> like
>> > to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
>> >
>> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
>> >
>> > > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
>> NO_INFOMSGS?
>> > > Do the outputs match then?
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Paul Randal
>> > > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
>> > >
>> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights.
>> > >
>> > > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
>> > > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
>> > > running
>> > > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
>> > > output
>> > > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks
>> > > >
>> > > > Ron
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>>|||I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it doesn't
look like the Integrity output.
I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC commend...
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> http://www.sqlug.se/
>
> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...
> > Here the Integrity output:
> > 1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
> >
> >
> >
> > (null)
> > (null)
> > ** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
> >
> > Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
> > Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing 2005-02-13
> > 04:00:00
> >
> > DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
> > [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
> > 'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your
> > system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >
> >
> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> >
> >> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
> >> CHECKDB.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Paul Randal
> >> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> >>
> >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> >>
> >> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
> >> > No different results.
> >> >
> >> > Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
> >> > different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both
> >> are
> >> > doing the same thing.
> >> >
> >> > I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would
> >> like
> >> > to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
> >> >
> >> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
> >> NO_INFOMSGS?
> >> > > Do the outputs match then?
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > Paul Randal
> >> > > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> >> > >
> >> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> >> rights.
> >> > >
> >> > > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> > > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> >> > > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
> >> > > running
> >> > > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
> >> > > output
> >> > > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thanks
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Ron
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>|||> I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
> the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
All the maintenance wizard does is execute SQL commands. I ran a profiler trace to capture the
command executed by the maintenance wizard:
dbcc checkdb WITH NO_INFOMSGS
If you are curious, you can use profiler while the maint wizard is executing to capture the commands
that it executing against SQL Server.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A051C9CE-671A-46FF-BD75-DAE4A408B081@.microsoft.com...
> I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it doesn't
> look like the Integrity output.
> I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
> the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>> Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC commend...
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>> http://www.sqlug.se/
>>
>> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...
>> > Here the Integrity output:
>> > 1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > (null)
>> > (null)
>> > ** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
>> >
>> > Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
>> > Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing 2005-02-13
>> > 04:00:00
>> >
>> > DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
>> > [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
>> > 'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your
>> > system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> >
>> >
>> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
>> >> CHECKDB.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Paul Randal
>> >> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
>> >>
>> >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>> >>
>> >> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > No different results.
>> >> >
>> >> > Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
>> >> > different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both
>> >> are
>> >> > doing the same thing.
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would
>> >> like
>> >> > to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
>> >> >
>> >> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
>> >> NO_INFOMSGS?
>> >> > > Do the outputs match then?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > --
>> >> > > Paul Randal
>> >> > > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
>> >> > >
>> >> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> >> rights.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> > > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
>> >> > > running
>> >> > > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
>> >> > > output
>> >> > > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Thanks
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Ron
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>|||You can also find the SQL commands that the maintenance plan
runs for whatever options are selected in the following
article:
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/ak_inside_sql_server_maintenance_plans.asp
-Sue
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 06:55:06 -0800, Ron
<Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it doesn't
>look like the Integrity output.
>I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
>the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
>"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>> Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC commend...
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>> http://www.sqlug.se/
>>
>> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...
>> > Here the Integrity output:
>> > 1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > (null)
>> > (null)
>> > ** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
>> >
>> > Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
>> > Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing 2005-02-13
>> > 04:00:00
>> >
>> > DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
>> > [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
>> > 'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your
>> > system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> >
>> >
>> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
>> >> CHECKDB.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Paul Randal
>> >> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
>> >>
>> >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>> >>
>> >> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > No different results.
>> >> >
>> >> > Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
>> >> > different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both
>> >> are
>> >> > doing the same thing.
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would
>> >> like
>> >> > to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
>> >> >
>> >> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
>> >> NO_INFOMSGS?
>> >> > > Do the outputs match then?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > --
>> >> > > Paul Randal
>> >> > > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
>> >> > >
>> >> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> >> rights.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> > > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
>> >> > > running
>> >> > > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
>> >> > > output
>> >> > > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Thanks
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Ron
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>|||And to answer your question, the integrity job uses DBCC CHECKDB so it's
doing exactly the same as a manual DBCC CHECKDB.
