Adventureworks version 631 error

I installed Sql Server 2005 Express Edition on an XP system thismorning and tried to attach Adventureworks, but got an error messagestating:

The database 'Adventureworks' cannot be opend because itis version 631. This server supports version 612 andearlier. A downgrade path is not supported.

Since both SqlServer 2005 Express Edition, Management Studio, and the Adventureworksdatabase have all be downloaded within the past three days, I amastonished that there is a compatibility issue. I have runAdventureworks on other systems without problems. Any suggestionson how to proceed?

Hi Moonshadow,

Where did you download that "Adventureworks" ?

Please make sure you are downloading the correct AdventureWorks database for SQL Server 2005. The CodePlex website contains two versions of the database, one for SQL Server 2008 and one for SQL Server 2005. If you are viewing the AdventureWorks database download release for SQL Server 2008 you must click "SQL Server 2005 SP2a" in the Releases box on the right hand side. You can also use the following link to download the SQL Server 2005 version directly at:http://www.codeplex.com/MSFTDBProdSamples/Release/ProjectReleases.aspx?ReleaseId=4004.

Detailed information, see:http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1966875&SiteID=1

thanks

This response contains a reference to a third party World Wide Web site. Microsoft is providing this information as a convenience to you. Microsoft does not control these sites and has not tested any software or information found on these sites; therefore, Microsoft cannot make any representations regarding the quality, safety, or suitability of any software or information found there. There are inherent dangers in the use of any software found on the Internet, and Microsoft cautions you to make sure that you completely understand the risk before retrieving any software from the Internet.

|||

Hi B.C. When I originally searched for the DB I was redirected tothe Codeplex site where the current default download version is for SqlServer 2008, hence version incompatibility. I tracked down andinstalled the 2005 version at Codeplex and all is well.

adventureworks attach error

i've attempt to atach the adventureWorks database to follow the webcourse 2924 but I got the following error:

TITLE: Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio

Attach database failed for Server 'localhost'. (Microsoft.SqlServer.Smo)

For help, click: http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink?ProdName=Microsoft+SQL+Server&ProdVer=9.00.2047.00&EvtSrc=Microsoft.SqlServer.Management.Smo.ExceptionTemplates.FailedOperationExceptionText&EvtID=Attach+database+Server&LinkId=20476

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

An exception occurred while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch. (Microsoft.SqlServer.ConnectionInfo)

Could not find row in sysindexes for database ID 28, object ID 1, index ID 1. Run DBCC CHECKTABLE on sysindexes.
Could not open new database 'AdventureWorks'. CREATE DATABASE is aborted. (Microsoft SQL Server, Error: 602)

But, how can I run DBCC CHECKTABLE on non attached database?

For help, click: http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink?ProdName=Microsoft+SQL+Server&EvtSrc=MSSQLServer&EvtID=602&LinkId=20476

BUTTONS:

OK

Mary,

Please follow this article to attach AW.

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms310325.aspx

Adventure work database error

i followed all the instruction to add the database of the adventure works to the database server. but when i attach the database from the managment sql server this error comes

Couldnt find row in sysindexes for database ID 8, object ID1 ..........etc

and couldnt open new database 'adventureworks'. create database is aborted.

please i need a qucik help. cuz i tried the msdn and i failed.

thanks

hi kyehia,

do you mean you downloaded and installed from http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=e719ecf7-9f46-4312-af89-6ad8702e4e6e&DisplayLang=en following the indicated instructions?

