ODBC SQL 2005 and Named Instance - won't connect

We have two instances of SQL 2005 installed, with static TCP/IP ports, one
instance on one IP address, port 1433 and the other instance on a different
IP address, port 1433.
Try to create an ODBC System DSN using SQL Native Client and it won't
connect.
If we do the same thing but using a default instance of SQL 2005, ODBC
connects fine.
Any help anyone can give as to why ODBC won't connect to the SQL 2005 names
instances?
I've tried searching thru MSDN and TechNet and such but found nothing of any
help.
Michael MacGregor
Database Architect
Never mind, got it to work, having taken a sledgehammer to the server.
Disabled all IP addresses other than the one specified for the instance,
then restarted the whole box, and hey presto it finally worked.
Now we just have to get LDAP to recognise the named instances. Yeah I know,
old technology and all that stuff.
MTM
"Michael MacGregor" <nospam@.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:emWQtlFGGHA.3728@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> We have two instances of SQL 2005 installed, with static TCP/IP ports, one
> instance on one IP address, port 1433 and the other instance on a
> different IP address, port 1433.
> Try to create an ODBC System DSN using SQL Native Client and it won't
> connect.
> If we do the same thing but using a default instance of SQL 2005, ODBC
> connects fine.
> Any help anyone can give as to why ODBC won't connect to the SQL 2005
> names instances?
> I've tried searching thru MSDN and TechNet and such but found nothing of
> any help.
> Michael MacGregor
> Database Architect
>

ODBC SQL 2005 and Named Instance - won't connect

We have two instances of SQL 2005 installed, with static TCP/IP ports, one
instance on one IP address, port 1433 and the other instance on a different
IP address, port 1433.
Try to create an ODBC System DSN using SQL Native Client and it won't
connect.
If we do the same thing but using a default instance of SQL 2005, ODBC
connects fine.
Any help anyone can give as to why ODBC won't connect to the SQL 2005 names
instances?
I've tried searching thru MSDN and technet and such but found nothing of any
help.
Michael MacGregor
Database ArchitectNever mind, got it to work, having taken a sledgehammer to the server.
Disabled all IP addresses other than the one specified for the instance,
then restarted the whole box, and hey presto it finally worked.
Now we just have to get LDAP to recognise the named instances. Yeah I know,
old technology and all that stuff.
MTM
"Michael MacGregor" <nospam@.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:emWQtlFGGHA.3728@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> We have two instances of SQL 2005 installed, with static TCP/IP ports, one
> instance on one IP address, port 1433 and the other instance on a
> different IP address, port 1433.
> Try to create an ODBC System DSN using SQL Native Client and it won't
> connect.
> If we do the same thing but using a default instance of SQL 2005, ODBC
> connects fine.
> Any help anyone can give as to why ODBC won't connect to the SQL 2005
> names instances?
> I've tried searching thru MSDN and technet and such but found nothing of
> any help.
> Michael MacGregor
> Database Architect
>

ODBC from SQL Server 2000 to Word 2003

I have a table of address data which I'd like to put into a mailmerge of
envelopes in Word 2003. When I select the Query which I've already set up,
an error message says "Record 1 contained too few fields".
This problem doesn't happen in Excel 2003, and it didn't happen at all
before we changed the SQL Server in January. I've installed all service
packs for the server and for Office.
I'm not sure whether this is a Word problem or not, so I've posted here and
in the Word group.
Tim
That's a word error and related to how word is interpreting
the fields you are using for the mail merge. Years ago, it
could happen with some odd characters in the data -
generally control characters if I remember right.
But it's something more on the word side or how word is
interpreting the data.
-Sue
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 11:04:25 -0000, "Tim Gowen"
<tim.gowen@.rafmuseum.org> wrote:

>I have a table of address data which I'd like to put into a mailmerge of
>envelopes in Word 2003. When I select the Query which I've already set up,
>an error message says "Record 1 contained too few fields".
>This problem doesn't happen in Excel 2003, and it didn't happen at all
>before we changed the SQL Server in January. I've installed all service
>packs for the server and for Office.
>I'm not sure whether this is a Word problem or not, so I've posted here and
>in the Word group.
>
> Tim
>

ODBC from SQL Server 2000 to Word 2003

I have a table of address data which I'd like to put into a mailmerge of
envelopes in Word 2003. When I select the Query which I've already set up,
an error message says "Record 1 contained too few fields".
This problem doesn't happen in Excel 2003, and it didn't happen at all
before we changed the SQL Server in January. I've installed all service
packs for the server and for Office.
I'm not sure whether this is a Word problem or not, so I've posted here and
in the Word group.
TimThat's a word error and related to how word is interpreting
the fields you are using for the mail merge. Years ago, it
could happen with some odd characters in the data -
generally control characters if I remember right.
But it's something more on the word side or how word is
interpreting the data.
-Sue
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 11:04:25 -0000, "Tim Gowen"
<tim.gowen@.rafmuseum.org> wrote:

>I have a table of address data which I'd like to put into a mailmerge of
>envelopes in Word 2003. When I select the Query which I've already set up,
>an error message says "Record 1 contained too few fields".
>This problem doesn't happen in Excel 2003, and it didn't happen at all
>before we changed the SQL Server in January. I've installed all service
>packs for the server and for Office.
>I'm not sure whether this is a Word problem or not, so I've posted here and
>in the Word group.
>
> Tim
>