|
database
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Help interpreting DBCC CHECKDB outputunderstand which tables it is telling me have problems. I ran: DBCC CHECKDB ( 'qamain1' , NOINDEX ) WITH ALL_ERRORMSGS Here's a snippet from the output: DBCC results for 'tz_datatype_key'. Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 Object ID 1628741055, index ID 0: Page (1:9300396) could not be processed. See other errors for details. Server: Msg 8944, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 Table error: Object ID 1628741055, index ID 0, page (1:9300396), row 0. Test (ColumnOffsets <= (nextRec - pRec)) failed. Values are 321 and 31. Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 Object ID 1628741055, index ID 0: Page (1:9300397) could not be processed. See other errors for details. Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 Object ID 1628741055, index ID 0: Page (1:9300398) could not be processed. See other errors for details. There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'tz_datatype_key'. I don't understand the correlation between the table name (tz_datatype_key) and the Object ID (1628741055). If I do: select object_id('tz_datatype_key') the object id returned is not 1628741055. If I do: select object_name(1628741055) the object name returned is not tz_datatype_key So what gives? Are the results of DBCC CHECKDB out of order somehow? Thanks! Hi
You don't say what the alternate object is for id 1628741055! If you run SELECT name FROM sysobjects where id = 1628741055 do you get more than one row? If the second object can be dropped/re-created without loss of data you may want to drop it and re-run the checkdb. John Show quote "pshro***@gmail.com" wrote: > I ran DBCC CHECKDB on a database that has corruption. I don't > understand which tables it is telling me have problems. I ran: > > DBCC CHECKDB ( 'qamain1' , NOINDEX ) WITH ALL_ERRORMSGS > > Here's a snippet from the output: > > DBCC results for 'tz_datatype_key'. > Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 > Object ID 1628741055, index ID 0: Page (1:9300396) could not be > processed. See other errors for details. > Server: Msg 8944, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 > Table error: Object ID 1628741055, index ID 0, page (1:9300396), row 0. > Test (ColumnOffsets <= (nextRec - pRec)) failed. Values are 321 and 31. > Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 > Object ID 1628741055, index ID 0: Page (1:9300397) could not be > processed. See other errors for details. > Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 > Object ID 1628741055, index ID 0: Page (1:9300398) could not be > processed. See other errors for details. > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'tz_datatype_key'. > > I don't understand the correlation between the table name > (tz_datatype_key) and the Object ID (1628741055). If I do: > > select object_id('tz_datatype_key') > > the object id returned is not 1628741055. If I do: > > select object_name(1628741055) > > the object name returned is not tz_datatype_key > > So what gives? Are the results of DBCC CHECKDB out of order somehow? > > Thanks! > > (pshro***@gmail.com) writes:
Show quote > I ran DBCC CHECKDB on a database that has corruption. I don't My conclusion is that the database is in really poor shape. There> understand which tables it is telling me have problems. I ran: > > DBCC CHECKDB ( 'qamain1' , NOINDEX ) WITH ALL_ERRORMSGS > > Here's a snippet from the output: > > DBCC results for 'tz_datatype_key'. > Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 > Object ID 1628741055, index ID 0: Page (1:9300396) could not be > processed. See other errors for details. > Server: Msg 8944, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 > Table error: Object ID 1628741055, index ID 0, page (1:9300396), row 0. > Test (ColumnOffsets <= (nextRec - pRec)) failed. Values are 321 and 31. > Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 > Object ID 1628741055, index ID 0: Page (1:9300397) could not be > processed. See other errors for details. > Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 > Object ID 1628741055, index ID 0: Page (1:9300398) could not be > processed. See other errors for details. > There are 1 rows in 1 pages for object 'tz_datatype_key'. > > I don't understand the correlation between the table name > (tz_datatype_key) and the Object ID (1628741055). If I do: > > select object_id('tz_datatype_key') > > the object id returned is not 1628741055. If I do: > > select object_name(1628741055) > > the object name returned is not tz_datatype_key > > So what gives? Are the results of DBCC CHECKDB out of order somehow? could be a linkage error, so although you start in one table you end up in another. If you have a good backup, I would suggest that you use that one. If you don't have a backup, running DBCC with repair options could be an idea, but it could lead to data loss, and you may prefer to open a case with Microsoft first. In any case, be very suspicious about the state of your hardware, if you have not already replaced it. -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esq***@sommarskog.se Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books.mspx Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspx  |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interesting topics