Keyword not supported: ,server.

Hello there.

I'm developing an eCommerce solutions based on the ASP.NET 2.0 Commerce Starter Kit, architechture. It uses the Provider Pattern. In my web-application, i use the CatalogProvider, to retrieve data from a SQL Server 2005 database. I call the methods through a handler class, whoch excists inside the WebApp. I also use a ShoppingCartProvider, OrdersProvider, ShippingProvider etc. in the same way.

In my Web.Config file, i have all the provers listed, and on each provider, the name of the connectionString to use are given.

My connection string looks like this:

"connString" connectionString="Server=xxxx;Database=xxxx;Trusted_Connection=True;" providerName="System.Data.SqlClient" />

The problem is, that suddently, when browsing the website, that connects to the database through the providers, i get this error:

Keyword not supported: ',server'.

Description:An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code.

Exception Details:System.ArgumentException: Keyword not supported: ',server'.

Source Error:

Line 31: public static IDataReader GetProductsByCategory(int categoryID)Line 32: {Line 33: return Commerce.Providers.CatalogProvider.Instance.GetProductsByCategory(categoryID);Line 34: }Line 35:

Source File:d:\Development\ASPNET\SeoShop\App_Code\Handlers\CatalogManager.cs Line:33

Stack Trace:

If i then go back to my web.config file, and removes the providerName section, of the connectionString, the website works again, for a short period. When the error return, i undo the deletion of the providerName, and it will work again... For a short time...

I've also tried to use another connectionsString, like this:
Data Source=Aron1;Initial Catalog=pubs;Integrated Security=SSPI

But then the keyword which is not supported is: ', data source'

Does anyone know what the issue might be?

Thanks in advance...

I see the keyword is ",server". Where's the comma coming from? That's your problem.|||

I don't know where it is coming from. It seems very wierd, that it is there. But the fact, that it only happens occassionally, is the wierdest thing, though.

I might review my providers data-access layer, to see if the comma occurs, but i doubt it.

|||

Perhaps changing your connection to something like this might help:

connectionString="Server=xxxx;Database=xxxx;Trusted_Connection=True;providerName=System.Data.SqlClient"

|||

ndinakar >>

That returns the following error:

Keyword not supported: 'providername'.

Description:An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code.

Exception Details:System.ArgumentException: Keyword not supported: 'providername'.

Source Error:

An unhandled exception was generated during the execution of the current web request. Information regarding the origin and location of the exception can be identified using the exception stack trace below.

Stack Trace:

[ArgumentException: Keyword not supported: 'providername'.] System.Data.Common.DbConnectionOptions.ParseInternal(Hashtable parsetable, String connectionString, Boolean buildChain, Hashtable synonyms, Boolean firstKey) +1406530 System.Data.Common.DbConnectionOptions..ctor(String connectionString, Hashtable synonyms, Boolean useOdbcRules) +102 System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnectionString..ctor(String connectionString) +52 System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnectionFactory.CreateConnectionOptions(String connectionString, DbConnectionOptions previous) +24 System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionFactory.GetConnectionPoolGroup(String connectionString, DbConnectionPoolGroupOptions poolOptions, DbConnectionOptions& userConnectionOptions) +125 System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.ConnectionString_Set(String value) +56 System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.set_ConnectionString(String value) +4 System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection..ctor(String connectionString) +21 System.Web.DataAccess.SqlConnectionHolder..ctor(String connectionString) +40

|||

You could use:

"Data Source=Aron1;Initial Catalog=pubs;Integrated Security=SSPI;"
- or -
"Server=Aron1;Database=pubs;Trusted_Connection=True;"
(both connection strings produces the same result)

|||

ndinakar wrote the following post at 06-28-2006 5:51 PM:

You could use:

"Data Source=Aron1;Initial Catalog=pubs;Integrated Security=SSPI;"
- or -
"Server=Aron1;Database=pubs;Trusted_Connection=True;"
(both connection strings produces the same result)

Doesn't make a difference, regarding my problem!

|||can you post your updated code ?|||

I've been digging deeper into this problem now for some time.

The problem seems to be caused by caching the connection-string and providername. Take a look at this error message form ASP.NET:

---

System.Data.SqlClient,System.Data.SqlClient,System.Data.SqlClient

Description:An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code.

Exception Details:System.Exception: System.Data.SqlClient,System.Data.SqlClient,System.Data.SqlClient

Source Error:

Line 24: catch (ArgumentException)Line 25: {Line 26: throw new Exception(providerName);Line 27: }Line 28: DbConnection myConn = fact.CreateConnection();

As I see it, it adds the providername and delimits the records with a , (comma).

The code looks like this:

1using System;2using System.Reflection;3using System.Collections.Specialized;4using System.Configuration.Provider;5using System.Data;6using System.Web.Caching;7using System.Web;8using System.Web.Configuration;9using System.Configuration;1011namespace Commerce.Providers12{1314public abstract class CatalogProvider : System.Configuration.Provider.ProviderBase15 {1617static CatalogProvider _instance;1819static object padLock;20public static CatalogProvider Instance21 {2223get24 {25 CatalogProvider tempInstance;26if (_instance ==null)27 padLock =new object();28lock (padLock)29 {30 tempInstance = LoadProvider();31 _instance = tempInstance;32 }3334return _instance;35 }36 }3738public static CatalogProvider LoadProvider()39 {40// Get the names of the providers41 // Use the cache because the reflection used later is expensive42 Cache cache = System.Web.HttpRuntime.Cache;43string cacheKey =null;4445 CatalogProvider _instanceLoader;46 CatalogProviderConfiguration config = CatalogProviderConfiguration.GetConfig();47 cacheKey ="CatalogProvider::" + config.DefaultProvider;4849 cache.Remove(cacheKey);50object oProvider = cache.Get(cacheKey);51if (oProvider !=null)52 {53 _instanceLoader = (CatalogProvider)oProvider;54 }55else56 {5758try59 {6061// Read the configuration specific information for this provider62 Provider CatalogProvider = (Provider)config.Providers[config.DefaultProvider];6364// The assembly should be in \bin or GAC65 Type type = Type.GetType(CatalogProvider.Type);66 _instanceLoader = (CatalogProvider)Activator.CreateInstance(type);6768// Initialize the provider with the attributes.69string cStringName = CatalogProvider.Attributes["connectionStringName"];70string cString = System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings[cStringName].ConnectionString;71string providerName = System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings[cStringName].ProviderName;72 CatalogProvider.Attributes.Add("connectionString", cString);73 CatalogProvider.Attributes.Add("providerName", providerName);74 _instanceLoader.Initialize(CatalogProvider.Name, CatalogProvider.Attributes);7576//pop it into the cache to keep out site from running into the ground :)77 cache.Insert(cacheKey, _instanceLoader);7879 }80catch (Exception e)81 {82throw new Exception("Unable to load provider", e);83 }84 }85return _instanceLoader;86 }878889#region Products90public abstract IDataReader ProductsSearch(string query);91public abstract IDataReader GetProducts();92public abstract int AddCategory(int parentID,string categoryName,string metaKeywords,string metaDescription,string metaRobotsTag,string pageTitle);93public abstract IDataReader GetCategories();94public abstract IDataReader GetCompleteCategoriesList();95public abstract IDataReader GetCategoryByID(int categoryId);96public abstract IDataReader GetCategoryByParentID(int parentId);97public abstract IDataReader GetProductsByCategory(int categoryID);98public abstract IDataReader GetProductsByWhereClause(string whereClause);99public abstract IDataReader GetProduct(int productID);100101public abstract IDataReader GetTagList();102103public abstract void FillProductDataSet(int productID, DataSet ds);104public abstract bool ProductIsActive(int productID);105106public abstract void ProductsAdjustInventory(int productID,int newAmount,string comment);107public abstract IDataReader ProductsInventoryHistory(int productID);108public abstract void ProductInactivate(int productID);109public abstract void ProductDeletePermanent(int productID);110111public abstract int ProductInsert(string metaKeywords,string metaDescription,string metaRobotsTag,int categoryID,string modelNumber,string modelName,double unitCost,string description,int amountOnHand,string sku,double weight,bool isActive,int discountPercent,string pageTitle);112public abstract int InsertProductImage(int productID,string thumbPath,string mediumPath,string mainPath);113public abstract void ProductUpdate(int productID,string metaKeywords,string metaDescription,string metaRobotsTag,int categoryID,string modelNumber,string modelName,double unitCost,string description,int amountOnHand,string sku,double weight,bool isActive,int discountPercent,string pageTitle,string thumbPath,string mediumPath,string mainPath);114115#endregion116 }117}118

All the settings are stored in the web.config.|||Found a solution:http://forums.asp.net/thread/1418919.aspx

Key columns in SQL Server Everywhere Edition

I have noticed that Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Everywhere Edition OLE DB Provider doesn't support DBPROP_UNIQUEROWS property from
DBPROPSET_ROWSET property set. Does it mean that I have to use the KEY_COLUMN_USAGE rowset to get list of key columns in table?

