Collecting data on 64 bit servers

Oct 23, 2009 at 3:06 PM

I am running SQLH2 on a Windows Server 2003 Standard Ed 32 Bit with SP2 and it never seems to collect any SQL Database information on the 64 Bit servers I have it collecting data for.

In the H2log.txt file I find the following;


10/23/2009 3:57:39 AM  Status:  Initializing Target: MYSERVERNAME
10/23/2009 3:57:39 AM  Status:    registering Server
10/23/2009 3:57:39 AM  INFO:  srv_id = 3; signature = 3d975964-1281-410b-b6cb-f29b6fa605eb
10/23/2009 3:57:39 AM  Status:  Scanning Registry on MYSERVERNAME
10/23/2009 3:57:39 AM  WARNING:  No SQL Server instances registered on the box
10/23/2009 3:57:39 AM  Status:    RUN

Is there a solution for this?

I can't seem to find one.

Oct 27, 2009 at 6:59 AM

There is no solution for this problem. See earlier discussions on this issue.

You should not be running version 2.1.1. Please update to the last one. The first one has a bug related to data persistence,

Oct 28, 2009 at 3:54 PM

So it should work with "SQLH2 v.2.1.004 Mar 18 2009, Stable" ?

Oct 28, 2009 at 9:22 PM

No it still doesn't work.

2.1.1 has a serious bug, which was fixed in 2.1.3. You can see what fixes each version contain on the Source Code tab.


Jun 2, 2010 at 8:29 PM

I did run v2.1.3 and it did not find x64 - Hosted SQL Server 2005

I am currently running for SQLH2.exe and for SQLH2PerfCollectorSvc.exe.

NO x64 collections at all, I get "No SQL Server instances registered on the box"

Jun 9, 2010 at 1:04 AM

The 64-bit problem is not fixed yet.

2.2.1 has some improvements in this space, but is not a complete fix.

It provides 2 setups - 32-bit and 64-bit. Using 64-bit client version on 64-bit OS should be able to connect and discover 64-bit instances on target 64-bit machines. The problem is what Registry hive the app is connected to when targeting 64-bit machines. It appeared to be dependent on the client OS. It has been discussed here in the past.

Jun 9, 2010 at 5:47 PM

Thanks for clarifying, I misunderstood the links regarding x64,

I can give v2.2.1 a try. I will ramp up an x64 eval box and take a look.

Can both setups reference the same repository database?

If so, I can run sampling from both clients to the same repository.

Jun 9, 2010 at 6:07 PM

Yes they can.

That would be a good config to try for the rest of us.

Jun 9, 2010 at 6:09 PM


I will try and get an update out in the next week or so.

Jun 10, 2010 at 9:23 PM

Well, I was able to get something in place quickly.

I was successfull running both clients (32 bit and 64 bit) pointing to the same repository.

HOWEVER, I am unable to run any Reporting Services Reports that I have with the version that Microsoft provided due to the schema changes.

Do you have any of these canned reports that I can used to point to the new repository database?


Jun 11, 2010 at 12:19 AM

I didn't think there were any changes to the schema affecting old reports.

What errors do you see?

Jun 11, 2010 at 3:18 PM

Sorry. I had a problem connecting to the respository database on SSRS to the new repository.

I found the problem and can run the existing reports I have now.

There are differences in the schema though and the existing reports that I run are not aware of the new columns in the tables c_dtabase and hd_database tables as well as the new tables: c_DiskPartition, c_jobhistory, c_jobs, c_LogicalDisk, d_DriveType, hd_jobhistory, hd_LogicalDisk, hs_jobs and hs_LogicalDisk.  There are also new stored procedures: sph_DiskPartition, sph_jobhistory, sph_jobs and sph_LogicalDisk and 1 new function called fn_GetDateTimeFromString. 

The current repository I am using is v, Linear version 115.  The new repository that both 32 bit and 64 bit v2.2.1.0 clients are pointing to are is v Linear version 116.

I upgraded my current database after restoring it to a different location using the script to upgrade it for linear version 116 (as provided) so I could retain my current data and not have to start over with a new database.

With these little changes, I feel pretty good running this, I will run this more over the next few days and provide an update where I am at with it.


Jun 22, 2010 at 2:33 AM

Sorry it took me awhile to return to this thread.

Yes there are changes to the schema. The update included an upgrade script (at least I thought it was included). I'm glad you sorted it out.