Help needed! DBCC CHECKDB - consistency errors

Hello All,
After restoring the SQL Server 2000 user database backup into one of the SQL
Server 2000 instances I get database consistency errors. I restored this
database a couple of times and every time I get the errors; however they are
not consistent - different types of errors, different tables and indexes get
affected. I restored the same database backup into a different server and
ran dbcc checkdb over it - no errors occurred. Something causes corruption
in the database on one particular server.
Here are the errors:
DBCC results for 'tTREE_COMPONENTS'.
Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Object ID 1467308437, index ID 0: Page (1:251481) could not be processed.
See other errors for details.
Server: Msg 8944, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1467308437, index ID 0, page (1:251481), row 44. Test
(ColumnOffsets <= (nextRec - pRec)) failed. Values are 87 and 57.
There are 663 rows in 16 pages for object 'tTREE_COMPONENTS'.
DBCC results for 'tACCUMULATORS'.
There are 10234724 rows in 97149 pages for object 'tACCUMULATORS'.
CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 2 consistency errors in table
'tACCUMULATORS' (object ID 1467308437).
DBCC results for 'WATSTARTDATETP'.
Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4: Page (3:224866) could not be processed.
See other errors for details.
Server: Msg 8941, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4, page (3:224866). Test (sorted
[i].offset >= PAGEHEADSIZE) failed. Slot 159, offset 0x1 is invalid.
Server: Msg 8942, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Table error: Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4, page (3:224866). Test
(sorted[i].offset >= max) failed. Slot 0, offset 0x9f overlaps with the prior
row.
There are 4 rows in 1 pages for object 'WATSTARTDATETP'.
DBCC results for 'ACCRUALTRAN'.
There are 5919148 rows in 150538 pages for object 'ACCRUALTRAN'.
CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
'ACCRUALTRAN' (object ID 1905493917).
Could it be that our IO subsystem is causing corruption? I am thinking
about running SQLIOSim and SQLIOStress..
If you could please take a look at the errors and give me your thoughts it
would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you in advance,
JuliaJulia,
My only suspicion, after reading your description, is that you are probably
running into a bad disk or array. And, if so, you need to determine if that
is true and fix it right now.
RLF
"DBCC CHECKDB - consistency errors"
<DBCCCHECKDBconsistencyerrors@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:94E38ACE-9F29-4B76-8B3A-2CF1467AC9B2@.microsoft.com...
> Hello All,
> After restoring the SQL Server 2000 user database backup into one of the
> SQL
> Server 2000 instances I get database consistency errors. I restored this
> database a couple of times and every time I get the errors; however they
> are
> not consistent - different types of errors, different tables and indexes
> get
> affected. I restored the same database backup into a different server and
> ran dbcc checkdb over it - no errors occurred. Something causes
> corruption
> in the database on one particular server.
> Here are the errors:
> DBCC results for 'tTREE_COMPONENTS'.
> Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Object ID 1467308437, index ID 0: Page (1:251481) could not be processed.
> See other errors for details.
> Server: Msg 8944, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1467308437, index ID 0, page (1:251481), row 44.
> Test
> (ColumnOffsets <= (nextRec - pRec)) failed. Values are 87 and 57.
> There are 663 rows in 16 pages for object 'tTREE_COMPONENTS'.
> DBCC results for 'tACCUMULATORS'.
> There are 10234724 rows in 97149 pages for object 'tACCUMULATORS'.
> CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 2 consistency errors in table
> 'tACCUMULATORS' (object ID 1467308437).
> DBCC results for 'WATSTARTDATETP'.
> Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4: Page (3:224866) could not be processed.
> See other errors for details.
> Server: Msg 8941, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4, page (3:224866). Test
> (sorted
> [i].offset >= PAGEHEADSIZE) failed. Slot 159, offset 0x1 is invalid.
> Server: Msg 8942, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> Table error: Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4, page (3:224866). Test
> (sorted[i].offset >= max) failed. Slot 0, offset 0x9f overlaps with the
> prior
> row.
> There are 4 rows in 1 pages for object 'WATSTARTDATETP'.
> DBCC results for 'ACCRUALTRAN'.
> There are 5919148 rows in 150538 pages for object 'ACCRUALTRAN'.
> CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
> 'ACCRUALTRAN' (object ID 1905493917).
> Could it be that our IO subsystem is causing corruption? I am thinking
> about running SQLIOSim and SQLIOStress..
> If you could please take a look at the errors and give me your thoughts it
> would be greatly appreciated.
> Thank you in advance,
> Julia
>
>|||Russell, thank you so much for such a quick response. In my company in order
to make the server administrators to run Dell hardware diagnostics I
basically need to prove that itâ's a bad disk issue, but there are no errors
in the Event Viewer log and I donâ't think we have the smoking gun in SQL
Server 2000 that would point to the cause of the consistency error?