regards

Advantage comparison on Attach & Restore database

If I were to copy a database from one machine to another machine, I can
use:
- Backup & restore
- Detach & attach
Not to mention on those daily backup or availability of the database.
Just consider copy one database to another machine.
Does anyone know what's the advantage of each method mention above?
I used to Detach & Attach cause it's fast. Backup & restore database
would takes long time.
Other than that, anyone know is there any side effect or drawback of
the methods mentiond above?
Peter CCHHi,
Detach and attach must be faster but it require downtime; where as Backup
and restore do not need any downtime.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Peter CCH" <petercch.wodoy@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1156564154.830161.207440@.i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> If I were to copy a database from one machine to another machine, I can
> use:
> - Backup & restore
> - Detach & attach
> Not to mention on those daily backup or availability of the database.
> Just consider copy one database to another machine.
> Does anyone know what's the advantage of each method mention above?
> I used to Detach & Attach cause it's fast. Backup & restore database
> would takes long time.
> Other than that, anyone know is there any side effect or drawback of
> the methods mentiond above?
>
> Peter CCH
>|||Other than that, nothing else?
Then it would be fine for me cause it's a developer machine, not
production server.
We always need to copy database from machine to machine.
Thanks.
Hari Prasad wrote:
> Hi,
> Detach and attach must be faster but it require downtime; where as Backup
> and restore do not need any downtime.
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
> "Peter CCH" <petercch.wodoy@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1156564154.830161.207440@.i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> > If I were to copy a database from one machine to another machine, I can
> > use:
> > - Backup & restore
> > - Detach & attach
> >
> > Not to mention on those daily backup or availability of the database.
> > Just consider copy one database to another machine.
> >
> > Does anyone know what's the advantage of each method mention above?
> > I used to Detach & Attach cause it's fast. Backup & restore database
> > would takes long time.
> >
> > Other than that, anyone know is there any side effect or drawback of
> > the methods mentiond above?
> >
> >
> >
> > Peter CCH
> >|||Backup and Restore may also 'defrag' the tables and indexes.
--
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"Peter CCH" <petercch.wodoy@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1156564154.830161.207440@.i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> If I were to copy a database from one machine to another machine, I can
> use:
> - Backup & restore
> - Detach & attach
> Not to mention on those daily backup or availability of the database.
> Just consider copy one database to another machine.
> Does anyone know what's the advantage of each method mention above?
> I used to Detach & Attach cause it's fast. Backup & restore database
> would takes long time.
> Other than that, anyone know is there any side effect or drawback of
> the methods mentiond above?
>
> Peter CCH
>|||> Backup and Restore may also 'defrag' the tables and indexes.
No table/index defragmentation takes place during the restore; the restored
database is exactly like the original. However, a restore can effectively
defrag database files at the file system level when the files are recreated.
Such fragmentation usually occurs only when one relies on automatic growth.
With the exception of a version upgrade, few changes are made during the
restore. The only changes that come to mind are to the file paths and
database owner.
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
news:%23gDCwVMyGHA.4336@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Backup and Restore may also 'defrag' the tables and indexes.
> --
> Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
> Westwood Consulting, Inc
> Most good judgment comes from experience.
> Most experience comes from bad judgment.
> - Anonymous
>
> "Peter CCH" <petercch.wodoy@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1156564154.830161.207440@.i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> If I were to copy a database from one machine to another machine, I can
>> use:
>> - Backup & restore
>> - Detach & attach
>> Not to mention on those daily backup or availability of the database.
>> Just consider copy one database to another machine.
>> Does anyone know what's the advantage of each method mention above?
>> I used to Detach & Attach cause it's fast. Backup & restore database
>> would takes long time.
>> Other than that, anyone know is there any side effect or drawback of
>> the methods mentiond above?
>>
>> Peter CCH
>|||Thanks Dan,
I meant to say 'File' defrag, and my evil twin wrote in the other thought...
--
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"Dan Guzman" <guzmanda@.nospam-online.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:OhkIAJPyGHA.4912@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Backup and Restore may also 'defrag' the tables and indexes.
> No table/index defragmentation takes place during the restore; the
> restored database is exactly like the original. However, a restore can
> effectively defrag database files at the file system level when the files
> are recreated. Such fragmentation usually occurs only when one relies on
> automatic growth.
> With the exception of a version upgrade, few changes are made during the
> restore. The only changes that come to mind are to the file paths and
> database owner.
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Dan Guzman
> SQL Server MVP
> "Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
> news:%23gDCwVMyGHA.4336@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Backup and Restore may also 'defrag' the tables and indexes.
>> --
>> Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
>> Westwood Consulting, Inc
>> Most good judgment comes from experience.
>> Most experience comes from bad judgment.
>> - Anonymous
>>
>> "Peter CCH" <petercch.wodoy@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1156564154.830161.207440@.i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> If I were to copy a database from one machine to another machine, I can
>> use:
>> - Backup & restore
>> - Detach & attach
>> Not to mention on those daily backup or availability of the database.
>> Just consider copy one database to another machine.
>> Does anyone know what's the advantage of each method mention above?
>> I used to Detach & Attach cause it's fast. Backup & restore database
>> would takes long time.
>> Other than that, anyone know is there any side effect or drawback of
>> the methods mentiond above?
>>
>> Peter CCH
>>
>

