https://packages.microsoft.com/rhel/7/prod/msodbcsql17-184.108.40.206-1.x86_64.rpm: [Errno 14] HTTPS Error 404 - Not Found --:--:-- ETA
Trying other mirror.
To address this issue please refer to the below wiki article
If above article doesn't help to resolve this issue please use https://bugs.centos.org/.
https://packages.microsoft.com/rhel/7/prod/mssql-tools-220.127.116.11-1.x86_64.rpm: [Errno 14] HTTPS Error 404 - Not Found --:--:-- ETA
Trying other mirror.
Error downloading packages:
mssql-tools-18.104.22.168-1.x86_64: [Errno 256] No more mirrors to try.
msodbcsql17-22.214.171.124-1.x86_64: [Errno 256] No more mirrors to try.
@Pete-S happen to know where the default location of the event files are saved?
I created a new session and I believe it is properly showing the queries ran, but if I try to change the place where the file is logged to is doesn't start, but if I leave the default set I can't find the file!!
I'm not sure the default is actually a file at all, it may be memory buffers.
However it sound like you have a user rights issue. Make sure SQL server is allowed to write to the file where you put it.
Also remember The SQL instance is usually not running with a user context. Generally a system service.
I am working on building a new physical server to replace one which is running older versions of Windows and SQL server, plus it is almost out of storage space so this needs to be done sooner than later.
This SQL server is running a 3rd party application and they currently only support up to SQL 2016, so that's what I have to install - not 2017. And it's going to be SQL 2016 Standard Edition running on Windows 2016 Server Standard with 16 cores.
I spent a while researching SQL sever licensing to try and get an idea of how much it's going to cost. I haven't dealt with SQL server licensing yet.
First, I assumed that I would still have to purchase SQL Server 2017 core licenses with downgrade rights. So looking on the SQL Sever Pricing page, it looks as though Standard - per core price is $3,717 (2 pack). So if my server has a total of 16 cores, this is going to cost about $29,736 to cover SQL licensing.
Is this even applicable to what I'm doing or am I missing something? It does say in the technical details "BIOS locked (Lenovo)" but I have no idea what that refers to. But other than that, it looks like it's licensing SQL Server 2016 for 16 cores and bundled with Windows Server 2016. Surly this can't be correct... or is it? If it is actually what I would need to be covered, I would purchase it, of course.
Otherwise, can someone help me get an idea of what I should be paying for SQL Server 2016 Standard Edition for 16 cores if not the cost I initially calculated ($29,736)? And I don't think we'd do the server + cal licensing as we have about 80 users and 100 or more systems which would connect to the SQL server.
Simple rule of thumb to ask your Microsoft licensing rep for the following:
First option is license + CALs that allows internal access only with unlimited instances on the server and unlimited cores:
SQL Server Standard License
SQL Server Standard User CALs (80 Users)
Second option is per core with a minimum of 4 to purchase:
SQL Server Standard Per Core 2-Pack (2x)
In the Per Core scenario we can license for the number of physical cores to use and delimit that in SQL Studio Management. When it comes to audit, a snip of that setting that only allows the four threads should be just fine.
So if you license + CAL, do you have to cover all users AND computers?
If you license by user you cover users. If you license by device you cover devices.
Well what constitutes as a device? I mean, users use a device to connect to the SQL server... so wouldn't I have to cover both? I don't get it.
That is never how Microsoft CALs have worked.
ok, I finally re-read the overview.. makes sense again. We have a pretty even user/device ratio with slight fluctuations in both over time. I suppose we'd just do user CALs..
There is almost no reason for anyone in the normal, day to day, business world to use device CALs.
Agreed, this is super specific niche stuff normally reserved for manufacturing shift work.
We have a few clients that run two or three shifts across one or more facilities. A shared device by two or three peeps per day is about the only time we've ever deployed Device CALs.
@jaredbusch one of the complications is that there IS no virtual core. vCPU is NOT core.
a vCPU has vCores. Always. It might just be one. That is how it works.
Not in any system I've seen. What people call vCores are actually vCPUs. The vCPU might tell the OS it has multiple cores, but the idea of a vCore has never existed, only vCPUs. Vmware, KVM, etc. all the same. Core means physical, it's like having a physical virtual, it cancels itself out.
I am almost certain that VMWare lets you make a 1 CPU VM with 2 cores.
Hyper-V just says virtual processors.
It must be run from an Administrator command prompt. This took me several days to figure out so I hope it can benefit someone else. Everything I found about reindexing the WSUS database was on Server 2008 or 2012. This works on Server 2016.
For those who use SCCM, do you host the database on the same server as the SCCM application, or do you have SQL server as its own VM?
I am replacing SCCM in our test environment, and will be doing the same eventually in our production environment. The current one has SQL server host locally. But since were looking to start over, I figured it would be worth weighing the pros and cons of keeping SQL Server local or having you be on the remote server.
In my last job, we ran SCCM for a while and we had everything on one VM. (Small set up with ~200 PCs). It ran OK.
I'd suggest keeping it to one host for your test environment, and separating them out for your production setup.