Prev: The SQLBrowser service was unable to process a client request error
Next: KILLED\ROLLBACK on BACKUP
From: Griff on 28 Jun 2006 06:11
Hi - I originally posted this to windows.server.general, but no responses
there.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have database application that stops working and the event log shows two
errors - I suspect that they are related but I don't know for certain and
I'm not sure whether they refer to connections to SQL Server or to the
Windows server.

The first error is number 17883:

Error: 17883, Severity: 1, State: 0
The Scheduler 0 appears to be hung.

And the second is number 17809
Could not connect. The maximum number of '32767' configured ...
Error: 17809, Severity: 20, State: 1

Unfortunately, I don't have the FULL text.

Now, I've investigated this as best I can and Microsoft say that the 17883
error occurs when the underlying disk system is too quick (e.g. when using a
SAN), but that this was fixed in SQL Server 2000 sp4. Yes, my server is
fibre-attached to a SAN **but I'm already running sp4** ... Here are some
URLs that I found:

http://www.developersdex.com/sql/message.asp?p=1866&ID=%3C48E20E01-71FA-483B-ADFC-7806C2FCC9D8%40microsoft.com%3E
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=810885
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/815056
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/816840

Regarding error 17809, I've put in some monitoring software and the number
of SQL Server connections never goes above 200, so I'm thinking that the
32767 connections is not a SQL Server connection but in fact a "lower" level
connection to the server [I say "lower" because I don't really understand
this side of networking (I'm just a VB developer)]. It sounds to me as if
the Windows 2003 sp1 server hosting the SQL Server has all its connections
open and can't cope with anything new. If this is the case it's either that
Windows 2003 can't cope with being on a SAN (which I simply can't believe)
or - if I'm being ultra paranoid - the server is suffering some sort of
denial of service (DOS) attack.

Also...when the database application connection dies, it returns one of the
following error messages (trapped from the ADO object error stack):

Number = -2147467259, Description = [DBNETLIB][ConnectionRead
(recv()).]General network error. Check your network documentation., Source =
Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server, SQLState = 08S01, Native Error =
11.
Number = -2147467259, Description = [DBNETLIB][ConnectionWrite
(send()).]General network error. Check your network documentation., Source =
Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server, SQLState = 08S01, Native Error =
11.

Any help or suggestions would be most appreciated,

Thanks!

Griff


From: John Bell on 28 Jun 2006 10:06
Hi

Have monitored the system with perfmon and ruled out KB815056?
Have you ruled out autogrow (or at least if autogrow is on the size of
increment is not too excessive), create/alter database issues and ruled out
KB810885?
Checked that you have at least version 2040 (SELECT @@VERSION)
Checked with the SAN vendor to see if there are any configuration issues?

If you have done all these then I would suggest that you apply trace flag
1262 and log a call with PSS to analyse the mini-dump.

John

"Griff" wrote:

> Hi - I originally posted this to windows.server.general, but no responses
> there.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> I have database application that stops working and the event log shows two
> errors - I suspect that they are related but I don't know for certain and
> I'm not sure whether they refer to connections to SQL Server or to the
> Windows server.
>
> The first error is number 17883:
>
> Error: 17883, Severity: 1, State: 0
> The Scheduler 0 appears to be hung.
>
> And the second is number 17809
> Could not connect. The maximum number of '32767' configured ...
> Error: 17809, Severity: 20, State: 1
>
> Unfortunately, I don't have the FULL text.
>
> Now, I've investigated this as best I can and Microsoft say that the 17883
> error occurs when the underlying disk system is too quick (e.g. when using a
> SAN), but that this was fixed in SQL Server 2000 sp4. Yes, my server is
> fibre-attached to a SAN **but I'm already running sp4** ... Here are some
> URLs that I found:
>
> http://www.developersdex.com/sql/message.asp?p=1866&ID=%3C48E20E01-71FA-483B-ADFC-7806C2FCC9D8%40microsoft.com%3E
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=810885
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/815056
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/816840
>
> Regarding error 17809, I've put in some monitoring software and the number
> of SQL Server connections never goes above 200, so I'm thinking that the
> 32767 connections is not a SQL Server connection but in fact a "lower" level
> connection to the server [I say "lower" because I don't really understand
> this side of networking (I'm just a VB developer)]. It sounds to me as if
> the Windows 2003 sp1 server hosting the SQL Server has all its connections
> open and can't cope with anything new. If this is the case it's either that
> Windows 2003 can't cope with being on a SAN (which I simply can't believe)
> or - if I'm being ultra paranoid - the server is suffering some sort of
> denial of service (DOS) attack.
>
> Also...when the database application connection dies, it returns one of the
> following error messages (trapped from the ADO object error stack):
>
> Number = -2147467259, Description = [DBNETLIB][ConnectionRead
> (recv()).]General network error. Check your network documentation., Source =
> Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server, SQLState = 08S01, Native Error =
> 11.
> Number = -2147467259, Description = [DBNETLIB][ConnectionWrite
> (send()).]General network error. Check your network documentation., Source =
> Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server, SQLState = 08S01, Native Error =
> 11.
>
> Any help or suggestions would be most appreciated,
>
> Thanks!
>
> Griff
>
>
>
From: Arnie Rowland on 28 Jun 2006 11:13
I'd check with the SAN vendor. I've experienced issues with some vendors
until they corrected their fiber channel drivers.