Moving to the "Transact-SQL" forum.|||Thank you for your help

key columns

I have noticed that Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Everywhere Edition OLE DB Provider doesn't support DBPROP_UNIQUEROWS property from
DBPROPSET_ROWSET property set. Does it mean that I have to use the KEY_COLUMN_USAGE rowset to get list of key columns in table?Yes, you should use DBSCHEMA_KEY_COLUMN_USAGE in this case. or you can get the same information with the following query: "select * from information_schema.key_column_usage;"

key columns

I have noticed that Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Everywhere Edition OLE DB Provider doesn't support DBPROP_UNIQUEROWS property from
DBPROPSET_ROWSET property set. Does it mean that I have to use the KEY_COLUMN_USAGE rowset to get list of key columns in table?Yes, you should use DBSCHEMA_KEY_COLUMN_USAGE in this case. or you can get the same information with the following query: "select * from information_schema.key_column_usage;"

Keeping PK and identity when moving db from one server to another

We have a database at an external hosting provider.
I would like to move the database to another provider,
If I use the Import or Export tools in Enterprise Manager (db -> db), the
PK's and Indentities are not set on the new server....
...is there somehow I can move the database including the PK's and
Identities...?
Does it have to be through: Backup -> Manually file transfer -> Restore?
There are ca. 50 tables in that database, and restoring all the keys and
identities is full time job.
Thanx!
Regards,
Taras DKTaras
What's a problem with BACKUP and then RESTORE commands?
"Taras Tim Bredel" <ttb@.jtj.dk> wrote in message
news:uIpt7YJ8DHA.2472@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> We have a database at an external hosting provider.
> I would like to move the database to another provider,
> If I use the Import or Export tools in Enterprise Manager (db -> db), the
> PK's and Indentities are not set on the new server....
> ...is there somehow I can move the database including the PK's and
> Identities...?
> Does it have to be through: Backup -> Manually file transfer -> Restore?
>
> There are ca. 50 tables in that database, and restoring all the keys and
> identities is full time job.
> Thanx!
> Regards,
> Taras DK
>|||Hi Uri
Well nothing actually.
Though I do not have access to the local file system on either of the
servers.
Therefor it would decrease the down time, if I could perform this task
without involving several dba's at each hosting facility.
So I should take that as a no!
Thanx!
Taras
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:%23P7EKcJ8DHA.696@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Taras
> What's a problem with BACKUP and then RESTORE commands?
> "Taras Tim Bredel" <ttb@.jtj.dk> wrote in message
> news:uIpt7YJ8DHA.2472@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > We have a database at an external hosting provider.
> > I would like to move the database to another provider,
> >
> > If I use the Import or Export tools in Enterprise Manager (db -> db),
the
> > PK's and Indentities are not set on the new server....
> >
> > ...is there somehow I can move the database including the PK's and
> > Identities...?
> > Does it have to be through: Backup -> Manually file transfer -> Restore?
> >
> >
> > There are ca. 50 tables in that database, and restoring all the keys and
> > identities is full time job.
> >
> > Thanx!
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Taras DK
> >
> >
>|||Taras
Take a look at DTS object that called Copy SQL Server Objects Task.
You will be able transfer PK, indexes....
"Taras Tim Bredel" <ttb@.jtj.dk> wrote in message
news:uDfvRjJ8DHA.2796@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi Uri
> Well nothing actually.
> Though I do not have access to the local file system on either of the
> servers.
> Therefor it would decrease the down time, if I could perform this task
> without involving several dba's at each hosting facility.
> So I should take that as a no!
> Thanx!
> Taras
> "Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
> news:%23P7EKcJ8DHA.696@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Taras
> > What's a problem with BACKUP and then RESTORE commands?
> > "Taras Tim Bredel" <ttb@.jtj.dk> wrote in message
> > news:uIpt7YJ8DHA.2472@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > We have a database at an external hosting provider.
> > > I would like to move the database to another provider,
> > >
> > > If I use the Import or Export tools in Enterprise Manager (db -> db),
> the
> > > PK's and Indentities are not set on the new server....
> > >
> > > ...is there somehow I can move the database including the PK's and
> > > Identities...?
> > > Does it have to be through: Backup -> Manually file transfer ->
Restore?
> > >
> > >
> > > There are ca. 50 tables in that database, and restoring all the keys
and
> > > identities is full time job.
> > >
> > > Thanx!
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Taras DK
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>|||Hi Uri
Perfect... I't works (almost) like a charm.
Except it only copies the tables and objects owned by dbo, and not the ones
owned by the db_owner ?
Could you please elaborate ?
Thanx!
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:%236KX8lJ8DHA.3052@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Taras
> Take a look at DTS object that called Copy SQL Server Objects Task.
> You will be able transfer PK, indexes....
>
> "Taras Tim Bredel" <ttb@.jtj.dk> wrote in message
> news:uDfvRjJ8DHA.2796@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > Hi Uri
> >
> > Well nothing actually.
> > Though I do not have access to the local file system on either of the
> > servers.
> > Therefor it would decrease the down time, if I could perform this task
> > without involving several dba's at each hosting facility.
> >
> > So I should take that as a no!
> >
> > Thanx!
> >
> > Taras
> >
> > "Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
> > news:%23P7EKcJ8DHA.696@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > Taras
> > > What's a problem with BACKUP and then RESTORE commands?
> > > "Taras Tim Bredel" <ttb@.jtj.dk> wrote in message
> > > news:uIpt7YJ8DHA.2472@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > > We have a database at an external hosting provider.
> > > > I would like to move the database to another provider,
> > > >
> > > > If I use the Import or Export tools in Enterprise Manager (db ->
db),
> > the
> > > > PK's and Indentities are not set on the new server....
> > > >
> > > > ...is there somehow I can move the database including the PK's and
> > > > Identities...?
> > > > Does it have to be through: Backup -> Manually file transfer ->
> Restore?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > There are ca. 50 tables in that database, and restoring all the keys
> and
> > > > identities is full time job.
> > > >
> > > > Thanx!
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Taras DK
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

