Comments
8 comments
-
Hi Sxary,
This looks like a problem that will require investigation by one of our product support engineers. As you have a support contract I will raise a ticket for you and one of them will be in touch soon. -
Hi Sxary,
I've been able to replicate the problem and I've raised a bug report with id SOC-8800. Do you also get the error'HAS_PERMS_BY_NAME' is not a recognized function name.
when you try and expand the database node in the object explorer?
I notice that Microsoft don't support using SSMS 2014 or later to manage a SQL 2000 database, although clearly it's doable to an extent. -
Hi, thank you for the responses and investigation. Yes I do get that error, which I can usually dismiss and continue using SSMS. I understand that newer SSMSes are not supported but as you say - it's doable, and it's still nicer to work in than the older versions. Hopefully at some point the database will be updated!
-
Hi Sxary,
Could you let me know what version of SQL 2000 you are running? I was able to reproduce the problem using the RTM version, but one of the developers tried SP4 and it seemed to work. If you're not already on SP4, it might be that installing SP4 is a workaround for this. -
Hi Rob,
SELECT SERVERPROPERTY('productversion'), SERVERPROPERTY('productlevel'), SERVERPROPERTY('edition') 8.00.2066 SP4 Enterprise Edition
So SP4 plus a more recent hotfix.
-
Thanks for the information! The developers have now reproduced the problem so I'll let you know as soon as I have any updates.
-
I'm pleased to tell you this bug is now fixed in the latest Frequent Updates release of SQL Source Control, version 5.6.1.
-
Awesome, thank you!
Add comment
Please sign in to leave a comment.
When running SQL Source Control in SSMS 2016 I'm unable to expand any of my databases in object explorer on a 2000 server I have connected. If I open a second instance of SSMS (so SQL Source Control is disabled) it works. It's fair enough that SQL Source Control doesn't support SQL Server 2000, but couldn't it simply not attempt to control it instead of breaking the existing functionality?
Thanks,
Steve