| Author |
Topic |
|
DOlivastro
Starting Member
41 Posts |
 Posted - 2004-04-27 : 17:34:42
|
| When I first got into SQLServer (not all that long ago), I decided that the client network utility had to specify "TCP/IP" as the Network Library. Sometimes a PC was unable to register a server unless I made this change.About 3 months ago, we experienced a strange problem. All the PC's timed out when they connected to a server. Then, if they attempted to connect again, it would suddenly let them through.Playing around, I decided to change my PC to use the "Named Pipes" Library. And now it works fine.I have no idea what Named Pipes is. Am I right in thinking this is what made SQLServer time out? Do most of you use TCP/IP or Named pipes? Any info is greatly appreciated.Dom |
|
|
derrickleggett
Pointy Haired Yak DBA
4184 Posts |
Posted - 2004-04-27 : 19:10:42
|
| You really should use TCP/IP. It's more efficient. Were you having problems with the network at that time? Did you try setting up a trace or pinging the server?MeanOldDBAderrickleggett@hotmail.comWhen life gives you a lemon, fire the DBA. |
 |
|
|
DOlivastro
Starting Member
41 Posts |
Posted - 2004-04-28 : 11:57:04
|
| Pinging the server works, but it takes a long time. One odd thing. When our router (used for the internet) is down, we have no access to the server (at least that was true using tcp/ip. The router hasn't been down since we moved to Named pipes). I always thought that maybe, when we attempt to access the server, we are going out the router to internet sites, which explains the timeout. Is this possible? How would I check it.BTW, thanks for the help.Dom |
|
|
|
derrickleggett
Pointy Haired Yak DBA
4184 Posts |
Posted - 2004-04-28 : 16:56:05
|
| If your pings by themselves are taking a long time, you could have a serious network issue. Isolate the issue. Does it take a long time to ping other servers on the same switch? If this is not the case, you should look at your bandwidth utilization on the box. That would generally lead me to look at the cable and network card on the SQL Server also.Also, are you using the same router for the internet you are for the SQL Server? I would check the statistics on the router and see what's going on there. This router is part of your domain isn't it? Also, just for kicks make sure the SQL Server isn't in the DMZ.MeanOldDBAderrickleggett@hotmail.comWhen life gives you a lemon, fire the DBA. |
|
|
|
cas_o
Posting Yak Master
154 Posts |
Posted - 2004-04-28 : 17:53:58
|
| Try TRACERT <ip of database server> in command window see where your packets are going.Oh use -d switch on the end which stops DNS name resolution (might be a bit quicker);-]... Quack Waddle |
|
|
|
afterburn
Starting Member
28 Posts |
Posted - 2004-04-29 : 00:12:34
|
| Sounds like the SQL Server is in the DMZ or has 2 network cards???Either way the server is a security risk |
|
|
|
DOlivastro
Starting Member
41 Posts |
Posted - 2004-04-29 : 11:42:07
|
| Thanks for all the help.Here is what I'm finding. 1. If I say PING www.CHIResearch.com, or any valid site like that, I get a quick response. 2. If I say PING www.NoSuchSite.big, or any invalid site like that, I get a slow response.So far, so good. Now ...3. If I say PING JOHN (where JOHN is a PC here at work), I get a very slow response, similar to step 2 above.It seems to me that the router does not know that some sites are just local nodes, and therefore does not get me the information quick enough. Am I right about this? Is there some way to configure the router so that it knows where the servers are?BTW, I tried Tracert, but nothing in the output seems to tell me anything. For example, "tracert server" gives me this: 1 <10 ms <10 ms <10 ms server_1 [192.168.1.130]What does this tell me? |
|
|
|
cas_o
Posting Yak Master
154 Posts |
Posted - 2004-04-29 : 12:05:44
|
| Ok TRACERT traces the route, so it shows you the hops between you and the destination. If 192.168.1.130 is the ip address of the server you are getting straight there in 10 milliseconds.Slow response may sugest a problem with name resolution via DNS or WINS I presume you are using DNS. Windows will try various methods to get an IP for a device/host name, first it checks its arp cache, then DNS then WINS then the hosts file in c:\winnt\system32\drivers\etcif that fails it may broadcast i'm not sure, but the further along the line it goes the longer it takes you see.;-]... Quack Waddle |
|
|
|
derrickleggett
Pointy Haired Yak DBA
4184 Posts |
Posted - 2004-04-29 : 14:25:46
|
| Just use ping.ping -r 1 10.1.0.99 for example.MeanOldDBAderrickleggett@hotmail.comWhen life gives you a lemon, fire the DBA. |
|
|
|
DOlivastro
Starting Member
41 Posts |
Posted - 2004-04-29 : 16:39:26
|
| You guys are really helping me. Thanks alot.Here's what I did, based on your replies. I added a line to hosts:192.168.1.130 Server_1Now Ping works faster, and using TCP/IP instead of Named Pipes, works fine, although maybe a hiccup slower than Named Pipes.This tells me, as I thought, that the system does not know how to find Server_1 unless it is told via hosts. Now my question is, Isn't the address a temporary thing. We do not hard code it into the server configuration, it just picks it up at boot time. So I hesitate to keep it in hosts.Should I be doing something via DNS on the Server and on the Client?Dom |
|
|
|
derrickleggett
Pointy Haired Yak DBA
4184 Posts |
Posted - 2004-04-29 : 16:46:12
|
| You have your servers as dynamic IPs? That's kind of hard to believe. You should reserve a section of IP addresses for your servers. Preferably, reserver entire blocks. You can then apply different security to different blocks, set up VLAN's, etc. without having a nightmare on your hands.I would go ahead and set up static IP at least on the SQL Server for now, make sure all your WINS and DCs are updated and see what kind of performance you get then.MeanOldDBAderrickleggett@hotmail.comWhen life gives you a lemon, fire the DBA. |
|
|
|
cas_o
Posting Yak Master
154 Posts |
Posted - 2004-04-29 : 16:51:22
|
| Yes Yes Yes absolutely. Server_1? how is it addressed at boot ? DHCP or is statically addressed? I recommend static addresses for servers. You definitely want to have a DNS record added for your server. I don't administer any of the DNS at my company so I don't know the exact details. But configured properly server_1 should be able to dynamically tell the DNS server for the domain it's in, its IP and name on boot.anything trying to connect to it needs a DNS ip address in it's ipconfig so it can query the DNS server for an ip for Server_1 and then connect.;-]... Quack Waddle |
|
|
|
|
Named Pipes