Keeping PK and identity when moving db from one server to another

We have a database at an external hosting provider.
I would like to move the database to another provider,
If I use the Import or Export tools in Enterprise Manager (db -> db), the
PK's and Indentities are not set on the new server....
...is there somehow I can move the database including the PK's and
Identities...?
Does it have to be through: Backup -> Manually file transfer -> Restore?
There are ca. 50 tables in that database, and restoring all the keys and
identities is full time job.
Thanx!
Regards,
Taras DKTaras
What's a problem with BACKUP and then RESTORE commands?
"Taras Tim Bredel" <ttb@.jtj.dk> wrote in message
news:uIpt7YJ8DHA.2472@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> We have a database at an external hosting provider.
> I would like to move the database to another provider,
> If I use the Import or Export tools in Enterprise Manager (db -> db), the
> PK's and Indentities are not set on the new server....
> ...is there somehow I can move the database including the PK's and
> Identities...?
> Does it have to be through: Backup -> Manually file transfer -> Restore?
>
> There are ca. 50 tables in that database, and restoring all the keys and
> identities is full time job.
> Thanx!
> Regards,
> Taras DK
>|||Hi Uri
Well nothing actually.
Though I do not have access to the local file system on either of the
servers.
Therefor it would decrease the down time, if I could perform this task
without involving several dba's at each hosting facility.
So I should take that as a no!
Thanx!
Taras
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:%23P7EKcJ8DHA.696@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Taras
> What's a problem with BACKUP and then RESTORE commands?
> "Taras Tim Bredel" <ttb@.jtj.dk> wrote in message
> news:uIpt7YJ8DHA.2472@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
the
>|||Taras
Take a look at DTS object that called Copy SQL Server Objects Task.
You will be able transfer PK, indexes....
"Taras Tim Bredel" <ttb@.jtj.dk> wrote in message
news:uDfvRjJ8DHA.2796@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi Uri
> Well nothing actually.
> Though I do not have access to the local file system on either of the
> servers.
> Therefor it would decrease the down time, if I could perform this task
> without involving several dba's at each hosting facility.
> So I should take that as a no!
> Thanx!
> Taras
> "Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
> news:%23P7EKcJ8DHA.696@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> the
Restore?
and
>|||Hi Uri
Perfect... I't works (almost) like a charm.
Except it only copies the tables and objects owned by dbo, and not the ones
owned by the db_owner ?
Could you please elaborate ?
Thanx!
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:%236KX8lJ8DHA.3052@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Taras
> Take a look at DTS object that called Copy SQL Server Objects Task.
> You will be able transfer PK, indexes....
>
> "Taras Tim Bredel" <ttb@.jtj.dk> wrote in message
> news:uDfvRjJ8DHA.2796@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
db),
> Restore?
> and
>

KB928365 and 'Internal .Net Framework Data Provider error 6' issue with .NET 2.0 on data

Hello,
I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
happening after we have applied KB928365
(http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003) and
databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
and Service Packs.
Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but
it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
option for us considering the security concerns involved.
I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case, it
is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
special attention to the case.
I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET and/or
SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
I thank you in advance.
Carlos Mendona
I'm posting the stack trace we've captured. Please reply below if you have
captured something different.
System.InvalidOperationException: Internal .Net Framework Data Provider
error 6.
at System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.CreateOb ject(DbConnection
owningObject)
at
System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.UserCrea teRequest(DbConnection
owningObject)
at System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.GetConne ction(DbConnection
owningObject)
at
System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionFactory.GetCo nnection(DbConnection
owningConnection)
at
System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionClosed.OpenCo nnection(DbConnection
outerConnection, DbConnectionFactory connectionFactory)
at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.Open()
at (..) <-- our propetary code begins here
The error code comes from the System.Data.Common.ADP.InternalErrorCode
enumerator (value NewObjectCannotBePooled = 6).
Unfortunately, this problem still has no solution and Microsoft is yet to
disclose some information regarding this issue. Up until now, as far as I
know, they haven't acknowledged nor identified the error.
Carlos
"Carlos Mendona" <carlos.mendonca@.locaweb.com.br> wrote in message
news:%23vZY99r3HHA.4880@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
> with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> happening after we have applied KB928365
> (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
> in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
> Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003)
and
> databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
> and Service Packs.
> Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
> we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet',
but
> it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case,
it
> is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> special attention to the case.
> I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET
and/or
> SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> I thank you in advance.
> Carlos Mendona
>
|||Hello Carlos,
Can you post the connection string being used? Please sanitize it for userID
and password, of course.
Thanks,
Kent Tegels
http://staff.develop.com/ktegels/
|||Looks like MS issued a hot fix for this on the 9th.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
"Carlos Mendon?a" wrote:

> Hello,
> I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
> with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> happening after we have applied KB928365
> (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
> in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
> Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003) and
> databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
> and Service Packs.
> Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
> we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but
> it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case, it
> is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> special attention to the case.
> I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET and/or
> SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> I thank you in advance.
> Carlos Mendon?a
>
>
|||Great news! I will ask for some testing and post the results later.
Thanks a lot,
Carlos
"Mark" <Mark@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:93BE8F7C-A008-4096-A570-4264AAAF7B83@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Looks like MS issued a hot fix for this on the 9th.
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
>
> "Carlos Mendona" wrote:
issues[vbcol=seagreen]
once[vbcol=seagreen]
..Net[vbcol=seagreen]
and[vbcol=seagreen]
Updates[vbcol=seagreen]
issue,[vbcol=seagreen]
but[vbcol=seagreen]
it[vbcol=seagreen]
and/or[vbcol=seagreen]
|||The fix is not publically available. You have to get it from MS directly.
-Hank
In article <#VFla#qMIHA.4228@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>, "Carlos Mendona"
<carlos.mendonca@.locaweb.com.br> wrote:
>Great news! I will ask for some testing and post the results later.
>Thanks a lot,
>Carlos
>"Mark" <Mark@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>news:93BE8F7C-A008-4096-A570-4264AAAF7B83@.microsoft.com...
>issues
>once
>..Net
>and
>Updates
>issue,
>but
>it
>and/or
>
|||Did anyone already receive and test this hotfix ?
I also noticed the kb944099 is talking about version 2.0.50727.948 of
system.data.dll
Today I received Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 SP1 on Windows update, this
Service pack contains version 2.0.50727.1433 of system.dat.dll and is
superseding KB928365. So this sould also fix this problem.
Anyone already tried 1 of this solutions ?
Kind regrards
Tom
"Mark" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Looks like MS issued a hot fix for this on the 9th.
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
>
> "Carlos Mendon?a" wrote:
|||We did and we confirm it does work. MS indeed solved the problem.
Regards,
Carlos Mendona
"treg" <treg@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:61E93D99-B384-43CB-BCD2-1BF49895AD1D@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Did anyone already receive and test this hotfix ?
> I also noticed the kb944099 is talking about version 2.0.50727.948 of
> system.data.dll
> Today I received Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 SP1 on Windows update, this
> Service pack contains version 2.0.50727.1433 of system.dat.dll and is
> superseding KB928365. So this sould also fix this problem.
> Anyone already tried 1 of this solutions ?
> Kind regrards
> Tom
>
> "Mark" wrote:
issues[vbcol=seagreen]
once[vbcol=seagreen]
..Net[vbcol=seagreen]
2003) and[vbcol=seagreen]
Updates[vbcol=seagreen]
issue,[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but[vbcol=seagreen]
..NET[vbcol=seagreen]
be[vbcol=seagreen]
case, it[vbcol=seagreen]
and/or[vbcol=seagreen]
hint.[vbcol=seagreen]
|||We are still seeing this intermittently. The web server reporting the error,
along with the live and mirror database servers, all have .NET 2.0 SP1,
System.Data.dll version 2.0.507272.1433. KB944099 talks of a hotfix version
2.0.507272.948 and I would assume that SP1 includes this fix, but it appears
not to have fixed the problem in our case.
Any suggestions?
|||We raised this with MS PSS. They confirmed it was not fixed in SP1 and they
gave us the hotfix, which appears to have fixed it.

KB928365 and 'Internal .Net Framework Data Provider error 6' issue with .NET 2.0 on data

Hello,
I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
happening after we have applied KB928365
(http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003) and
databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
and Service Packs.
Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but
it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
option for us considering the security concerns involved.
I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case, it
is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
special attention to the case.
I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET and/or
SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
I thank you in advance.
Carlos Mendona
I'm posting the stack trace we've captured. Please reply below if you have
captured something different.
System.InvalidOperationException: Internal .Net Framework Data Provider
error 6.
at System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.CreateOb ject(DbConnection
owningObject)
at
System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.UserCrea teRequest(DbConnection
owningObject)
at System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.GetConne ction(DbConnection
owningObject)
at
System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionFactory.GetCo nnection(DbConnection
owningConnection)
at
System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionClosed.OpenCo nnection(DbConnection
outerConnection, DbConnectionFactory connectionFactory)
at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.Open()
at (..) <-- our propetary code begins here
The error code comes from the System.Data.Common.ADP.InternalErrorCode
enumerator (value NewObjectCannotBePooled = 6).
Unfortunately, this problem still has no solution and Microsoft is yet to
disclose some information regarding this issue. Up until now, as far as I
know, they haven't acknowledged nor identified the error.
Carlos
"Carlos Mendona" <carlos.mendonca@.locaweb.com.br> wrote in message
news:%23vZY99r3HHA.4880@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
> with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> happening after we have applied KB928365
> (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
> in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
> Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003)
and
> databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
> and Service Packs.
> Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
> we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet',
but
> it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case,
it
> is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> special attention to the case.
> I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET
and/or
> SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> I thank you in advance.
> Carlos Mendona
>
|||Hello Carlos,
Can you post the connection string being used? Please sanitize it for userID
and password, of course.
Thanks,
Kent Tegels
http://staff.develop.com/ktegels/
|||Looks like MS issued a hot fix for this on the 9th.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
"Carlos Mendon?a" wrote:

> Hello,
> I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
> with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> happening after we have applied KB928365
> (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
> in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
> Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003) and
> databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
> and Service Packs.
> Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
> we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but
> it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case, it
> is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> special attention to the case.
> I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET and/or
> SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> I thank you in advance.
> Carlos Mendon?a
>
>
|||Great news! I will ask for some testing and post the results later.
Thanks a lot,
Carlos
"Mark" <Mark@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:93BE8F7C-A008-4096-A570-4264AAAF7B83@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Looks like MS issued a hot fix for this on the 9th.
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
>
> "Carlos Mendona" wrote:
issues[vbcol=seagreen]
once[vbcol=seagreen]
..Net[vbcol=seagreen]
and[vbcol=seagreen]
Updates[vbcol=seagreen]
issue,[vbcol=seagreen]
but[vbcol=seagreen]
it[vbcol=seagreen]
and/or[vbcol=seagreen]
|||The fix is not publically available. You have to get it from MS directly.
-Hank
In article <#VFla#qMIHA.4228@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>, "Carlos Mendona"
<carlos.mendonca@.locaweb.com.br> wrote:
>Great news! I will ask for some testing and post the results later.
>Thanks a lot,
>Carlos
>"Mark" <Mark@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>news:93BE8F7C-A008-4096-A570-4264AAAF7B83@.microsoft.com...
>issues
>once
>..Net
>and
>Updates
>issue,
>but
>it
>and/or
>
|||Did anyone already receive and test this hotfix ?
I also noticed the kb944099 is talking about version 2.0.50727.948 of
system.data.dll
Today I received Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 SP1 on Windows update, this
Service pack contains version 2.0.50727.1433 of system.dat.dll and is
superseding KB928365. So this sould also fix this problem.
Anyone already tried 1 of this solutions ?
Kind regrards
Tom
"Mark" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Looks like MS issued a hot fix for this on the 9th.
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
>
> "Carlos Mendon?a" wrote:
|||We did and we confirm it does work. MS indeed solved the problem.
Regards,
Carlos Mendona
"treg" <treg@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:61E93D99-B384-43CB-BCD2-1BF49895AD1D@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Did anyone already receive and test this hotfix ?
> I also noticed the kb944099 is talking about version 2.0.50727.948 of
> system.data.dll
> Today I received Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 SP1 on Windows update, this
> Service pack contains version 2.0.50727.1433 of system.dat.dll and is
> superseding KB928365. So this sould also fix this problem.
> Anyone already tried 1 of this solutions ?
> Kind regrards
> Tom
>
> "Mark" wrote:
issues[vbcol=seagreen]
once[vbcol=seagreen]
..Net[vbcol=seagreen]
2003) and[vbcol=seagreen]
Updates[vbcol=seagreen]
issue,[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but[vbcol=seagreen]
..NET[vbcol=seagreen]
be[vbcol=seagreen]
case, it[vbcol=seagreen]
and/or[vbcol=seagreen]
hint.[vbcol=seagreen]

KB928365 and 'Internal .Net Framework Data Provider error 6' issue with .NET 2.0 on data

Hello,
I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
happening after we have applied KB928365
(http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003) and
databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
and Service Packs.
Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but
it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
option for us considering the security concerns involved.
I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case, it
is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
special attention to the case.
I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET and/or
SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
I thank you in advance.
Carlos Mendona
I'm posting the stack trace we've captured. Please reply below if you have
captured something different.
System.InvalidOperationException: Internal .Net Framework Data Provider
error 6.
at System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.CreateOb ject(DbConnection
owningObject)
at
System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.UserCrea teRequest(DbConnection
owningObject)
at System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.GetConne ction(DbConnection
owningObject)
at
System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionFactory.GetCo nnection(DbConnection
owningConnection)
at
System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionClosed.OpenCo nnection(DbConnection
outerConnection, DbConnectionFactory connectionFactory)
at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.Open()
at (..) <-- our propetary code begins here
The error code comes from the System.Data.Common.ADP.InternalErrorCode
enumerator (value NewObjectCannotBePooled = 6).
Unfortunately, this problem still has no solution and Microsoft is yet to
disclose some information regarding this issue. Up until now, as far as I
know, they haven't acknowledged nor identified the error.
Carlos
"Carlos Mendona" <carlos.mendonca@.locaweb.com.br> wrote in message
news:%23vZY99r3HHA.4880@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
> with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> happening after we have applied KB928365
> (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
> in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
> Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003)
and
> databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
> and Service Packs.
> Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
> we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet',
but
> it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case,
it
> is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> special attention to the case.
> I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET
and/or
> SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> I thank you in advance.
> Carlos Mendona
>
|||Hello Carlos,
Can you post the connection string being used? Please sanitize it for userID
and password, of course.
Thanks,
Kent Tegels
http://staff.develop.com/ktegels/
|||Looks like MS issued a hot fix for this on the 9th.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
"Carlos Mendon?a" wrote:

> Hello,
> I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
> with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> happening after we have applied KB928365
> (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
> in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
> Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003) and
> databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
> and Service Packs.
> Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
> we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but
> it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case, it
> is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> special attention to the case.
> I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET and/or
> SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> I thank you in advance.
> Carlos Mendon?a
>
>
|||Great news! I will ask for some testing and post the results later.
Thanks a lot,
Carlos
"Mark" <Mark@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:93BE8F7C-A008-4096-A570-4264AAAF7B83@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Looks like MS issued a hot fix for this on the 9th.
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
>
> "Carlos Mendona" wrote:
issues[vbcol=seagreen]
once[vbcol=seagreen]
..Net[vbcol=seagreen]
and[vbcol=seagreen]
Updates[vbcol=seagreen]
issue,[vbcol=seagreen]
but[vbcol=seagreen]
it[vbcol=seagreen]
and/or[vbcol=seagreen]
|||The fix is not publically available. You have to get it from MS directly.
-Hank
In article <#VFla#qMIHA.4228@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>, "Carlos Mendona"
<carlos.mendonca@.locaweb.com.br> wrote:
>Great news! I will ask for some testing and post the results later.
>Thanks a lot,
>Carlos
>"Mark" <Mark@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>news:93BE8F7C-A008-4096-A570-4264AAAF7B83@.microsoft.com...
>issues
>once
>..Net
>and
>Updates
>issue,
>but
>it
>and/or
>
|||Did anyone already receive and test this hotfix ?
I also noticed the kb944099 is talking about version 2.0.50727.948 of
system.data.dll
Today I received Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 SP1 on Windows update, this
Service pack contains version 2.0.50727.1433 of system.dat.dll and is
superseding KB928365. So this sould also fix this problem.
Anyone already tried 1 of this solutions ?
Kind regrards
Tom
"Mark" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Looks like MS issued a hot fix for this on the 9th.
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
>
> "Carlos Mendon?a" wrote:
|||We did and we confirm it does work. MS indeed solved the problem.
Regards,
Carlos Mendona
"treg" <treg@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:61E93D99-B384-43CB-BCD2-1BF49895AD1D@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Did anyone already receive and test this hotfix ?
> I also noticed the kb944099 is talking about version 2.0.50727.948 of
> system.data.dll
> Today I received Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 SP1 on Windows update, this
> Service pack contains version 2.0.50727.1433 of system.dat.dll and is
> superseding KB928365. So this sould also fix this problem.
> Anyone already tried 1 of this solutions ?
> Kind regrards
> Tom
>
> "Mark" wrote:
issues[vbcol=seagreen]
once[vbcol=seagreen]
..Net[vbcol=seagreen]
2003) and[vbcol=seagreen]
Updates[vbcol=seagreen]
issue,[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but[vbcol=seagreen]
..NET[vbcol=seagreen]
be[vbcol=seagreen]
case, it[vbcol=seagreen]
and/or[vbcol=seagreen]
hint.[vbcol=seagreen]