Advantage comparison on Attach & Restore database

If I were to copy a database from one machine to another machine, I can
use:
- Backup & restore
- Detach & attach
Not to mention on those daily backup or availability of the database.
Just consider copy one database to another machine.
Does anyone know what's the advantage of each method mention above?
I used to Detach & Attach cause it's fast. Backup & restore database
would takes long time.
Other than that, anyone know is there any side effect or drawback of
the methods mentiond above?
Peter CCHHi,
Detach and attach must be faster but it require downtime; where as Backup
and restore do not need any downtime.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Peter CCH" <petercch.wodoy@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1156564154.830161.207440@.i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> If I were to copy a database from one machine to another machine, I can
> use:
> - Backup & restore
> - Detach & attach
> Not to mention on those daily backup or availability of the database.
> Just consider copy one database to another machine.
> Does anyone know what's the advantage of each method mention above?
> I used to Detach & Attach cause it's fast. Backup & restore database
> would takes long time.
> Other than that, anyone know is there any side effect or drawback of
> the methods mentiond above?
>
> Peter CCH
>|||Other than that, nothing else?
Then it would be fine for me cause it's a developer machine, not
production server.
We always need to copy database from machine to machine.
Thanks.
Hari Prasad wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi,
> Detach and attach must be faster but it require downtime; where as Backup
> and restore do not need any downtime.
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
> "Peter CCH" <petercch.wodoy@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1156564154.830161.207440@.i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...|||Backup and Restore may also 'defrag' the tables and indexes.
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"Peter CCH" <petercch.wodoy@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1156564154.830161.207440@.i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> If I were to copy a database from one machine to another machine, I can
> use:
> - Backup & restore
> - Detach & attach
> Not to mention on those daily backup or availability of the database.
> Just consider copy one database to another machine.
> Does anyone know what's the advantage of each method mention above?
> I used to Detach & Attach cause it's fast. Backup & restore database
> would takes long time.
> Other than that, anyone know is there any side effect or drawback of
> the methods mentiond above?
>
> Peter CCH
>|||> Backup and Restore may also 'defrag' the tables and indexes.
No table/index defragmentation takes place during the restore; the restored
database is exactly like the original. However, a restore can effectively
defrag database files at the file system level when the files are recreated.
Such fragmentation usually occurs only when one relies on automatic growth.
With the exception of a version upgrade, few changes are made during the
restore. The only changes that come to mind are to the file paths and
database owner.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
news:%23gDCwVMyGHA.4336@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Backup and Restore may also 'defrag' the tables and indexes.
> --
> Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
> Westwood Consulting, Inc
> Most good judgment comes from experience.
> Most experience comes from bad judgment.
> - Anonymous
>
> "Peter CCH" <petercch.wodoy@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1156564154.830161.207440@.i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>|||Thanks Dan,
I meant to say 'File' defrag, and my evil twin wrote in the other thought...
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"Dan Guzman" <guzmanda@.nospam-online.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:OhkIAJPyGHA.4912@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> No table/index defragmentation takes place during the restore; the
> restored database is exactly like the original. However, a restore can
> effectively defrag database files at the file system level when the files
> are recreated. Such fragmentation usually occurs only when one relies on
> automatic growth.
> With the exception of a version upgrade, few changes are made during the
> restore. The only changes that come to mind are to the file paths and
> database owner.
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Dan Guzman
> SQL Server MVP
> "Arnie Rowland" <arnie@.1568.com> wrote in message
> news:%23gDCwVMyGHA.4336@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>