Post reply

can we modify system tables in SQL Server 2000?

  • September 28, 2007 at 5:01 am

    #118360

    Hi all,

    Here i have a question that can we modify system tables in SQL Server 2000?

    Any help would be helpful to me.....:-)

    Thanks,

    Bagath

  • September 28, 2007 at 5:29 am

    #737076

    Yes, you can.

    Just have SQL Server Installation disk handy.

    You'll need it.

    _____________
    Code for TallyGenerator

  • September 28, 2007 at 5:36 am

    #737080

    Thanks a lot...

    Could you explain in detail....?

  • September 28, 2007 at 5:39 am

    #737081

    I could.

    If you would explain in details what you are trying to modify in system tables.

    _____________
    Code for TallyGenerator

  • September 28, 2007 at 5:49 am

    #737085

    Hey finally i have got the answer...

    http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-US/library/aa196704(sql.80).aspx#

    Really this forum is very helpful to me to learn many things.....

    Awesome........

  • September 28, 2007 at 6:03 am

    #737087

    Hope you did not miss this statements:

    "Updating fields in system tables can prevent an instance of Microsoft® SQL Server™ from running or can cause data loss. "

    "On production systems, you should not enable allow updates except under the direction of Microsoft Product Support Services."

    I gave you that answer straight away.

    It's nobody's fault you did not get it.

    _____________
    Code for TallyGenerator

  • September 28, 2007 at 6:19 am

    #737092

    Ya ofcourse,I did not implement the things directly on main database.

    Just got that doubt and implemented in sample database which was created by me for practice purpose on test server.

    Thank you

  • September 29, 2007 at 3:32 am

    #737341

    May I ask what you're trying to do and why you find it necessary to change the system tables? That way lies madness

    Gail Shaw
    Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
    SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability

    We walk in the dark places no others will enter
    We stand on the bridge and no one may pass

  • September 29, 2007 at 5:05 am

    #737349

    Sorry but I need to to be 100% clear. Kids cover your hears :

    DON'T f*ck WITH SYSTEM TABLES, EVER.

  • September 29, 2007 at 10:01 pm

    #737490

    A little exuberant on Remi's part... but I absolutely agree with Serqiy and Remi... writing to system tables is a form of "Death by SQL"... you will make a mistake and the system will make you pay for it. 😉 And, you will say what Remi said when it happens :hehe:

    --Jeff Moden

    RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
    First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
    ________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

    Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

    Helpful Links:
    How to post code problems
    How to Post Performance Problems
    Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

  • September 30, 2007 at 8:54 am

    #737520

    Nobody can say that they were not warned now :).

    Let me soften my tone a bit. You can select from the system tables.... assuming there's no usefull view that exists to give you the data you want.

    Is that better Jeff :hehe:?

  • September 30, 2007 at 1:18 pm

    #737554

    The only time I've ever had to directly modify the system tables was to fix stuff-ups caused by idio^H^H^H^H other DBAs directly modifying the system tables.

    Ever seen a table with an owner of NULL? Not amusing....

    Gail Shaw
    Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
    SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability

    We walk in the dark places no others will enter
    We stand on the bridge and no one may pass

  • September 30, 2007 at 1:50 pm

    #737559

    What error does that throw?.. I'm guessing something like object not found, but I'm sure it would take me a few minutes to figure out what was happening!

  • September 30, 2007 at 2:10 pm

    #737561

    Don't recall. It took me quite some time to figure out the cause.

    Was something like 'Cannot find object NULL'. Seems that SQL does a string concatenation of the owner (null) and the table, resulting in NULL. In EM the owner column appears blank.

    Gail Shaw
    Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
    SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability

    We walk in the dark places no others will enter
    We stand on the bridge and no one may pass

  • September 30, 2007 at 2:46 pm

    #737563

    I wonder if that behavior could change depending on the SET CONCAT_NULL_YIELDS_NULL setting!?!?.

    Still pretty damn annoying to have to put up with that cr*p :w00t:.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 28 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply