Restrict user from default tables (access given by public role)

I am newbie.. probably this is a silly question..
I added few users with only SELECT permissions to 2 User Tables. But
when these users login,they could also see multiple system tables
(syscontraints, syssegments , dtproperties) . From reading this forum
and other articles, I understand these are visible due to the user
being part of the default "public" role.
My Question is, is there any way to remove/hide these system tables
from the user?.. The team manager doesnt like these users seeing
anything other than the 2 User Tables they supposed to see..
Thanks in advance for all tips/advices/suggestionsTell your team manager he's a turd. No...actually don't say that, it'll
probably get you fired.
I wouldn't go messing around with the permissions on the system tables,
you're likely to stuff up some functionality of SQL Server in that DB
for those users. The system tables are a very necessary part of
day-to-day data & schema manipulation...for every user of the DB.
Things like optimising query plans, for example, rely on data stored in
the system tables. I'm not positive if things will start breaking if
you start revoking or denying permissions on those system tables but I
wouldn't risk it.
There's an option in SSMS (Tools | Options | Environment | General |
Hide system objects in Object Explorer), not sure about SQLEM or QA,
that will hide the system tables in the GUI but not change their
underlying permissions. That may placate the pointy-haired manager
<http://www.dilbert.com/> asking for this change, perhaps.
What tool are the users using to "see" these system tables?
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
sreejith.ram@.gmail.com wrote:

>I am newbie.. probably this is a silly question..
>I added few users with only SELECT permissions to 2 User Tables. But
>when these users login,they could also see multiple system tables
>(syscontraints, syssegments , dtproperties) . From reading this forum
>and other articles, I understand these are visible due to the user
>being part of the default "public" role.
>My Question is, is there any way to remove/hide these system tables
>from the user?.. The team manager doesnt like these users seeing
>anything other than the 2 User Tables they supposed to see..
>Thanks in advance for all tips/advices/suggestions
>
>|||Thanks Mike... This convinced me I should spend my time convincing the
manager to leave it alone than trying to hide the tables
The users are using SQL Server Enterprise Manager.|||> The users are using SQL Server Enterprise Manager.
EM is more of a DBA/Developer tool than an end-user tool. In any case, you
can hide most of the system object noise by unchecking the 'show system
databases and system objects' option under the EM server registration
properties.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
<sreejith.ram@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1138983030.862156.116660@.f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Thanks Mike... This convinced me I should spend my time convincing the
> manager to leave it alone than trying to hide the tables
> The users are using SQL Server Enterprise Manager.
>|||I thought there was that "hide" option in SQLEM. I just couldn't
remember where it was (been using SSMS too long <g> ).
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Dan Guzman wrote:

>EM is more of a DBA/Developer tool than an end-user tool. In any case, you
>can hide most of the system object noise by unchecking the 'show system
>databases and system objects' option under the EM server registration
>properties.
>
>

Restoring Transaction log

Hi everyone,
First off, any help will be appreciated.
The scenario is that a chunk of data from one of the tables in a
database have been mistakenly deleted. I have done a complete backup of
the database and the backed up the log. I attempted restoring the
Database first with teh Norecpvery option and that worked. when I tried
restoring the log file with the STOPAT clause I get an error. I am
reproducing the script at the error below. Please help if you can
'Restoring the Database - Successful, with message shown below
RESTORE DATABASE MatriEdu2006
FROM DISK = 'C:\EducMatri06.db' WITH NORECOVERY,
MOVE 'EduMatri_Data' TO 'C:\MatriEdu2006.mdf',
MOVE 'EduMatri_Log' TO 'C:\MatriEdu2006.ldf'
Processed 920 pages for database 'MatriEdu2006', file 'Edu_Data' on
file 1.
Processed 1 pages for database 'MatriEdu2006', file 'Edu_Log' on file
1.
RESTORE DATABASE successfully processed 921 pages in 1.114 seconds
(6.766 MB/sec).
'Restore Log - Failed, with error message shown below
RESTORE LOG MatriEdu2006
FROM DISK = 'C:\EducationMatrix_Log'
WITH RECOVERY, STOPAT = 'Dec 11, 2006 03:14 PM'
Server: Msg 4326, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
The log in this backup set terminates at LSN 537000000112000001, which
is too early to apply to the database. A more recent log backup that
includes LSN 553000000066000001 can be restored.
Server: Msg 3013, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
RESTORE LOG is terminating abnormally.
>>> On 12/10/2006 at 5:40 PM, in message
<1165797639.616739.281890@.80g2000cwy.googlegroups. com>,
highflier<nbarnard@.au.loreal.com> wrote:
> Server: Msg 4326, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> The log in this backup set terminates at LSN 537000000112000001,
> which
> is too early to apply to the database. A more recent log backup that
> includes LSN 553000000066000001 can be restored.
> Server: Msg 3013, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> RESTORE LOG is terminating abnormally.
You need to find a full backup made *before* the data loss, along with
all the logs made between that full and the time of the data loss.
|||This also indicates that something else is wrong here. If an LSN terminates
with a number that precedes the LSN of an earlier transaction log, that
transaction log needs to be skipped during a restore.
In your case below, the 537000000112000001 does exactly this so figure out
which TRN this is and when you run the restore and it comes time to restore
from this TRN log, skip it and go on to the next one. The database choked
on a transaction before one log completed but fixed itself during the next
one so all the stuff in that log is not needed as the transaction completed
during the execution of the next log.
Regards,
Jamie
"highflier" wrote:

> Hi everyone,
> First off, any help will be appreciated.
> The scenario is that a chunk of data from one of the tables in a
> database have been mistakenly deleted. I have done a complete backup of
> the database and the backed up the log. I attempted restoring the
> Database first with teh Norecpvery option and that worked. when I tried
> restoring the log file with the STOPAT clause I get an error. I am
> reproducing the script at the error below. Please help if you can
> 'Restoring the Database - Successful, with message shown below
> RESTORE DATABASE MatriEdu2006
> FROM DISK = 'C:\EducMatri06.db' WITH NORECOVERY,
> MOVE 'EduMatri_Data' TO 'C:\MatriEdu2006.mdf',
> MOVE 'EduMatri_Log' TO 'C:\MatriEdu2006.ldf'
> Processed 920 pages for database 'MatriEdu2006', file 'Edu_Data' on
> file 1.
> Processed 1 pages for database 'MatriEdu2006', file 'Edu_Log' on file
> 1.
> RESTORE DATABASE successfully processed 921 pages in 1.114 seconds
> (6.766 MB/sec).
>
> 'Restore Log - Failed, with error message shown below
> RESTORE LOG MatriEdu2006
> FROM DISK = 'C:\EducationMatrix_Log'
> WITH RECOVERY, STOPAT = 'Dec 11, 2006 03:14 PM'
> Server: Msg 4326, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> The log in this backup set terminates at LSN 537000000112000001, which
> is too early to apply to the database. A more recent log backup that
> includes LSN 553000000066000001 can be restored.
> Server: Msg 3013, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> RESTORE LOG is terminating abnormally.
>
sql

Restoring Transaction log

Hi everyone,
First off, any help will be appreciated.
The scenario is that a chunk of data from one of the tables in a
database have been mistakenly deleted. I have done a complete backup of
the database and the backed up the log. I attempted restoring the
Database first with teh Norecpvery option and that worked. when I tried
restoring the log file with the STOPAT clause I get an error. I am
reproducing the script at the error below. Please help if you can
'Restoring the Database - Successful, with message shown below
RESTORE DATABASE MatriEdu2006
FROM DISK = 'C:\EducMatri06.db' WITH NORECOVERY,
MOVE 'EduMatri_Data' TO 'C:\MatriEdu2006.mdf',
MOVE 'EduMatri_Log' TO 'C:\MatriEdu2006.ldf'
Processed 920 pages for database 'MatriEdu2006', file 'Edu_Data' on
file 1.
Processed 1 pages for database 'MatriEdu2006', file 'Edu_Log' on file
1.
RESTORE DATABASE successfully processed 921 pages in 1.114 seconds
(6.766 MB/sec).
'Restore Log - Failed, with error message shown below
RESTORE LOG MatriEdu2006
FROM DISK = 'C:\EducationMatrix_Log'
WITH RECOVERY, STOPAT = 'Dec 11, 2006 03:14 PM'
Server: Msg 4326, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
The log in this backup set terminates at LSN 537000000112000001, which
is too early to apply to the database. A more recent log backup that
includes LSN 553000000066000001 can be restored.
Server: Msg 3013, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
RESTORE LOG is terminating abnormally.>>> On 12/10/2006 at 5:40 PM, in message
<1165797639.616739.281890@.80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
highflier<nbarnard@.au.loreal.com> wrote:
> Server: Msg 4326, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> The log in this backup set terminates at LSN 537000000112000001,
> which
> is too early to apply to the database. A more recent log backup that
> includes LSN 553000000066000001 can be restored.
> Server: Msg 3013, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> RESTORE LOG is terminating abnormally.
You need to find a full backup made *before* the data loss, along with
all the logs made between that full and the time of the data loss.|||This also indicates that something else is wrong here. If an LSN terminates
with a number that precedes the LSN of an earlier transaction log, that
transaction log needs to be skipped during a restore.
In your case below, the 537000000112000001 does exactly this so figure out
which TRN this is and when you run the restore and it comes time to restore
from this TRN log, skip it and go on to the next one. The database choked
on a transaction before one log completed but fixed itself during the next
one so all the stuff in that log is not needed as the transaction completed
during the execution of the next log.
Regards,
Jamie
"highflier" wrote:

> Hi everyone,
> First off, any help will be appreciated.
> The scenario is that a chunk of data from one of the tables in a
> database have been mistakenly deleted. I have done a complete backup of
> the database and the backed up the log. I attempted restoring the
> Database first with teh Norecpvery option and that worked. when I tried
> restoring the log file with the STOPAT clause I get an error. I am
> reproducing the script at the error below. Please help if you can
> 'Restoring the Database - Successful, with message shown below
> RESTORE DATABASE MatriEdu2006
> FROM DISK = 'C:\EducMatri06.db' WITH NORECOVERY,
> MOVE 'EduMatri_Data' TO 'C:\MatriEdu2006.mdf',
> MOVE 'EduMatri_Log' TO 'C:\MatriEdu2006.ldf'
> Processed 920 pages for database 'MatriEdu2006', file 'Edu_Data' on
> file 1.
> Processed 1 pages for database 'MatriEdu2006', file 'Edu_Log' on file
> 1.
> RESTORE DATABASE successfully processed 921 pages in 1.114 seconds
> (6.766 MB/sec).
>
> 'Restore Log - Failed, with error message shown below
> RESTORE LOG MatriEdu2006
> FROM DISK = 'C:\EducationMatrix_Log'
> WITH RECOVERY, STOPAT = 'Dec 11, 2006 03:14 PM'
> Server: Msg 4326, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> The log in this backup set terminates at LSN 537000000112000001, which
> is too early to apply to the database. A more recent log backup that
> includes LSN 553000000066000001 can be restored.
> Server: Msg 3013, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> RESTORE LOG is terminating abnormally.
>

Restoring Transaction log

Hi everyone,
First off, any help will be appreciated.
The scenario is that a chunk of data from one of the tables in a
database have been mistakenly deleted. I have done a complete backup of
the database and the backed up the log. I attempted restoring the
Database first with teh Norecpvery option and that worked. when I tried
restoring the log file with the STOPAT clause I get an error. I am
reproducing the script at the error below. Please help if you can
'Restoring the Database - Successful, with message shown below
RESTORE DATABASE MatriEdu2006
FROM DISK = 'C:\EducMatri06.db' WITH NORECOVERY,
MOVE 'EduMatri_Data' TO 'C:\MatriEdu2006.mdf',
MOVE 'EduMatri_Log' TO 'C:\MatriEdu2006.ldf'
Processed 920 pages for database 'MatriEdu2006', file 'Edu_Data' on
file 1.
Processed 1 pages for database 'MatriEdu2006', file 'Edu_Log' on file
1.
RESTORE DATABASE successfully processed 921 pages in 1.114 seconds
(6.766 MB/sec).
'Restore Log - Failed, with error message shown below
RESTORE LOG MatriEdu2006
FROM DISK = 'C:\EducationMatrix_Log'
WITH RECOVERY, STOPAT = 'Dec 11, 2006 03:14 PM'
Server: Msg 4326, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
The log in this backup set terminates at LSN 537000000112000001, which
is too early to apply to the database. A more recent log backup that
includes LSN 553000000066000001 can be restored.
Server: Msg 3013, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
RESTORE LOG is terminating abnormally.>> On 12/10/2006 at 5:40 PM, in message
<1165797639.616739.281890@.80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
highflier<nbarnard@.au.loreal.com> wrote:
> Server: Msg 4326, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> The log in this backup set terminates at LSN 537000000112000001,
> which
> is too early to apply to the database. A more recent log backup that
> includes LSN 553000000066000001 can be restored.
> Server: Msg 3013, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> RESTORE LOG is terminating abnormally.
You need to find a full backup made *before* the data loss, along with
all the logs made between that full and the time of the data loss.

restoring sql 7 to sql 2000 converts views to tables ???

I just did a restore of a database created in SQL 7 and it seems that
SQL Server 2000 converted all the views to tables, which is no good.
Anyone know of a fix for this?
Did you actually do a restore or did you use DTS or the Import/Export wizard
? I've not seen this behaviour on a straight database restore (in fact I
can't see how it would be possible) but I have seen it using DTS
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"alloowishus" <alloowishus@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b3c62b19.0404140825.6c8d44b9@.posting.google.c om...
> I just did a restore of a database created in SQL 7 and it seems that
> SQL Server 2000 converted all the views to tables, which is no good.
> Anyone know of a fix for this?

restoring sql 7 to sql 2000 converts views to tables ???

I just did a restore of a database created in SQL 7 and it seems that
SQL Server 2000 converted all the views to tables, which is no good.
Anyone know of a fix for this?Did you actually do a restore or did you use DTS or the Import/Export wizard
? I've not seen this behaviour on a straight database restore (in fact I
can't see how it would be possible) but I have seen it using DTS
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"alloowishus" <alloowishus@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b3c62b19.0404140825.6c8d44b9@.posting.google.com...
> I just did a restore of a database created in SQL 7 and it seems that
> SQL Server 2000 converted all the views to tables, which is no good.
> Anyone know of a fix for this?sql

restoring sql 7 to sql 2000 converts views to tables ???

I just did a restore of a database created in SQL 7 and it seems that
SQL Server 2000 converted all the views to tables, which is no good.
Anyone know of a fix for this?Did you actually do a restore or did you use DTS or the Import/Export wizard
? I've not seen this behaviour on a straight database restore (in fact I
can't see how it would be possible) but I have seen it using DTS
--
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"alloowishus" <alloowishus@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b3c62b19.0404140825.6c8d44b9@.posting.google.com...
> I just did a restore of a database created in SQL 7 and it seems that
> SQL Server 2000 converted all the views to tables, which is no good.
> Anyone know of a fix for this?

Restoring just a table from a full backup

is there a way to restore certain tables from a full backup?

Simple answer: No

Although there might be a way if you used a seperate file group for that table.

|||I am not sure. We are using Great Plains 9 and my bose told me he just wants to backup and restore payroll.|||

try some 3rd party tools.

|||You can restore the backup with other name, then copy the desired table from one database to the other.|||great idea|||I believe that is what I will do. thanks.|||

When you use for example SQL LiteSpeed for dumping (also usefull for quick and compressed dumping) there is an option in the admin tool for SQL LiteSpeed where you can restore a single object (view, sp, table, function etc) from a dump.

I have very good experience with SQL LiteSpeed.

Restoring filegroup which has indexes only

We are planning to put our tables on one filegroup and the indexes on the
other. In SQL 2005, it is possible to restore just 1 filegroup and continue
operations. This sounds fine if the tables and the associated indexes are on
the same filegroup. But what happens in my case ? If the index filegroup
drive fails and is restored from a backup, the indexes on it will be out of
sync. My question is - will we have to rebuild all the indexes (in which
case, it won't make sense to restore the filegroup in the first place), and
is it actually possible to restore the filegroup which holds indexes only an
d
continue operations as normal, or would it cause problems ?Hi Pranil
If you restore a filegroup, you must also restore log backups to bring the
filegroup up to date (i.e. get it in sync) with the rest of the database.
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Pranil" <Pranil@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:05780582-E1EA-4EF6-94CF-D19982EAB574@.microsoft.com...
> We are planning to put our tables on one filegroup and the indexes on the
> other. In SQL 2005, it is possible to restore just 1 filegroup and
> continue
> operations. This sounds fine if the tables and the associated indexes are
> on
> the same filegroup. But what happens in my case ? If the index filegroup
> drive fails and is restored from a backup, the indexes on it will be out
> of
> sync. My question is - will we have to rebuild all the indexes (in which
> case, it won't make sense to restore the filegroup in the first place),
> and
> is it actually possible to restore the filegroup which holds indexes only
> and
> continue operations as normal, or would it cause problems ?
>

Restoring filegroup which has indexes only

We are planning to put our tables on one filegroup and the indexes on the
other. In SQL 2005, it is possible to restore just 1 filegroup and continue
operations. This sounds fine if the tables and the associated indexes are on
the same filegroup. But what happens in my case ? If the index filegroup
drive fails and is restored from a backup, the indexes on it will be out of
sync. My question is - will we have to rebuild all the indexes (in which
case, it won't make sense to restore the filegroup in the first place), and
is it actually possible to restore the filegroup which holds indexes only and
continue operations as normal, or would it cause problems ?
Hi Pranil
If you restore a filegroup, you must also restore log backups to bring the
filegroup up to date (i.e. get it in sync) with the rest of the database.
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Pranil" <Pranil@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:05780582-E1EA-4EF6-94CF-D19982EAB574@.microsoft.com...
> We are planning to put our tables on one filegroup and the indexes on the
> other. In SQL 2005, it is possible to restore just 1 filegroup and
> continue
> operations. This sounds fine if the tables and the associated indexes are
> on
> the same filegroup. But what happens in my case ? If the index filegroup
> drive fails and is restored from a backup, the indexes on it will be out
> of
> sync. My question is - will we have to rebuild all the indexes (in which
> case, it won't make sense to restore the filegroup in the first place),
> and
> is it actually possible to restore the filegroup which holds indexes only
> and
> continue operations as normal, or would it cause problems ?
>

Restoring filegroup which has indexes only

We are planning to put our tables on one filegroup and the indexes on the
other. In SQL 2005, it is possible to restore just 1 filegroup and continue
operations. This sounds fine if the tables and the associated indexes are on
the same filegroup. But what happens in my case ? If the index filegroup
drive fails and is restored from a backup, the indexes on it will be out of
sync. My question is - will we have to rebuild all the indexes (in which
case, it won't make sense to restore the filegroup in the first place), and
is it actually possible to restore the filegroup which holds indexes only and
continue operations as normal, or would it cause problems ?Hi Pranil
If you restore a filegroup, you must also restore log backups to bring the
filegroup up to date (i.e. get it in sync) with the rest of the database.
--
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Pranil" <Pranil@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:05780582-E1EA-4EF6-94CF-D19982EAB574@.microsoft.com...
> We are planning to put our tables on one filegroup and the indexes on the
> other. In SQL 2005, it is possible to restore just 1 filegroup and
> continue
> operations. This sounds fine if the tables and the associated indexes are
> on
> the same filegroup. But what happens in my case ? If the index filegroup
> drive fails and is restored from a backup, the indexes on it will be out
> of
> sync. My question is - will we have to rebuild all the indexes (in which
> case, it won't make sense to restore the filegroup in the first place),
> and
> is it actually possible to restore the filegroup which holds indexes only
> and
> continue operations as normal, or would it cause problems ?
>