--
Paul Randal
Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Sue Hoegemeier" <Sue_H@.nomail.please> wrote in message
news:qd8411pgobfai7a405kjpisvroftt9a9ap@.4ax.com...
> You can also find the SQL commands that the maintenance plan
> runs for whatever options are selected in the following
> article:
>
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/ak_inside_sql_server_maintenance_plans.asp
> -Sue
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 06:55:06 -0800, Ron
> <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it
doesn't
> >look like the Integrity output.
> >
> >I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
> >the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
> >
> >"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> >
> >> Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC
commend...
> >>
> >> --
> >> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> >> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> >> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >> http://www.sqlug.se/
> >>
> >>
> >> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...
> >> > Here the Integrity output:
> >> > 1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > (null)
> >> > (null)
> >> > ** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
> >> >
> >> > Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
> >> > Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing
2005-02-13
> >> > 04:00:00
> >> >
> >> > DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
> >> > [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in
database
> >> > 'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact
your
> >> > system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check
runs DBCC
> >> >> CHECKDB.
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Paul Randal
> >> >> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> >> >>
> >> >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
> >> >>
> >> >> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> > No different results.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan
produces
> >> >> > different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if
both
> >> >> are
> >> >> > doing the same thing.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but
would
> >> >> like
> >> >> > to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
> >> >> NO_INFOMSGS?
> >> >> > > Do the outputs match then?
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > --
> >> >> > > Paul Randal
> >> >> > > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
no
> >> >> rights.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> >> > > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> > > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb
('database') and
> >> >> > > running
> >> >> > > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The
checkdb
> >> >> > > output
> >> >> > > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no
detail.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Thanks
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Ron
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>|||Thanks Everyone!
"Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> And to answer your question, the integrity job uses DBCC CHECKDB so it's
> doing exactly the same as a manual DBCC CHECKDB.
> --
> Paul Randal
> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> "Sue Hoegemeier" <Sue_H@.nomail.please> wrote in message
> news:qd8411pgobfai7a405kjpisvroftt9a9ap@.4ax.com...
> > You can also find the SQL commands that the maintenance plan
> > runs for whatever options are selected in the following
> > article:
> >
> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/ak_inside_sql_server_maintenance_plans.asp
> >
> > -Sue
> >
> > On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 06:55:06 -0800, Ron
> > <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > >I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it
> doesn't
> > >look like the Integrity output.
> > >
> > >I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
> > >the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
> > >
> > >"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> > >
> > >> Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC
> commend...
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> > >> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> > >> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> > >> http://www.sqlug.se/
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > >> news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...
> > >> > Here the Integrity output:
> > >> > 1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > (null)
> > >> > (null)
> > >> > ** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
> > >> >
> > >> > Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
> > >> > Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing
> 2005-02-13
> > >> > 04:00:00
> > >> >
> > >> > DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
> > >> > [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in
> database
> > >> > 'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact
> your
> > >> > system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check
> runs DBCC
> > >> >> CHECKDB.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> --
> > >> >> Paul Randal
> > >> >> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> > >> >>
> > >> >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > >> >> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
> > >> >> > No different results.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan
> produces
> > >> >> > different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if
> both
> > >> >> are
> > >> >> > doing the same thing.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but
> would
> > >> >> like
> > >> >> > to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
> > >> >> NO_INFOMSGS?
> > >> >> > > Do the outputs match then?
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > --
> > >> >> > > Paul Randal
> > >> >> > > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
> no
> > >> >> rights.
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > >> >> > > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> > >> >> > > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb
> ('database') and
> > >> >> > > running
> > >> >> > > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The
> checkdb
> > >> >> > > output
> > >> >> > > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no
> detail.
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > Thanks
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > Ron
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>
>
the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb output
shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
Thanks
RonWhat about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH NO_INFOMSGS?
Do the outputs match then?
--
Paul Randal
Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
running
> the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
output
> shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
> Thanks
> Ron|||No different results.
Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both are
doing the same thing.
I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would like
to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
"Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH NO_INFOMSGS?
> Do the outputs match then?
> --
> Paul Randal
> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
> running
> > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
> output
> > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Ron
>
>|||Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
CHECKDB.
--
Paul Randal
Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
> No different results.
> Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
> different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both
are
> doing the same thing.
> I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would
like
> to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
> "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
NO_INFOMSGS?
> > Do the outputs match then?
> >
> > --
> > Paul Randal
> > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> >
> > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
> >
> > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
> > running
> > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
> > output
> > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Ron
> >
> >
> >|||Here the Integrity output:
1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
(null)
(null)
** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing 2005-02-13
04:00:00
DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your
system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
"Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
> CHECKDB.
> --
> Paul Randal
> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
> > No different results.
> >
> > Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
> > different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both
> are
> > doing the same thing.
> >
> > I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would
> like
> > to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
> >
> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> >
> > > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
> NO_INFOMSGS?
> > > Do the outputs match then?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Paul Randal
> > > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> > >
> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
> > >
> > > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> > > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
> > > running
> > > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
> > > output
> > > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > > Ron
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>|||Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC commend...
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...
> Here the Integrity output:
> 1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
>
> (null)
> (null)
> ** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
> Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
> Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing 2005-02-13
> 04:00:00
> DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
> 'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your
> system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>
> "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
>> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
>> CHECKDB.
>> --
>> Paul Randal
>> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
>> > No different results.
>> >
>> > Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
>> > different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both
>> are
>> > doing the same thing.
>> >
>> > I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would
>> like
>> > to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
>> >
>> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
>> >
>> > > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
>> NO_INFOMSGS?
>> > > Do the outputs match then?
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Paul Randal
>> > > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
>> > >
>> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights.
>> > >
>> > > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
>> > > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
>> > > running
>> > > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
>> > > output
>> > > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks
>> > > >
>> > > > Ron
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>>|||I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it doesn't
look like the Integrity output.
I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC commend...
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> http://www.sqlug.se/
>
> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...
> > Here the Integrity output:
> > 1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
> >
> >
> >
> > (null)
> > (null)
> > ** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
> >
> > Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
> > Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing 2005-02-13
> > 04:00:00
> >
> > DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
> > [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
> > 01000]
> > DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
> > 'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your
> > system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >
> >
> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> >
> >> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
> >> CHECKDB.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Paul Randal
> >> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> >>
> >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> >>
> >> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
> >> > No different results.
> >> >
> >> > Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
> >> > different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both
> >> are
> >> > doing the same thing.
> >> >
> >> > I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would
> >> like
> >> > to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
> >> >
> >> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
> >> NO_INFOMSGS?
> >> > > Do the outputs match then?
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > Paul Randal
> >> > > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> >> > >
> >> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> >> rights.
> >> > >
> >> > > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> > > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> >> > > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
> >> > > running
> >> > > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
> >> > > output
> >> > > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thanks
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Ron
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>|||> I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
> the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
All the maintenance wizard does is execute SQL commands. I ran a profiler trace to capture the
command executed by the maintenance wizard:
dbcc checkdb WITH NO_INFOMSGS
If you are curious, you can use profiler while the maint wizard is executing to capture the commands
that it executing against SQL Server.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A051C9CE-671A-46FF-BD75-DAE4A408B081@.microsoft.com...
> I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it doesn't
> look like the Integrity output.
> I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
> the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
> "Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>> Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC commend...
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>> http://www.sqlug.se/
>>
>> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...
>> > Here the Integrity output:
>> > 1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > (null)
>> > (null)
>> > ** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
>> >
>> > Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
>> > Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing 2005-02-13
>> > 04:00:00
>> >
>> > DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
>> > [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
>> > 'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your
>> > system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> >
>> >
>> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
>> >> CHECKDB.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Paul Randal
>> >> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
>> >>
>> >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>> >>
>> >> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > No different results.
>> >> >
>> >> > Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
>> >> > different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both
>> >> are
>> >> > doing the same thing.
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would
>> >> like
>> >> > to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
>> >> >
>> >> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
>> >> NO_INFOMSGS?
>> >> > > Do the outputs match then?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > --
>> >> > > Paul Randal
>> >> > > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
>> >> > >
>> >> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> >> rights.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> > > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
>> >> > > running
>> >> > > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
>> >> > > output
>> >> > > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Thanks
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Ron
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>|||You can also find the SQL commands that the maintenance plan
runs for whatever options are selected in the following
article:
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/ak_inside_sql_server_maintenance_plans.asp
-Sue
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 06:55:06 -0800, Ron
<Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it doesn't
>look like the Integrity output.
