Re: Does replication setup make some entry in the Remote servers setti
- From: "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 14:17:26 -0500
Yes, it is correct to see the servers listed in more than one place. The
values you refer to are bit flags held in an integer field. Addition is not
the correct operation, logical OR is the correct operation.
You need to enable each server for remote access, just like it says. Login
to each remote SQL server and execute the following:
exec sp_configure 'remote access', 1
go
reconfigure with override
go
This tells the remote server to accept remote queries.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Wingman" <Wingman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:59C3CADD-1BCB-45CD-9DB0-2EEEFCADCA6B@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Ok, I tried that stored procedure and the server name now shows up in both
> linked server and remote servers. And I still can't execute the remote
> stored procedure. Here is my observation after reading the link. It said
> the status for a remote server of a subscriber supposedly a 69. In order
> for
> it to become a linked server of a subscriber it needs to be 229. Before
> I
> executed the stored procedure, the server name that I want to change its
> status is 1093 not 69. After the execution, it added 160 to it to become
> 1253. Is the 1253 status correct? The initial status number 1093 is not
> 69,
> is it because there are other settings added values to it?
>
> Here are my questions:
> 1) is it correct that the server name will show up both in the linked
> servers and remote servers in EM?
>
> 2) Is the 1253 new status correct?
>
> 3) the link didn't say I need to do a service restart, what do you think?
> I
> am getting this error when I execute a remote stored procedure:
> "Could not execute procedure on remote server 'server1' because SQL Server
> is not configured for remote access. Ask your system administrator to
> reconfigure SQL Server to allow remote access."
>
> Also, when I try to double click on the 'table' of the linked server, it
> said the server doesn't exist or access denied. The SQL login name I
> entered in the Linked server properties has the sys admin right and this
> account exists in both servers.
>
>
> Wingman
>
>
> "Wingman" wrote:
>
>> If I create a transactional replication - Push method in SQL 2K standard
>> with
>> sp4, will replication create entries in the Remote Servers setting in EM?
>> Currently I found three entries in the Remote Servers listing, server
>> name
>> for the publishing server name, server name for the subscriber server,
>> and
>> repl_distrbutor.
>>
>> If the replication does make these entries, I have no problem with the
>> repl_distributor being there. But I have problem with the subscriber
>> server
>> name being there because I want to create a Linked Server with that same
>> name
>> but I can't since the name is already in use by the remote servers.
>>
>> Please let me know which one or all of the above names are legit if
>> indeed
>> repliation put them in there to begin with.
>>
>> Say if the above entries need to be there, how I should move them to the
>> Linked Servers setting because the remote servers feature is for backward
>> compatible reason and linked servers is more dynamic and is the one to
>> replace it.
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Wingman
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Prev by Date: Re: Peer to peer replication on SQL 2000?
- Next by Date: Replicate large table through an unreliable network
- Previous by thread: Re: Does replication setup make some entry in the Remote servers setti
- Next by thread: Re: Does replication setup make some entry in the Remote servers s
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