KB928365 and 'Internal .Net Framework Data Provider error 6' issue with .NET 2.0 on data

Hello,
I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
happening after we have applied KB928365
(http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003) and
databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
and Service Packs.
Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but
it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
option for us considering the security concerns involved.
I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case, it
is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
special attention to the case.
I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET and/or
SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
I thank you in advance.
Carlos MendonçaThis probably occurred a while back for you. Were you able to see any
resolution? I am seeing the same symptoms as you.
Thank you.
Kevin Burton
"Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> Hello,
> I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
> with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> happening after we have applied KB928365
> (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
> in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
> Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003) and
> databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
> and Service Packs.
> Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
> we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but
> it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case, it
> is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> special attention to the case.
> I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET and/or
> SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> I thank you in advance.
> Carlos Mendonça
>
>|||--
Ian H
"Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> Hello,
> I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
> with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> happening after we have applied KB928365
> (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
> in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
> Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003) and
> databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
> and Service Packs.
> Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
> we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but
> it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case, it
> is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> special attention to the case.
> I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET and/or
> SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> I thank you in advance.
> Carlos Mendonça
>
>
Hi Carlos,
I am experiencing this very same problem. Have you had any luck working out
what it is?
Thanks
Ian|||Unfortunately we have still not found any solution to the problem. One thing
I would suggest, though, would be to set up Counter Logs in the client, the
server and the database server to trace the following objects:
SQL Server: General Statistics Login/sec and Logout/sec
SQL Server: General Statistics User Connections
.NET CLR Data : SqlClient: Current # of pooled and non pooled connections
.NET CLR Data : SqlClient: Current # pooled connections
.NET CLR Data : SqlClient: Current # connection pools
.NET CLR Data : SqlClient: Peak # pooled connections
.NET CLR Data : SqlClient: Total # failed connects
The reason for this is that if you analyze the stack trace of the exception,
you will see that it is being raised in the CreateObject method right after
it checks whether the connection can be pooled (use a disassembler such as
Reflector to open the
System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.CreateObject() method @.
System.Data.dll). In other words, the KB928365 *MAY* have changed number of
default pools or the way they are allocated or whatever and by tracing them,
it may be possible to see if fine tuning the connection string could solve
the problem we're experiencing.
Of course, Microsoft could always shed a light on this issue since more and
more people are finding out about it...
Yours,
Carlos Mendonça
"Ian Hannah" <IanHannah@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:35DF7C2A-62F9-489E-8470-10CD3A8E60A1@.microsoft.com...
> --
> Ian H
>
> "Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing
issues
> > with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> > Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> > happening after we have applied KB928365
> > (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> >
> > The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every
once
> > in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal
.Net
> > Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003)
and
> > databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security
Updates
> > and Service Packs.
> >
> > Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the
issue,
> > we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> > exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> > problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet',
but
> > it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> > option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> >
> > I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> > team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> > some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case,
it
> > is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> > special attention to the case.
> >
> > I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET
and/or
> > SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> >
> > I thank you in advance.
> >
> > Carlos Mendonça
> >
> >
> >
> Hi Carlos,
> I am experiencing this very same problem. Have you had any luck working
out
> what it is?
> Thanks
> Ian|||We have been experiencing the exact same issue and currently have an open
support ticket with Microsoft to try and resolve the problem.
Interestingly, if you check the application event logs on the failover sql
server you should see an event like this (at the exact time of the .Net error
6):
Event Type: Failure Audit
Event Source: MSSQLSERVER
Event Category: (4)
Event ID: 18456
Date: 4/09/2007
Time: 1:59:39 PM
The event log entry also reports the client IP address and the username that
tried to connect but for security reasons I'm not including that information
here.
We have 4 installations that use database mirroring and all of them are
experiencing this issue. I don't believe we have installed KB928365 due to
strict testing policy on windows updates prior to rollout on production
servers.
Jason.
"Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> Hello,
> I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
> with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> happening after we have applied KB928365
> (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
> in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
> Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003) and
> databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
> and Service Packs.
> Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
> we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but
> it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case, it
> is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> special attention to the case.
> I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET and/or
> SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> I thank you in advance.
> Carlos Mendonça
>
>|||Dear Jason,
We too confirm that the event is being reported in the Application log in
the exact same way you saw it. It doesn't say much more regarding the
problem, though. What has been Microsoft's position regarding this issue so
far? Has there been any progress whatsoever in the ticket you have opened?
Thanks,
Carlos Mendonça
"Jason Coombes" <Jason Coombes@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:93115343-E17E-452B-982A-78DC4EDC353D@.microsoft.com...
> We have been experiencing the exact same issue and currently have an open
> support ticket with Microsoft to try and resolve the problem.
> Interestingly, if you check the application event logs on the failover sql
> server you should see an event like this (at the exact time of the .Net
error
> 6):
> Event Type: Failure Audit
> Event Source: MSSQLSERVER
> Event Category: (4)
> Event ID: 18456
> Date: 4/09/2007
> Time: 1:59:39 PM
> The event log entry also reports the client IP address and the username
that
> tried to connect but for security reasons I'm not including that
information
> here.
> We have 4 installations that use database mirroring and all of them are
> experiencing this issue. I don't believe we have installed KB928365 due
to
> strict testing policy on windows updates prior to rollout on production
> servers.
> Jason.
> "Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing
issues
> > with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> > Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> > happening after we have applied KB928365
> > (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> >
> > The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every
once
> > in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal
.Net
> > Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003)
and
> > databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security
Updates
> > and Service Packs.
> >
> > Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the
issue,
> > we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> > exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> > problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet',
but
> > it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> > option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> >
> > I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> > team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> > some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case,
it
> > is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> > special attention to the case.
> >
> > I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET
and/or
> > SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> >
> > I thank you in advance.
> >
> > Carlos Mendonça
> >
> >
> >|||Hi Carlos,
The person handling the support ticket has been in daily contact with me
(experience of MS tech support has been excellent) but nothing to report so
far. I did find an application which had accidentally been configured so
that the 2nd server was being connected to first instead of as a failover.
This has made it harder for me to prove my case but now that has been
resolved connections are still hitting the 2nd db server.
Am expecting another call back tomorrow when we will review the logs again
and see if any further connections have been rejected.
Jason.
"Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> Dear Jason,
> We too confirm that the event is being reported in the Application log in
> the exact same way you saw it. It doesn't say much more regarding the
> problem, though. What has been Microsoft's position regarding this issue so
> far? Has there been any progress whatsoever in the ticket you have opened?
> Thanks,
> Carlos Mendonça
> "Jason Coombes" <Jason Coombes@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:93115343-E17E-452B-982A-78DC4EDC353D@.microsoft.com...
> > We have been experiencing the exact same issue and currently have an open
> > support ticket with Microsoft to try and resolve the problem.
> >
> > Interestingly, if you check the application event logs on the failover sql
> > server you should see an event like this (at the exact time of the .Net
> error
> > 6):
> >
> > Event Type: Failure Audit
> > Event Source: MSSQLSERVER
> > Event Category: (4)
> > Event ID: 18456
> > Date: 4/09/2007
> > Time: 1:59:39 PM
> >
> > The event log entry also reports the client IP address and the username
> that
> > tried to connect but for security reasons I'm not including that
> information
> > here.
> >
> > We have 4 installations that use database mirroring and all of them are
> > experiencing this issue. I don't believe we have installed KB928365 due
> to
> > strict testing policy on windows updates prior to rollout on production
> > servers.
> >
> > Jason.
> >
> > "Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing
> issues
> > > with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> > > Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> > > happening after we have applied KB928365
> > > (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> > >
> > > The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every
> once
> > > in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal
> ..Net
> > > Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003)
> and
> > > databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security
> Updates
> > > and Service Packs.
> > >
> > > Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the
> issue,
> > > we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> > > exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> > > problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet',
> but
> > > it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> > > option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> > >
> > > I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> > > team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> > > some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case,
> it
> > > is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> > > special attention to the case.
> > >
> > > I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET
> and/or
> > > SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> > >
> > > I thank you in advance.
> > >
> > > Carlos Mendonça
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>|||We are also experiencing the exact same issue. Please let us know the
resolution. Many Many thanks...!
Cheers
Andy
"Jason Coombes" wrote:
> Hi Carlos,
> The person handling the support ticket has been in daily contact with me
> (experience of MS tech support has been excellent) but nothing to report so
> far. I did find an application which had accidentally been configured so
> that the 2nd server was being connected to first instead of as a failover.
> This has made it harder for me to prove my case but now that has been
> resolved connections are still hitting the 2nd db server.
> Am expecting another call back tomorrow when we will review the logs again
> and see if any further connections have been rejected.
> Jason.
> "Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> > Dear Jason,
> >
> > We too confirm that the event is being reported in the Application log in
> > the exact same way you saw it. It doesn't say much more regarding the
> > problem, though. What has been Microsoft's position regarding this issue so
> > far? Has there been any progress whatsoever in the ticket you have opened?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Carlos Mendonça
> >
> > "Jason Coombes" <Jason Coombes@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:93115343-E17E-452B-982A-78DC4EDC353D@.microsoft.com...
> > > We have been experiencing the exact same issue and currently have an open
> > > support ticket with Microsoft to try and resolve the problem.
> > >
> > > Interestingly, if you check the application event logs on the failover sql
> > > server you should see an event like this (at the exact time of the .Net
> > error
> > > 6):
> > >
> > > Event Type: Failure Audit
> > > Event Source: MSSQLSERVER
> > > Event Category: (4)
> > > Event ID: 18456
> > > Date: 4/09/2007
> > > Time: 1:59:39 PM
> > >
> > > The event log entry also reports the client IP address and the username
> > that
> > > tried to connect but for security reasons I'm not including that
> > information
> > > here.
> > >
> > > We have 4 installations that use database mirroring and all of them are
> > > experiencing this issue. I don't believe we have installed KB928365 due
> > to
> > > strict testing policy on windows updates prior to rollout on production
> > > servers.
> > >
> > > Jason.
> > >
> > > "Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing
> > issues
> > > > with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> > > > Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> > > > happening after we have applied KB928365
> > > > (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> > > >
> > > > The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every
> > once
> > > > in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal
> > ..Net
> > > > Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003)
> > and
> > > > databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security
> > Updates
> > > > and Service Packs.
> > > >
> > > > Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the
> > issue,
> > > > we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> > > > exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> > > > problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet',
> > but
> > > > it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> > > > option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> > > >
> > > > I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> > > > team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> > > > some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case,
> > it
> > > > is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> > > > special attention to the case.
> > > >
> > > > I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET
> > and/or
> > > > SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> > > >
> > > > I thank you in advance.
> > > >
> > > > Carlos Mendonça
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >|||On Oct 5, 11:39 am, Andy <A...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> We are also experiencing the exact same issue. Please let us know the
> resolution. Many Many thanks...!
> Cheers
> Andy
> "Jason Coombes" wrote:
> > Hi Carlos,
> > The person handling the support ticket has been in daily contact with me
> > (experience of MS tech support has been excellent) but nothing to repor=t so
> > far. I did find an application which had accidentally been configured =so
> > that the 2nd server was being connected to first instead of as a failov=er.
> > This has made it harder for me to prove my case but now that has been
> > resolved connections are still hitting the 2nd db server.
> > Am expecting another call back tomorrow when we will review the logs ag=ain
> > and see if any further connections have been rejected.
> > Jason.
> > "Carlos Mendon=E7a" wrote:
> > > Dear Jason,
> > > We too confirm that the event is being reported in the Application lo=g in
> > > the exact same way you saw it. It doesn't say much more regarding the
> > > problem, though. What has been Microsoft's position regarding this is=sue so
> > > far? Has there been any progress whatsoever in the ticket you have op=ened?
> > > Thanks,
> > > Carlos Mendon=E7a
> > > "Jason Coombes" <Jason Coom...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in me=ssage
> > >news:93115343-E17E-452B-982A-78DC4EDC353D@.microsoft.com...
> > > > We have been experiencing the exact same issue and currently have a=n open
> > > > support ticket with Microsoft to try and resolve the problem.
> > > > Interestingly, if you check the application event logs on the failo=ver sql
> > > > server you should see an event like this (at the exact time of the =.Net
> > > error
> > > > 6):
> > > > Event Type: Failure Audit
> > > > Event Source: MSSQLSERVER
> > > > Event Category: (4)
> > > > Event ID: 18456
> > > > Date: 4/09/2007
> > > > Time: 1:59:39 PM
> > > > The event log entry also reports the client IP address and the user=name
> > > that
> > > > tried to connect but for security reasons I'm not including that
> > > information
> > > > here.
> > > > We have 4 installations that use database mirroring and all of them= are
> > > > experiencing this issue. I don't believe we have installed KB92836=5 due
> > > to
> > > > strict testing policy on windows updates prior to rollout on produc=tion
> > > > servers.
> > > > Jason.
> > > > "Carlos Mendon=E7a" wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > > I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experienci=ng
> > > issues
> > > > > with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect t=o SQL
> > > > > Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues start=ed
> > > > > happening after we have applied KB928365
> > > > > (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> > > > > The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown e=very
> > > once
> > > > > in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Inte=rnal
> > > ..Net
> > > > > Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows= 2003)
> > > and
> > > > > databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security
> > > Updates
> > > > > and Service Packs.
> > > > > Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce t=he
> > > issue,
> > > > > we have identified people with similar problems while searching f=or the
> > > > > exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the =same
> > > > > problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.a=donet',
> > > but
> > > > > it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is n=ot an
> > > > > option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> > > > > I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from t=he .NET
> > > > > team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could =also be
> > > > > some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In eithe=r case,
> > > it
> > > > > is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we shoul=d pay
> > > > > special attention to the case.
> > > > > I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .=NET
> > > and/or
> > > > > SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me =a hint.
> > > > > I thank you in advance.
> > > > > Carlos Mendon=E7a
I had the same issue, and found a fix for it. In my case i was running
the app on the same server as the principal database. Application
referenced to itself via hostname and caused an issue, unless you
specify an IP of machine instead, and/or move the app to a completely
different server.|||That's not our case. Thanks for the tip, though.
Carlos Mendonça
<alexey.volochenko@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1192551324.006100.106030@.e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 5, 11:39 am, Andy <A...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> We are also experiencing the exact same issue. Please let us know the
> resolution. Many Many thanks...!
> Cheers
> Andy
> "Jason Coombes" wrote:
> > Hi Carlos,
> > The person handling the support ticket has been in daily contact with me
> > (experience of MS tech support has been excellent) but nothing to report
so
> > far. I did find an application which had accidentally been configured
so
> > that the 2nd server was being connected to first instead of as a
failover.
> > This has made it harder for me to prove my case but now that has been
