Link to home
Start Free TrialLog in
Avatar of AbrahamVlok
AbrahamVlokFlag for South Africa

asked on

Restoring a large database to a mapped drive

Hello,

I need a restore a database of 270GB. The .BAK is about 1GB (there is still alot of open space in the databse). I have mapped the network drive. I have started the SQL server with a account that does have read and write access on the LAN.

I changed the destination of the restored files (DB + LOG) to the Y drive (mapped LAN drive) in SQL management studio.

I get the error "The file "Y:\temp\abraham\db" db is on a network path that is not  supported for database  files.

Can you help me to fix this ?

Abraham
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Avatar of Rich Weissler
Rich Weissler

Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
Avatar of AbrahamVlok

ASKER

Hi Razmus,

I do not care about this as I am restoring a database to check settings - it is not running anyhting.

How do I set the trace flag ?

SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
I managed to change the tracflag - but still I get the same error.

This traceflag is related to "5110 "File 'file_name' is on a network device not supported for database files."

This is not my error.5110 is related to device problem. I have a path problem.
Avatar of Rich Weissler
Rich Weissler

Thats exactly the message that Trace flag 1807 is suppose to disable.  Confirm "DBCC TRACESTATUS (1807, -1);" ?
Hmm... Also confirm that this instance of SQL is not a cluster?
The investigation took too much time, I had to make alternative plans. I found an external USB disk and performed the restore to that.
I'm sorry the investigation was taking so much time.  

Were you able to confirm that the SQL Server wasn't part of a cluster, and confirm that the DBCC TRACESTATUS (1807,-1) was reporting positively?
The poster may have taken excessive time on the issue, but the question asked was answered.  Additional troubleshooting information which might have assisted in the eventual successful resolution was not provided.  (Or, if the server is part of a cluster, which has not been answered, would have concluded that the solution he desired is no possible.)
My biased recommendation is #3, with the answer being http:#33557545
Comments below that were attempts to assist the user in implementing the answer.

The answer gives the correct answer on how to accomplish the task requested, and the link provided the documentation from Microsoft with further information about the reason the option is not recommended, risks associated, and circumstances under which the one solution may still not work as desired.  The final solution implemented, namely use of supplemental storage directly attached to the database server, is also actually in compliance with the suggestion in the answer -- that the one solution to the question as posed is very strongly not recommended.