restoring filegroup from different date than mdf file

Can anyone tell me what the effect would be of restoring a filegroup from an
older date than the other filegroups in the database.
The tables in the older filegroup contain fewer records than the current
one. My main concern is that the sysindexes table will still contain
reference to a greater number of records.
You would not be able to access the database until you have restore all subsequent transaction log
backups for the database until current point in time. This is better explained in Books Online...
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
"DBA72" <DBA72@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:475C96EA-967D-4200-95ED-F1038F4488E0@.microsoft.com...
> Can anyone tell me what the effect would be of restoring a filegroup from an
> older date than the other filegroups in the database.
> The tables in the older filegroup contain fewer records than the current
> one. My main concern is that the sysindexes table will still contain
> reference to a greater number of records.

restoring filegroup from different date than mdf file

Can anyone tell me what the effect would be of restoring a filegroup from an
older date than the other filegroups in the database.
The tables in the older filegroup contain fewer records than the current
one. My main concern is that the sysindexes table will still contain
reference to a greater number of records.You would not be able to access the database until you have restore all subsequent transaction log
backups for the database until current point in time. This is better explained in Books Online...
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
http://www.sqlug.se/
"DBA72" <DBA72@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:475C96EA-967D-4200-95ED-F1038F4488E0@.microsoft.com...
> Can anyone tell me what the effect would be of restoring a filegroup from an
> older date than the other filegroups in the database.
> The tables in the older filegroup contain fewer records than the current
> one. My main concern is that the sysindexes table will still contain
> reference to a greater number of records.

Restoring deleted records with out of row blobs?

I have a database that had a number of rows in multiple tables deleted -
fortunately there was very little activity after these deletions (mostly more
deletions a few days later).
I have the log files, but the original inserts just have the pointer to the
blob. I tried generating undo scripts with apexsql Log but it doesn't even
reference the blob column when the script generates (restoring from a
detached mdf does give the pointer, but that pointer doesn't go anywhere and
a select on it is blank/null).
How is one supposed to go about restoring records / rolling back a
transaction log for deleting a row with an out-of-row blob? Am I totally
screwed even though nothing else happened in the database aside from the
deletes before the backup was taken?
"Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
>I have a database that had a number of rows in multiple tables deleted -
> fortunately there was very little activity after these deletions (mostly
> more
> deletions a few days later).
> I have the log files, but the original inserts just have the pointer to
> the
> blob. I tried generating undo scripts with apexsql Log but it doesn't
> even
> reference the blob column when the script generates (restoring from a
> detached mdf does give the pointer, but that pointer doesn't go anywhere
> and
> a select on it is blank/null).
> How is one supposed to go about restoring records / rolling back a
> transaction log for deleting a row with an out-of-row blob? Am I totally
> screwed even though nothing else happened in the database aside from the
> deletes before the backup was taken?
Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restored
database to your real database.
David
|||"David Browne" wrote:

> "Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
>
> Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
> point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restored
> database to your real database.
> David
>
Unfortunately the database was created between full backups and the only
remaining full backup is after the fact. There's no way to roll back the
transactions from the ldf?
How are blobs handled in the transaction log? Is it just a limitation of
the log viewer that I'm using that I don't see the the anything about the
content of the blobs aside from the pointer in row?
|||"David Browne" wrote:

> "Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
>
> Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
> point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restored
> database to your real database.
> David
>
So far it looks like
http://www.red-gate.com/products/SQL_Log_Rescue/index.htm will help me. My
frustrations seem to stem from a limitation with the other software I had
tried. I can see the correct data in the demo of log rescue... here's to
hoping.

Restoring deleted records with out of row blobs?