> > resolved connections are still hitting the 2nd db server.
> > Am expecting another call back tomorrow when we will review the logs
again
> > and see if any further connections have been rejected.
> > Jason.
> > "Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> > > Dear Jason,
> > > We too confirm that the event is being reported in the Application log
in
> > > the exact same way you saw it. It doesn't say much more regarding the
> > > problem, though. What has been Microsoft's position regarding this
issue so
> > > far? Has there been any progress whatsoever in the ticket you have
opened?
> > > Thanks,
> > > Carlos Mendonça
> > > "Jason Coombes" <Jason Coom...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
> > >news:93115343-E17E-452B-982A-78DC4EDC353D@.microsoft.com...
> > > > We have been experiencing the exact same issue and currently have an
open
> > > > support ticket with Microsoft to try and resolve the problem.
> > > > Interestingly, if you check the application event logs on the
failover sql
> > > > server you should see an event like this (at the exact time of the
.Net
> > > error
> > > > 6):
> > > > Event Type: Failure Audit
> > > > Event Source: MSSQLSERVER
> > > > Event Category: (4)
> > > > Event ID: 18456
> > > > Date: 4/09/2007
> > > > Time: 1:59:39 PM
> > > > The event log entry also reports the client IP address and the
username
> > > that
> > > > tried to connect but for security reasons I'm not including that
> > > information
> > > > here.
> > > > We have 4 installations that use database mirroring and all of them
are
> > > > experiencing this issue. I don't believe we have installed KB928365
due
> > > to
> > > > strict testing policy on windows updates prior to rollout on
production
> > > > servers.
> > > > Jason.
> > > > "Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > > I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been
experiencing
> > > issues
> > > > > with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to
SQL
> > > > > Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues
started
> > > > > happening after we have applied KB928365
> > > > > (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> > > > > The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown
every
> > > once
> > > > > in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is
'Internal
> > > ..Net
> > > > > Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows
2003)
> > > and
> > > > > databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security
> > > Updates
> > > > > and Service Packs.
> > > > > Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce
the
> > > issue,
> > > > > we have identified people with similar problems while searching
for the
> > > > > exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the
same
> > > > > problem has been reported at
'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet',
> > > but
> > > > > it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is
not an
> > > > > option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> > > > > I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from
the .NET
> > > > > team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could
also be
> > > > > some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either
case,
> > > it
> > > > > is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should
pay
> > > > > special attention to the case.
> > > > > I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the
.NET
> > > and/or
> > > > > SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a
hint.
> > > > > I thank you in advance.
> > > > > Carlos Mendonça
I had the same issue, and found a fix for it. In my case i was running
the app on the same server as the principal database. Application
referenced to itself via hostname and caused an issue, unless you
specify an IP of machine instead, and/or move the app to a completely
different server.|||Our app server and database servers are on different boxes. We do have the
failover setup on the database though.
Anyone has the solution?
"alexey.volochenko@.gmail.com" wrote:
> On Oct 5, 11:39 am, Andy <A...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > We are also experiencing the exact same issue. Please let us know the
> > resolution. Many Many thanks...!
> >
> > Cheers
> > Andy
> >
> > "Jason Coombes" wrote:
> > > Hi Carlos,
> >
> > > The person handling the support ticket has been in daily contact with me
> > > (experience of MS tech support has been excellent) but nothing to report so
> > > far. I did find an application which had accidentally been configured so
> > > that the 2nd server was being connected to first instead of as a failover.
> > > This has made it harder for me to prove my case but now that has been
> > > resolved connections are still hitting the 2nd db server.
> >
> > > Am expecting another call back tomorrow when we will review the logs again
> > > and see if any further connections have been rejected.
> >
> > > Jason.
> >
> > > "Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> >
> > > > Dear Jason,
> >
> > > > We too confirm that the event is being reported in the Application log in
> > > > the exact same way you saw it. It doesn't say much more regarding the
> > > > problem, though. What has been Microsoft's position regarding this issue so
> > > > far? Has there been any progress whatsoever in the ticket you have opened?
> >
> > > > Thanks,
> >
> > > > Carlos Mendonça
> >
> > > > "Jason Coombes" <Jason Coom...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > > >news:93115343-E17E-452B-982A-78DC4EDC353D@.microsoft.com...
> > > > > We have been experiencing the exact same issue and currently have an open
> > > > > support ticket with Microsoft to try and resolve the problem.
> >
> > > > > Interestingly, if you check the application event logs on the failover sql
> > > > > server you should see an event like this (at the exact time of the ..Net
> > > > error
> > > > > 6):
> >
> > > > > Event Type: Failure Audit
> > > > > Event Source: MSSQLSERVER
> > > > > Event Category: (4)
> > > > > Event ID: 18456
> > > > > Date: 4/09/2007
> > > > > Time: 1:59:39 PM
> >
> > > > > The event log entry also reports the client IP address and the username
> > > > that
> > > > > tried to connect but for security reasons I'm not including that
> > > > information
> > > > > here.
> >
> > > > > We have 4 installations that use database mirroring and all of them are
> > > > > experiencing this issue. I don't believe we have installed KB928365 due
> > > > to
> > > > > strict testing policy on windows updates prior to rollout on production
> > > > > servers.
> >
> > > > > Jason.
> >
> > > > > "Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> >
> > > > > > Hello,
> >
> > > > > > I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing
> > > > issues
> > > > > > with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> > > > > > Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> > > > > > happening after we have applied KB928365
> > > > > > (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> >
> > > > > > The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every
> > > > once
> > > > > > in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal
> > > > ..Net
> > > > > > Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003)
> > > > and
> > > > > > databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security
> > > > Updates
> > > > > > and Service Packs.
> >
> > > > > > Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the
> > > > issue,
> > > > > > we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> > > > > > exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> > > > > > problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet',
> > > > but
> > > > > > it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> > > > > > option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> >
> > > > > > I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> > > > > > team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> > > > > > some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case,
> > > > it
> > > > > > is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> > > > > > special attention to the case.
> >
> > > > > > I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET
> > > > and/or
> > > > > > SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> >
> > > > > > I thank you in advance.
> >
> > > > > > Carlos Mendonça
> I had the same issue, and found a fix for it. In my case i was running
> the app on the same server as the principal database. Application
> referenced to itself via hostname and caused an issue, unless you
> specify an IP of machine instead, and/or move the app to a completely
> different server.
>|||I'm posting the stack trace we've captured. Please reply below if you have
captured something different.
System.InvalidOperationException: Internal .Net Framework Data Provider
error 6.
at System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.CreateObject(DbConnection
owningObject)
at
System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.UserCreateRequest(DbConnection
owningObject)
at System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.GetConnection(DbConnection
owningObject)
at
System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionFactory.GetConnection(DbConnection
owningConnection)
at
System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionClosed.OpenConnection(DbConnection
outerConnection, DbConnectionFactory connectionFactory)
at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.Open()
at (..) <-- our propetary code begins here
The error code comes from the System.Data.Common.ADP.InternalErrorCode
enumerator (value NewObjectCannotBePooled = 6).
Unfortunately, this problem still has no solution and Microsoft is yet to
disclose some information regarding this issue. Up until now, as far as I
know, they haven't acknowledged nor identified the error.
Carlos
"Carlos Mendonça" <carlos.mendonca@.locaweb.com.br> wrote in message
news:%23vZY99r3HHA.4880@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
> with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> happening after we have applied KB928365
> (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
> in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
> Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003)
and
> databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
> and Service Packs.
> Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
> we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet',
but
> it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case,
it
> is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> special attention to the case.
> I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET
and/or
> SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> I thank you in advance.
> Carlos Mendonça
>|||Looks like MS issued a hot fix for this on the 9th.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
"Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> Hello,
> I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
> with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> happening after we have applied KB928365
> (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
> in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
> Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003) and
> databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
> and Service Packs.
> Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
> we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but
> it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case, it
