Restrict users to modify tabble structure

Is it possible to restrict users to modify the table structure. Most of our
users are using "Windows authentication"
Thanks for any help.
J Justin
You need to limit what permissions each user has. Modify the security =
on each group or individual so that they have only the rights that they =
need. If you want to limit what they can do you will want to clear all =
checkboxes on the "server roles" tab and you will want to make sure that =
they have the appropriate database roles assigned. You access the forms =
that I am talking about via Enterprise Manager. Drill into the security =
folder, Logins node. double-click on a specific login to view its =
properties.
--=20
Keith
"Justin" <justinkumar@.hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:%23nTbnRiTEHA.2324@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Is it possible to restrict users to modify the table structure. Most =
of our
> users are using "Windows authentication"
> Thanks for any help.
>=20
> J Justin
>=20
>
|||Just make sure that they don't have such permissions/privileges in your database. I.e., should not have the
sysadmin server role. Should not be dbo in the database. Should not have db_ddladmin or db_owner database
role.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Justin" <justinkumar@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23nTbnRiTEHA.2324@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Is it possible to restrict users to modify the table structure. Most of our
> users are using "Windows authentication"
> Thanks for any help.
> J Justin
>

Restrict users to modify tabble structure

Is it possible to restrict users to modify the table structure. Most of our
users are using "Windows authentication"
Thanks for any help.
J JustinYou need to limit what permissions each user has. Modify the security =
on each group or individual so that they have only the rights that they =
need. If you want to limit what they can do you will want to clear all =
checkboxes on the "server roles" tab and you will want to make sure that =
they have the appropriate database roles assigned. You access the forms =
that I am talking about via Enterprise Manager. Drill into the security =
folder, Logins node. double-click on a specific login to view its =
properties.
--=20
Keith
"Justin" <justinkumar@.hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:%23nTbnRiTEHA.2324@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Is it possible to restrict users to modify the table structure. Most =
of our
> users are using "Windows authentication"
> Thanks for any help.
>=20
> J Justin
>=20
>|||Just make sure that they don't have such permissions/privileges in your data
base. I.e., should not have the
sysadmin server role. Should not be dbo in the database. Should not have db_
ddladmin or db_owner database
role.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Justin" <justinkumar@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23nTbnRiTEHA.2324@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx
.gbl...
> Is it possible to restrict users to modify the table structure. Most of ou
r
> users are using "Windows authentication"
> Thanks for any help.
> J Justin
>

Restrict users to modify tabble structure

Is it possible to restrict users to modify the table structure. Most of our
users are using "Windows authentication"
Thanks for any help.
J JustinYou need to limit what permissions each user has. Modify the security =on each group or individual so that they have only the rights that they =need. If you want to limit what they can do you will want to clear all =checkboxes on the "server roles" tab and you will want to make sure that =they have the appropriate database roles assigned. You access the forms =that I am talking about via Enterprise Manager. Drill into the security =folder, Logins node. double-click on a specific login to view its =properties.
-- Keith
"Justin" <justinkumar@.hotmail.com> wrote in message =news:%23nTbnRiTEHA.2324@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Is it possible to restrict users to modify the table structure. Most =of our
> users are using "Windows authentication"
> Thanks for any help.
> > J Justin
> >|||Just make sure that they don't have such permissions/privileges in your database. I.e., should not have the
sysadmin server role. Should not be dbo in the database. Should not have db_ddladmin or db_owner database
role.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Justin" <justinkumar@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23nTbnRiTEHA.2324@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Is it possible to restrict users to modify the table structure. Most of our
> users are using "Windows authentication"
> Thanks for any help.
> J Justin
>sql

restrict user access

how can i set the user access level for sql 2000 server?
i want to restrict the user only can query/add table/ drop table/ modify
data/import & export data
but don't allow them to view other services such as "Management,
Replication, Security...etc"
which standard role i can choose or need to create a custom role for this?
btw, Although user can view the content of other user, but they still can
see the name of DB? how can avoid this?
Thanks in advanced.Hi
> i want to restrict the user only can query/add table/ drop table/ modify
> data/import & export data
Thats all what you want ? :-))))
Well first of all you need to create a login to SQL Server for this person.
Then grant an access to the database
As I see your requirements you are going to put them into db_owner database
role.
For more details please refer to the BOL.
"beachboy" <stanley@.javacatz.com> wrote in message
news:%23SgC77JIGHA.740@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> how can i set the user access level for sql 2000 server?
> i want to restrict the user only can query/add table/ drop table/ modify
> data/import & export data
> but don't allow them to view other services such as "Management,
> Replication, Security...etc"
> which standard role i can choose or need to create a custom role for this?
> btw, Although user can view the content of other user, but they still can
> see the name of DB? how can avoid this?
> Thanks in advanced.
>sql