>I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
>the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
>"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
>> Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC commend...
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>> http://www.sqlug.se/
>>
>> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...
>> > Here the Integrity output:
>> > 1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > (null)
>> > (null)
>> > ** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
>> >
>> > Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
>> > Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing 2005-02-13
>> > 04:00:00
>> >
>> > DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
>> > [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE
>> > 01000]
>> > DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in database
>> > 'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> > DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your
>> > system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
>> >
>> >
>> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check runs DBCC
>> >> CHECKDB.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Paul Randal
>> >> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
>> >>
>> >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>> >>
>> >> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > No different results.
>> >> >
>> >> > Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan produces
>> >> > different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if both
>> >> are
>> >> > doing the same thing.
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but would
>> >> like
>> >> > to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
>> >> >
>> >> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
>> >> NO_INFOMSGS?
>> >> > > Do the outputs match then?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > --
>> >> > > Paul Randal
>> >> > > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
>> >> > >
>> >> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> >> rights.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> > > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
>> >> > > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb ('database') and
>> >> > > running
>> >> > > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The checkdb
>> >> > > output
>> >> > > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no detail.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Thanks
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Ron
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>|||And to answer your question, the integrity job uses DBCC CHECKDB so it's
doing exactly the same as a manual DBCC CHECKDB.
--
Paul Randal
Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Sue Hoegemeier" <Sue_H@.nomail.please> wrote in message
news:qd8411pgobfai7a405kjpisvroftt9a9ap@.4ax.com...
> You can also find the SQL commands that the maintenance plan
> runs for whatever options are selected in the following
> article:
>
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/ak_inside_sql_server_maintenance_plans.asp
> -Sue
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 06:55:06 -0800, Ron
> <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it
doesn't
> >look like the Integrity output.
> >
> >I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
> >the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
> >
> >"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> >
> >> Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC
commend...
> >>
> >> --
> >> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> >> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> >> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> >> http://www.sqlug.se/
> >>
> >>
> >> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...
> >> > Here the Integrity output:
> >> > 1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > (null)
> >> > (null)
> >> > ** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
> >> >
> >> > Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
> >> > Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing
2005-02-13
> >> > 04:00:00
> >> >
> >> > DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
> >> > [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'.
[SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'.
[SQLSTATE
> >> > 01000]
> >> > DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE
01000]
> >> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in
database
> >> > 'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> > DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact
your
> >> > system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check
runs DBCC
> >> >> CHECKDB.
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Paul Randal
> >> >> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> >> >>
> >> >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
> >> >>
> >> >> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> > No different results.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan
produces
> >> >> > different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if
both
> >> >> are
> >> >> > doing the same thing.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but
would
> >> >> like
> >> >> > to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
> >> >> NO_INFOMSGS?
> >> >> > > Do the outputs match then?
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > --
> >> >> > > Paul Randal
> >> >> > > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
no
> >> >> rights.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> >> > > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> >> >> > > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb
('database') and
> >> >> > > running
> >> >> > > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The
checkdb
> >> >> > > output
> >> >> > > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no
detail.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Thanks
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Ron
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>|||Thanks Everyone!
"Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> And to answer your question, the integrity job uses DBCC CHECKDB so it's
> doing exactly the same as a manual DBCC CHECKDB.
> --
> Paul Randal
> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> "Sue Hoegemeier" <Sue_H@.nomail.please> wrote in message
> news:qd8411pgobfai7a405kjpisvroftt9a9ap@.4ax.com...
> > You can also find the SQL commands that the maintenance plan
> > runs for whatever options are selected in the following
> > article:
> >
> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/ak_inside_sql_server_maintenance_plans.asp
> >
> > -Sue
> >
> > On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 06:55:06 -0800, Ron
> > <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > >I'm not sure I follow. When dbcc checkdb runs with NO_INFOMSGS it
> doesn't
> > >look like the Integrity output.
> > >
> > >I guess my question is simply "Does the Integrity (with indexes) job from
> > >the maintenance plan do exactly what DBCC checkdb does?"