--
Arnie Rowland, YACE*
"To be successful, your heart must accompany your knowledge."

*Yet Another Certification Exam


"John Bell" <jbellnewsposts(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4AD9C407-4AE1-41D8-B969-52CD87BE78F7(a)microsoft.com...
> Hi
>
> Have monitored the system with perfmon and ruled out KB815056?
> Have you ruled out autogrow (or at least if autogrow is on the size of
> increment is not too excessive), create/alter database issues and ruled
> out
> KB810885?
> Checked that you have at least version 2040 (SELECT @@VERSION)
> Checked with the SAN vendor to see if there are any configuration issues?
>
> If you have done all these then I would suggest that you apply trace flag
> 1262 and log a call with PSS to analyse the mini-dump.
>
> John
>
> "Griff" wrote:
>
>> Hi - I originally posted this to windows.server.general, but no responses
>> there.
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> I have database application that stops working and the event log shows
>> two
>> errors - I suspect that they are related but I don't know for certain and
>> I'm not sure whether they refer to connections to SQL Server or to the
>> Windows server.
>>
>> The first error is number 17883:
>>
>> Error: 17883, Severity: 1, State: 0
>> The Scheduler 0 appears to be hung.
>>
>> And the second is number 17809
>> Could not connect. The maximum number of '32767' configured
>> ...
>> Error: 17809, Severity: 20, State: 1
>>
>> Unfortunately, I don't have the FULL text.
>>
>> Now, I've investigated this as best I can and Microsoft say that the
>> 17883
>> error occurs when the underlying disk system is too quick (e.g. when
>> using a
>> SAN), but that this was fixed in SQL Server 2000 sp4. Yes, my server is
>> fibre-attached to a SAN **but I'm already running sp4** ... Here are
>> some
>> URLs that I found:
>>
>>
>> http://www.developersdex.com/sql/message.asp?p=1866&ID=%3C48E20E01-71FA-483B-ADFC-7806C2FCC9D8%40microsoft.com%3E
>> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=810885
>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/815056
>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/816840
>>
>> Regarding error 17809, I've put in some monitoring software and the
>> number
>> of SQL Server connections never goes above 200, so I'm thinking that the
>> 32767 connections is not a SQL Server connection but in fact a "lower"
>> level
>> connection to the server [I say "lower" because I don't really understand
>> this side of networking (I'm just a VB developer)]. It sounds to me as
>> if
>> the Windows 2003 sp1 server hosting the SQL Server has all its
>> connections
>> open and can't cope with anything new. If this is the case it's either
>> that
>> Windows 2003 can't cope with being on a SAN (which I simply can't
>> believe)
>> or - if I'm being ultra paranoid - the server is suffering some sort of
>> denial of service (DOS) attack.
>>
>> Also...when the database application connection dies, it returns one of
>> the
>> following error messages (trapped from the ADO object error stack):
>>
>> Number = -2147467259, Description = [DBNETLIB][ConnectionRead
>> (recv()).]General network error. Check your network documentation.,
>> Source =
>> Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server, SQLState = 08S01, Native Error
>> =
>> 11.
>> Number = -2147467259, Description = [DBNETLIB][ConnectionWrite
>> (send()).]General network error. Check your network documentation.,
>> Source =
>> Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server, SQLState = 08S01, Native Error
>> =
>> 11.
>>
>> Any help or suggestions would be most appreciated,
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Griff
>>
>>
>>


From: Griff on 28 Jun 2006 12:44
Hi John

Firstly, KB815056 and KB810885 were allegedly fixed in sp4 which we already
have installed.

Interestingly you say that we should have "at least version 2040" - I've
checked and ours is registered as version 2039, yet we have the latest full
service pack. Presumably we should have the latest cumulative hot fix
(build 2162) mentioned on http://www.support.microsoft.com/ph/2852 ?

I'll also investigate the SAN side of things....thanks also Arnie.

Griff


From: John Bell on 28 Jun 2006 13:03
Hi Griff

Version 2040 was a fix for AWE http://support.microsoft.com/kb/899761, which
I would assume are using. I have found 2187 ok, but you would have to do your
own testing. Have you checked your current version number?

John

"Griff" wrote:

> Hi John
>
> Firstly, KB815056 and KB810885 were allegedly fixed in sp4 which we already
> have installed.
>
> Interestingly you say that we should have "at least version 2040" - I've
> checked and ours is registered as version 2039, yet we have the latest full
> service pack. Presumably we should have the latest cumulative hot fix
> (build 2162) mentioned on http://www.support.microsoft.com/ph/2852 ?
>
> I'll also investigate the SAN side of things....thanks also Arnie.
>
> Griff
>
>
>
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: The SQLBrowser service was unable to process a client request error
Next: KILLED\ROLLBACK on BACKUP