Restrict IP connections

I need to modify SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition so that it only
listens on the two local IP addresses, not the IP address of the
Internet.
I found KB article Q244980, but the "Maintain a Virtual Server for
Failover Clustering" can be selected.
Is there a registry setting or something where I can set which IP's SQL
server listens on?
--DaveHi Dave,
As far as I know that's not possible. Your best option is probably to close
ports 1433 and 1434 on your firewall. These are the default ports SQL Server
listens on. If you changed the ports, you of course need to close these. If
you're running on Windows 2003, you can restrict IP's on the network level.
Karl Gram, BSc, MBA
http://www.gramonline.com
"Dave Navarro" <dave@.dave.dave> wrote in message
news:MPG.1acfa74cf9ba4b9a9897d5@.news-40.giganews.com...
> I need to modify SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition so that it only
> listens on the two local IP addresses, not the IP address of the
> Internet.
> I found KB article Q244980, but the "Maintain a Virtual Server for
> Failover Clustering" can be selected.
> Is there a registry setting or something where I can set which IP's SQL
> server listens on?
> --Dave

Restoring multiple transaction logs from a single file

Hi all,
I have a home-grown log shipping setup at work which I'm trying to
modify. At present if the standby server cannot apply the logs before
the live server writes a new set (usually because the db cannot be
locked), it fails and we have to do a full resync between the servers.
I've put in a mechanism whereby the status of the last attempt to apply
the logs to the standby database is recorded. If the primary sees that
the last attempt was successful it does a BACKUP LOG ... WITH INIT.
If it sees the last attempt was not successful it does the same but
WITH NOINIT, which I gather appends the new logs onto the end of the
current lot. This way the transaction logs will queue up every hour
until I can solve whatever the issue between the servers is so they can
be applied, thus saving a full 4 hour resync on a 220GB database.
Problem is this. For example, the secondary can't apply logs because
it can't get exclusive lock on the db. It marks that database as out
of sync in a table. Next time the primary backs up logs it sees the
secondary is not up to date so it appends the logs to the last lot
instead of overwriting them (WITH NOINIT). Next time the secondary
does manage to apply the logs. Now I thought that would mean it gets
ALL the logs and applies them, except I get this error message:
Executed as user: STEWARTMILNE\sqlosp1. The log in this backup set
begins at LSN 1247944000000500300001, which is too late to apply to the
database. An earlier log backup that includes LSN
1247592000000017600001 can be restored. [SQLSTATE 42000] (Error 4305)
RESTORE LOG is terminating abnormally. [SQLSTATE 42000] (Error 3013).
The step failed.
Now I know that means that basically there is a gap between the last
log to be applied and the one we're attempting to apply now. What I
don't understand is how that can be since the last lot of logs to be
successfully applied included more than one BACKUP LOG's worth. How
can I tell RESTORE LOG to apply ALL the log backups appended together
instead of just the first ones in the set?
TIA
Niall> How
> can I tell RESTORE LOG to apply ALL the log backups appended together
> instead of just the first ones in the set?
You can't. So you have to write some code that uses RESTORE HEADERONLY, and based the result does
several RESTORE LOG commands.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
<niallporter@.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1158846017.059168.76240@.m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Hi all,
> I have a home-grown log shipping setup at work which I'm trying to
> modify. At present if the standby server cannot apply the logs before
> the live server writes a new set (usually because the db cannot be
> locked), it fails and we have to do a full resync between the servers.
> I've put in a mechanism whereby the status of the last attempt to apply
> the logs to the standby database is recorded. If the primary sees that
> the last attempt was successful it does a BACKUP LOG ... WITH INIT.
> If it sees the last attempt was not successful it does the same but
> WITH NOINIT, which I gather appends the new logs onto the end of the
> current lot. This way the transaction logs will queue up every hour
> until I can solve whatever the issue between the servers is so they can
> be applied, thus saving a full 4 hour resync on a 220GB database.
> Problem is this. For example, the secondary can't apply logs because
> it can't get exclusive lock on the db. It marks that database as out
> of sync in a table. Next time the primary backs up logs it sees the
> secondary is not up to date so it appends the logs to the last lot
> instead of overwriting them (WITH NOINIT). Next time the secondary
> does manage to apply the logs. Now I thought that would mean it gets
> ALL the logs and applies them, except I get this error message:
> Executed as user: STEWARTMILNE\sqlosp1. The log in this backup set
> begins at LSN 1247944000000500300001, which is too late to apply to the
> database. An earlier log backup that includes LSN
> 1247592000000017600001 can be restored. [SQLSTATE 42000] (Error 4305)
> RESTORE LOG is terminating abnormally. [SQLSTATE 42000] (Error 3013).
> The step failed.
> Now I know that means that basically there is a gap between the last
> log to be applied and the one we're attempting to apply now. What I
> don't understand is how that can be since the last lot of logs to be
> successfully applied included more than one BACKUP LOG's worth. How
> can I tell RESTORE LOG to apply ALL the log backups appended together
> instead of just the first ones in the set?
> TIA
> Niall
>