I hate to be negative, but it's extremely unfortunate that this script truncates the log, breaking the log backup chain, and that isn't explained anywhere in the script or the...

Lots of errors on this list. For instance, 3604 is used for all kinds of output from undocumented DBCC commands. Be careful when playing with these.

Correct. Although manual use of database snapshots is only in Enterprise Edition, DBCC's use of them is in every edition down to Express.

You don't. Only if you want to control where the snapshot goes do you need to do that.

It used to take table locks in 7.0 - from 2000 onwards it's been online by default, with no table locks.

I haven't tried it, but it should do. My guess is the number of ' are tripping you up.

Create a temp table and then INSERT into the table EXEC (string variable with the DBCC fileheader command in).

Hmm - no other way to get those AFAIK. I was hoping you were after some information that was stored in master for each database.

What data are you trying to gather from that? There may be an easier way to do it.

Nope - not possible.

Nope - something stopped the upgrade from completing. You'll need to go back to the copy you still have on 2005 and figure out what the corruption is there.

SALIM ALI (1/29/2013)

---

Failover, Restore and Repair

I think one has been forgotten, and it's one that's not to be taken likely because you have to know your data. This method...

Ness (1/29/2013)

---

Hi,

Would you run the DBCC CHECKDB with the REPAIR_REBUILD option (after recovery from a backup/HA solution)? I seem to remember that this was the preferred option the MS...

Can you run the CHECKDB using WITH TABLOCK?

Can you also try creating a database snapshot of your database to see if that succeeds? (nothing to do with CHECKDB)

I suspect there's...

You wouldn't read the logs. You'd have the corrupt database, and the restore pre-corruption database and then you'd manually merge the data in the two tables.