Thank you all!

Let me put it like this..

Is there any difference between SQL 2000, SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS and SQL 2008 SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS collation? or they are one and same?

Is there any...

Thank you all for the input.

I've setup log backups and my Mirror setup is running fine without any issues.

sorry for the confusion. Log is growing on Principle server.

Is it possible to backup log on Principle server? will that not break the Mirror?

Because I thought in high-safety method logs...

Thanks a lot for the advice

Thanks SSCrazy

Apparently different collations on SQL 2005 are of System Objects in User database.

thanks!

When I run the upgrade adviser ,report shows component affected with the following message

After upgrading to SQL Server 2005, Full-Text Search will not use operating system components such as word...

Thanks a lot

Existing production SQL 2000 collation is Latin1_General_CI_AS and I'd also installed SQL 2005 with default collation which is Latin1_General_CI_AS.

Microsoft initially suggested me to rebuild the system database with SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS collation...

Microsoft is looking into the issue now

Thank you all.

Well I ran the upgrade adviser on SQL 2000 server and books online says

In earlier versions of SQL Server, system object and system type names are matched against...

Thanks Gail.

But I'm still not able to understand how these errors are generated and what is wrong with the data on SQL 2005?

Is there anything wrong with Schema? Because...

It's still not in production

Output On SQL 2000 server

dbcc checkcatalog ('SALES')

Go

DBCC results for 'SALES'.

DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your system administrator.

The attribute (collation_name=53256) of row (object_id=1950070133,column_id=88) in sys.columns has an invalid value.

Msg 3858, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

The attribute (collation_name=53256) of row (object_id=1950070133,column_id=89) in sys.columns has an invalid value.

Msg...