I have a database that had a number of rows in multiple tables deleted -
fortunately there was very little activity after these deletions (mostly more
deletions a few days later).
I have the log files, but the original inserts just have the pointer to the
blob. I tried generating undo scripts with apexsql Log but it doesn't even
reference the blob column when the script generates (restoring from a
detached mdf does give the pointer, but that pointer doesn't go anywhere and
a select on it is blank/null).
How is one supposed to go about restoring records / rolling back a
transaction log for deleting a row with an out-of-row blob? Am I totally
screwed even though nothing else happened in the database aside from the
deletes before the backup was taken?"Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
>I have a database that had a number of rows in multiple tables deleted -
> fortunately there was very little activity after these deletions (mostly
> more
> deletions a few days later).
> I have the log files, but the original inserts just have the pointer to
> the
> blob. I tried generating undo scripts with apexsql Log but it doesn't
> even
> reference the blob column when the script generates (restoring from a
> detached mdf does give the pointer, but that pointer doesn't go anywhere
> and
> a select on it is blank/null).
> How is one supposed to go about restoring records / rolling back a
> transaction log for deleting a row with an out-of-row blob? Am I totally
> screwed even though nothing else happened in the database aside from the
> deletes before the backup was taken?
Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restored
database to your real database.
David|||"David Browne" wrote:
> "Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
> >I have a database that had a number of rows in multiple tables deleted -
> > fortunately there was very little activity after these deletions (mostly
> > more
> > deletions a few days later).
> >
> > I have the log files, but the original inserts just have the pointer to
> > the
> > blob. I tried generating undo scripts with apexsql Log but it doesn't
> > even
> > reference the blob column when the script generates (restoring from a
> > detached mdf does give the pointer, but that pointer doesn't go anywhere
> > and
> > a select on it is blank/null).
> >
> > How is one supposed to go about restoring records / rolling back a
> > transaction log for deleting a row with an out-of-row blob? Am I totally
> > screwed even though nothing else happened in the database aside from the
> > deletes before the backup was taken?
>
> Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
> point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restored
> database to your real database.
> David
>
So far it looks like
http://www.red-gate.com/products/SQL_Log_Rescue/index.htm will help me. My
frustrations seem to stem from a limitation with the other software I had
tried. I can see the correct data in the demo of log rescue... here's to
hoping.

Restoring deleted records with out of row blobs?

I have a database that had a number of rows in multiple tables deleted -
fortunately there was very little activity after these deletions (mostly mor
e
deletions a few days later).
I have the log files, but the original inserts just have the pointer to the
blob. I tried generating undo scripts with apexsql Log but it doesn't even
reference the blob column when the script generates (restoring from a
detached mdf does give the pointer, but that pointer doesn't go anywhere and
a select on it is blank/null).
How is one supposed to go about restoring records / rolling back a
transaction log for deleting a row with an out-of-row blob? Am I totally
screwed even though nothing else happened in the database aside from the
deletes before the backup was taken?"Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
>I have a database that had a number of rows in multiple tables deleted -
> fortunately there was very little activity after these deletions (mostly
> more
> deletions a few days later).
> I have the log files, but the original inserts just have the pointer to
> the
> blob. I tried generating undo scripts with apexsql Log but it doesn't
> even
> reference the blob column when the script generates (restoring from a
> detached mdf does give the pointer, but that pointer doesn't go anywhere
> and
> a select on it is blank/null).
> How is one supposed to go about restoring records / rolling back a
> transaction log for deleting a row with an out-of-row blob? Am I totally
> screwed even though nothing else happened in the database aside from the
> deletes before the backup was taken?
Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restored
database to your real database.
David|||"David Browne" wrote:

> "Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
e
> news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
>
> Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
> point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restore
d
> database to your real database.
> David
>
Unfortunately the database was created between full backups and the only
remaining full backup is after the fact. There's no way to roll back the
transactions from the ldf?
How are blobs handled in the transaction log? Is it just a limitation of
the log viewer that I'm using that I don't see the the anything about the
content of the blobs aside from the pointer in row?|||"David Browne" wrote:

> "Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
e
> news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
>
> Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
> point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restore
d
> database to your real database.
> David
>
So far it looks like
http://www.red-gate.com/products/SQ...escue/index.htm will help me. My
frustrations seem to stem from a limitation with the other software I had
tried. I can see the correct data in the demo of log rescue... here's to
hoping.