Web Wiz Forums - Web Wiz Forums 9.5 MS SQL Versions

Print Page | Close Window

Web Wiz Forums 9.5 MS SQL Versions

Printed From: Web Wiz Forums
Category: Web Wiz Web App Support Forums
Forum Name: Web Wiz Forums
Forum Description: Support forum for Web Wiz Forums application.
URL: https://forums.webwiz.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=30587
Printed Date: 30 March 2026 at 10:06pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.08 - https://www.webwizforums.com

Topic: Web Wiz Forums 9.5 MS SQL Versions

Posted By: Jono8800
Subject: Web Wiz Forums 9.5 MS SQL Versions
Date Posted: 04 December 2012 at 7:44am

Hello,

I've been asked to move our copy of Web Wiz Forums from our SQL 2005 server to either a SQL 2008R2 or SQL 2012 Server. I've had a look at the System Requirements, but it's all for version 10. Can anyone advise if 9.5 will work with 2008 R2 (or better yet, 2012)?

Thanks,

Jonathan

Replies:

Posted By: WebWiz-Bruce
Date Posted: 04 December 2012 at 10:44am

Web Wiz Forums 9.5 will ruin with SQL Server 2008 R2 and 2012.

However, there is a bug with identity seeding in SQL Server 2012 that means when the server is rebooted the identity fields jump ahead by 1000 instead of the next number. So might be worth holding of on SQL Server 2012 till Microsoft sort out this bug.

I noticed it myself on a few non Web Wiz Forums databases and thought it some sort of database corruption, but a few people have mentioned it to me as a bug and looking through the Internet it appears allot of people have this issue with SQL Server 2012.

-------------
https://www.webwiz.net/web-wiz-forums/forum-hosting.htm" rel="nofollow - Web Wiz Forums Hosting
https://www.webwiz.net/web-hosting/windows-web-hosting.htm" rel="nofollow - ASP.NET Web Hosting

Posted By: Jono8800
Date Posted: 04 December 2012 at 11:31am

Thanks Bruce - i wasn't aware of that "feature" with SQL 2012. I'll see what Microsoft say before I move it to SQL 2012.

Thanks for the prompt response (as always!).

Jono

Posted By: WebWiz-Bruce
Date Posted: 04 December 2012 at 11:52am

have seen this today posted on MSDN forums, that suggest is maybe a performance feature of SQL Server, either way it is a right pain as each time SQL Server restarts 1000 is added to the next identity field:-

“I found a few related bugs in our internal bug database and learned that this is expectedbehavior. There was a change to the identity code path that resulted in aserious performance regression. In order to address the problem,identities are now pre-allocated. The size of the pre-allocation is basedon the size of the data type of the column the identity property is defined on.For a SQL Server integer column, the server pre-allocates identities in rangesof 1000 values. For the bigint data type the server pre-allocates in ranges of10000 values. Based on empirical testing using the database you uploaded,it appears that a new range will be allocated for each table that had at leastone INSERT since the last time SQL Server was restarted. For tables thatutilize the identity property that didn’t allocate any new identity valuessince the last time SQL Server was restarted, a new range is not pre-allocatedthe next time the server starts.”

Posted By: IanSmithISA
Date Posted: 04 December 2012 at 6:26pm

Good afternoon

I have read the internet buzz on this and I am a bit confused as to why this matters in the context of a forum or even anywhere.

It was discussed in depth during the early part of this year, (e.g. http://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/739013/alwayson-failover-results-in-reseed-of-identity" rel="nofollow - http://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/739013/alwayson-failover-results-in-reseed-of-identity )

Whilst in my mind there is clearly a bug, ID values are only lost when the server is shut down from the service manager rather than after a T-SQL SHUTDOWN statement, this pretty clearly says that it is a bug, otherwise the behaviour would be the same, but it doesn’t really matter.

An Identity column based on a signed int (32 bit), which is often the smallest data type that they are set up on has a range of 0 – 2^31 or 0 – 2,147,483,648

So you will only lose the IDs (1,000 for a 32bit int) if the database is shutdown without a T-SQL shutdown being emitted. Knowing this to be an issue it should only affect server crashes and if you are having many of these then you have much more serious problems.

IDs have never been without gaps, rolled back INSERTs for example, so nobody can have created a working system that relied on an unbroken sequence.

On one project I created, part of the security audit looks at missing values in the sequence, looking for people with high levels of privilege who may have added and later removed rows. So this is a pain, but in this particular environment, which was mostly batch processing, a bit of common sense was applied and still is.

Do you get still get lost Identities if you do a SHUTDOWN from the Enterprise Manager Query window, rather than just turn the server off?

Bye

Ian

-------------
Why does anyone need more than an 80x25 character only VDU?

Posted By: WebWiz-Bruce
Date Posted: 05 December 2012 at 8:11am

It seems to happen once a month for us when the server running SQL Server 2012 is rebooted after Windows updates.

Can live with it, but it is a bit of a pain, and I would certainly consider it a bug rather than the 'feature' Microsoft are calling it.

Posted By: IanSmithISA
Date Posted: 05 December 2012 at 8:52am

Good morning

Are you issuing a SHUTDOWN command to SQL Server before the updates are applied, it may be that the updates include something that stops SQL Server, there normally is?

This ID loss is not supposed to happen if you explicitly issue a SHUTDOWN command.

Bye

Ian

-------------
Why does anyone need more than an 80x25 character only VDU?

Posted By: WebWiz-Bruce
Date Posted: 05 December 2012 at 9:05am

No, but now know why it occurs and is not a database corruption issue can now take steps when performing updates and reboots to prevent this from happening.

Are only presently running SQL Server 2012 on an inhouse database server for testing before rolling out SQL Server 2012 to customers. In the light of this 'feature' probably a good thing that have done this first.