> is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> special attention to the case.
> I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET and/or
> SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> I thank you in advance.
> Carlos Mendonça
>
>|||Great news! I will ask for some testing and post the results later.
Thanks a lot,
Carlos
"Mark" <Mark@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:93BE8F7C-A008-4096-A570-4264AAAF7B83@.microsoft.com...
> Looks like MS issued a hot fix for this on the 9th.
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
>
> "Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing
issues
> > with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> > Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> > happening after we have applied KB928365
> > (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> >
> > The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every
once
> > in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal
.Net
> > Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003)
and
> > databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security
Updates
> > and Service Packs.
> >
> > Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the
issue,
> > we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> > exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> > problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet',
but
> > it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> > option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> >
> > I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> > team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> > some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case,
it
> > is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> > special attention to the case.
> >
> > I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET
and/or
> > SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> >
> > I thank you in advance.
> >
> > Carlos Mendonça
> >
> >
> >|||The fix is not publically available. You have to get it from MS directly.
-Hank
In article <#VFla#qMIHA.4228@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>, "Carlos Mendonça"
<carlos.mendonca@.locaweb.com.br> wrote:
>Great news! I will ask for some testing and post the results later.
>Thanks a lot,
>Carlos
>"Mark" <Mark@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>news:93BE8F7C-A008-4096-A570-4264AAAF7B83@.microsoft.com...
>> Looks like MS issued a hot fix for this on the 9th.
>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
>>
>> "Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing
>issues
>> > with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
>> > Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
>> > happening after we have applied KB928365
>> > (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
>> >
>> > The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every
>once
>> > in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal
>..Net
>> > Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003)
>and
>> > databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security
>Updates
>> > and Service Packs.
>> >
>> > Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the
>issue,
>> > we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
>> > exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
>> > problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet',
>but
>> > it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
>> > option for us considering the security concerns involved.
>> >
>> > I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
>> > team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
>> > some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case,
>it
>> > is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
>> > special attention to the case.
>> >
>> > I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET
>and/or
>> > SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
>> >
>> > I thank you in advance.
>> >
>> > Carlos Mendonça
>> >
>> >
>> >
>|||Did anyone already receive and test this hotfix ?
I also noticed the kb944099 is talking about version 2.0.50727.948 of
system.data.dll
Today I received Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 SP1 on Windows update, this
Service pack contains version 2.0.50727.1433 of system.dat.dll and is
superseding KB928365. So this sould also fix this problem.
Anyone already tried 1 of this solutions ?
Kind regrards
Tom
"Mark" wrote:
> Looks like MS issued a hot fix for this on the 9th.
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
>
> "Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing issues
> > with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> > Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> > happening after we have applied KB928365
> > (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> >
> > The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every once
> > in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal .Net
> > Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows 2003) and
> > databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security Updates
> > and Service Packs.
> >
> > Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the issue,
> > we have identified people with similar problems while searching for the
> > exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> > problem has been reported at 'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but
> > it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> > option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> >
> > I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the .NET
> > team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also be
> > some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either case, it
> > is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> > special attention to the case.
> >
> > I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET and/or
> > SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a hint.
> >
> > I thank you in advance.
> >
> > Carlos Mendonça
> >
> >
> >|||We did and we confirm it does work. MS indeed solved the problem.
Regards,
Carlos Mendonça
"treg" <treg@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:61E93D99-B384-43CB-BCD2-1BF49895AD1D@.microsoft.com...
> Did anyone already receive and test this hotfix ?
> I also noticed the kb944099 is talking about version 2.0.50727.948 of
> system.data.dll
> Today I received Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 SP1 on Windows update, this
> Service pack contains version 2.0.50727.1433 of system.dat.dll and is
> superseding KB928365. So this sould also fix this problem.
> Anyone already tried 1 of this solutions ?
> Kind regrards
> Tom
>
> "Mark" wrote:
> > Looks like MS issued a hot fix for this on the 9th.
> >
> > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
> >
> >
> > "Carlos Mendonça" wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I work at a Hosting Company in Brazil and we have been experiencing
issues
> > > with managed applications using .NET Framework 2.0 that connect to SQL
> > > Server 2005 databases with a failover partner. These issues started
> > > happening after we have applied KB928365
> > > (http://support.microsoft.com/KB/928365).
> > >
> > > The issue is an System.InvalidOperationException that is thrown every
once
> > > in a while when connecting to the databases. The message is 'Internal
.Net
> > > Framework Data Provider error 6.'. Both Operating System (Windows
2003) and
> > > databases (SQL Server 2005) are up to date, including all Security
Updates
> > > and Service Packs.
> > >
> > > Although not many use failover partners to be able to reproduce the
issue,
> > > we have identified people with similar problems while searching for
the
> > > exception message in the major search engines. Additionally, the same
> > > problem has been reported at
'microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet', but
> > > it has been suggested that KB928365 should be removed, which is not an
> > > option for us considering the security concerns involved.
> > >
> > > I am posting in the newsgroups in hope of reaching someone from the
.NET
> > > team to report this issue. I think it may be a bug, but it could also
be
> > > some configuration requirement that KB928365 introduced. In either
case, it
> > > is an issue that affect big databases and I believe that we should pay
> > > special attention to the case.
> > >
> > > I am not familiar with the process of reporting an issue to the .NET
and/or
> > > SQL Server teams and I would appreciate if someone could give me a
hint.
> > >
> > > I thank you in advance.
> > >
> > > Carlos Mendonça
> > >
> > >
> > >|||We are still seeing this intermittently. The web server reporting the error,
along with the live and mirror database servers, all have .NET 2.0 SP1,
System.Data.dll version 2.0.507272.1433. KB944099 talks of a hotfix version
2.0.507272.948 and I would assume that SP1 includes this fix, but it appears
not to have fixed the problem in our case.
Any suggestions?|||We are seeing this problem almost once or twice per hour. We also have SP1
and of course could not install the hot fix as it fixes pre-SP1 code. Can
someone from MS please advise. We need a solution.
Thank you
Val|||We raised this with MS PSS. They confirmed it was not fixed in SP1 and they
gave us the hotfix, which appears to have fixed it.|||David,
What was the hotfix? Was it 928365?
Thanks
Chris
"David Brazier" <DavidBrazier@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D9DF446F-68FF-47D3-8AC5-6A08548036BF@.microsoft.com...
> We raised this with MS PSS. They confirmed it was not fixed in SP1 and
> they
> gave us the hotfix, which appears to have fixed it.|||It was the hotfix described in KB 944099.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
"Chris Wood" wrote:
> What was the hotfix? Was it 928365?|||So David what is the new version of this DLL? 948 or 1433?
Chris
"David Brazier" <DavidBrazier@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:EB5872A8-2068-417A-BE7D-314D1C749D55@.microsoft.com...
> It was the hotfix described in KB 944099.
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/944099
> "Chris Wood" wrote:
>> What was the hotfix? Was it 928365?
>|||Our System.Data.dll is now version 2.0.50727.1813 after the hotfix. Looking
at the KB article again, I see that says the fixed version is 2.0.50727.948.
But that was pre-SP1 and I am guessing that they had to apply a new fix
post-SP1, as it didn't make it into SP1 itself.
"Chris Wood" wrote:
> So David what is the new version of this DLL? 948 or 1433?|||David,
SO MS provided the fix when you reported the problem. Maybe they have a post
SP1 version and have not updated the KB article.
Chris
"David Brazier" <DavidBrazier@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8AB78D88-26DD-4449-9815-E21C67866662@.microsoft.com...
> Our System.Data.dll is now version 2.0.50727.1813 after the hotfix.
> Looking
> at the KB article again, I see that says the fixed version is
> 2.0.50727.948.
> But that was pre-SP1 and I am guessing that they had to apply a new fix
> post-SP1, as it didn't make it into SP1 itself.
> "Chris Wood" wrote:
>> So David what is the new version of this DLL? 948 or 1433?
>|||Yes, we reported it to MS support & they provided the hotfix. You're right,
the KB article should have been updated or replaced post-SP1.
"Chris Wood" wrote:
> SO MS provided the fix when you reported the problem. Maybe they have a post
> SP1 version and have not updated the KB article.|||http://support.microsoft.com/kb/948815