> > >
> > >"Tibor Karaszi" wrote:
> > >
> > >> Seems like maint wiz doesn't add WITH NO_INFOMSGS to the DBCC
> commend...
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> > >> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> > >> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> > >> http://www.sqlug.se/
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > >> news:57E3528C-7953-47CE-BB5B-19C35199C094@.microsoft.com...
> > >> > Here the Integrity output:
> > >> > 1] Database ABCD: Check Data and Index Linkage...
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > (null)
> > >> > (null)
> > >> > ** Execution Time: 0 hrs, 0 mins, 1 secs **
> > >> >
> > >> > Here's the DBCC checkdb output :
> > >> > Job 'DBCC checkdb' : Step 1, 'CheckDB Cinfo' : Began Executing
> 2005-02-13
> > >> > 04:00:00
> > >> >
> > >> > DBCC results for 'Cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 71 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysobjects'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 125 rows in 5 pages for object 'sysindexes'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 514 rows in 9 pages for object 'syscolumns'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 26 rows in 1 pages for object 'systypes'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 113 rows in 10 pages for object 'syscomments'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfiles1'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 37 rows in 1 pages for object 'syspermissions'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 17 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysusers'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysproperties'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 422 rows in 2 pages for object 'sysdepends'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysreferences'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextcatalogs'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfulltextcatalogs'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 0 pages for object 'sysfulltextnotify'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'sysfilegroups'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_APS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_AUDITTRACE'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CLSMACHINES'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_EVENTS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GOVINFO'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 7 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPINFO'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 106 rows in 2 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_GRPUSERS'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_HISTORY'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 589 rows in 22 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_INFOOBJECTS'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ISPLUGINS'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHAVAIL'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINECLASS'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINEGROUP'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 2 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_MACHINV'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_NEXTID'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RESTRICTIONS'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 145 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RIGHTROLES'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 2080 rows in 101 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_RUNTIMEIMAGE'.
> > >> > [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SCHEDULES'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 1397 rows in 12 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SECRIGHTS'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDATES'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_SPECIALDAYS'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 458 rows in 4 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDATES'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 143 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATEDAYS'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 9 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TEMPLATES'.
> [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_TIMEINFO'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 51 rows in 5 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_USERS'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_CHANNEL_INFO'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'cinfo.CI_ARCHIVEDOBJECTS'.
> [SQLSTATE
> > >> > 01000]
> > >> > DBCC results for 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > There are 0 rows in 1 pages for object 'dtproperties'. [SQLSTATE
> 01000]
> > >> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in
> database
> > >> > 'cinfo'. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> > DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact
> your
> > >> > system administrator. [SQLSTATE 01000]
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Can you post the output? As far as I'm aware, the integrity check
> runs DBCC
> > >> >> CHECKDB.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> --
> > >> >> Paul Randal
> > >> >> Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> > >> >>
> > >> >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > >> >> news:03075079-DA30-47EE-9550-E792A8E4EB1D@.microsoft.com...
> > >> >> > No different results.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Because the Integrity with Indexes via the maintenance plan
> produces
> > >> >> > different output than a DBCC checkdb database, I wanted to know if
> both
> > >> >> are
> > >> >> > doing the same thing.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > I'm thinking of replacing the integrity with a DBCC checkdb, but
> would
> > >> >> like
> > >> >> > to know what's the difference between the two besides the output.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > "Paul S Randal [MS]" wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > > What about if you manually run DBCC CHECKDB ('database') WITH
> > >> >> NO_INFOMSGS?
> > >> >> > > Do the outputs match then?
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > --
> > >> >> > > Paul Randal
> > >> >> > > Dev Lead, Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
> no
> > >> >> rights.
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > >> >> > > news:9E360D8A-D225-45C8-A5F7-D8671E46F417@.microsoft.com...
> > >> >> > > > Is there a difference running checkdb -DBCC checkdb
> ('database') and
> > >> >> > > running
> > >> >> > > > the Integrity with Indexes option of a maintenance plan? The
> checkdb
> > >> >> > > output
> > >> >> > > > shows detail while the integrity output shows almost no
> detail.
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > Thanks
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > Ron
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)