"Russell Fields" wrote:
> Julia,
> My only suspicion, after reading your description, is that you are probably
> running into a bad disk or array. And, if so, you need to determine if that
> is true and fix it right now.
> RLF
> "DBCC CHECKDB - consistency errors"
> <DBCCCHECKDBconsistencyerrors@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:94E38ACE-9F29-4B76-8B3A-2CF1467AC9B2@.microsoft.com...
> > Hello All,
> >
> > After restoring the SQL Server 2000 user database backup into one of the
> > SQL
> > Server 2000 instances I get database consistency errors. I restored this
> > database a couple of times and every time I get the errors; however they
> > are
> > not consistent - different types of errors, different tables and indexes
> > get
> > affected. I restored the same database backup into a different server and
> > ran dbcc checkdb over it - no errors occurred. Something causes
> > corruption
> > in the database on one particular server.
> >
> > Here are the errors:
> >
> > DBCC results for 'tTREE_COMPONENTS'.
> > Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> > Object ID 1467308437, index ID 0: Page (1:251481) could not be processed.
> > See other errors for details.
> > Server: Msg 8944, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> > Table error: Object ID 1467308437, index ID 0, page (1:251481), row 44.
> > Test
> > (ColumnOffsets <= (nextRec - pRec)) failed. Values are 87 and 57.
> > There are 663 rows in 16 pages for object 'tTREE_COMPONENTS'.
> >
> > DBCC results for 'tACCUMULATORS'.
> > There are 10234724 rows in 97149 pages for object 'tACCUMULATORS'.
> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 2 consistency errors in table
> > 'tACCUMULATORS' (object ID 1467308437).
> >
> > DBCC results for 'WATSTARTDATETP'.
> > Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> > Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4: Page (3:224866) could not be processed.
> > See other errors for details.
> >
> > Server: Msg 8941, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> > Table error: Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4, page (3:224866). Test
> > (sorted
> > [i].offset >= PAGEHEADSIZE) failed. Slot 159, offset 0x1 is invalid.
> >
> > Server: Msg 8942, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
> > Table error: Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4, page (3:224866). Test
> > (sorted[i].offset >= max) failed. Slot 0, offset 0x9f overlaps with the
> > prior
> > row.
> > There are 4 rows in 1 pages for object 'WATSTARTDATETP'.
> >
> > DBCC results for 'ACCRUALTRAN'.
> > There are 5919148 rows in 150538 pages for object 'ACCRUALTRAN'.
> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
> > 'ACCRUALTRAN' (object ID 1905493917).
> >
> > Could it be that our IO subsystem is causing corruption? I am thinking
> > about running SQLIOSim and SQLIOStress..
> >
> > If you could please take a look at the errors and give me your thoughts it
> > would be greatly appreciated.
> >
> > Thank you in advance,
> >
> > Julia
> >
> >
> >
>
>|||Julia,
Last time I had a similar problem, I finally proved it by running:
CHKDSK D:
It spat out errors that none of the monitoring tools had found. In my case,
it was not the disk, but the RAID array that had gone bad. There were no
Event log errors, no (for us) HP / Compaq warning messages, etc. But the
array was still bad.
Of course, I could be wrong, but this is my best guess based on the
symptoms.
RLF
(Going home now, so I cannot follow up any more tonight.)
"DBCC CHECKDB - consistency errors"
<DBCCCHECKDBconsistencyerrors@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:064B60C9-080E-4B5D-9657-23FDBD6B0C1A@.microsoft.com...
> Russell, thank you so much for such a quick response. In my company in
> order
> to make the server administrators to run Dell hardware diagnostics I
> basically need to prove that it's a bad disk issue, but there are no
> errors
> in the Event Viewer log and I don't think we have the smoking gun in SQL
> Server 2000 that would point to the cause of the consistency error?
> "Russell Fields" wrote:
>> Julia,
>> My only suspicion, after reading your description, is that you are
>> probably
>> running into a bad disk or array. And, if so, you need to determine if
>> that
>> is true and fix it right now.
>> RLF
>> "DBCC CHECKDB - consistency errors"
>> <DBCCCHECKDBconsistencyerrors@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:94E38ACE-9F29-4B76-8B3A-2CF1467AC9B2@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hello All,
>> >
>> > After restoring the SQL Server 2000 user database backup into one of
>> > the
>> > SQL
>> > Server 2000 instances I get database consistency errors. I restored
>> > this
>> > database a couple of times and every time I get the errors; however
>> > they
>> > are
>> > not consistent - different types of errors, different tables and
>> > indexes
>> > get
>> > affected. I restored the same database backup into a different server
>> > and
>> > ran dbcc checkdb over it - no errors occurred. Something causes
>> > corruption
>> > in the database on one particular server.
>> >
>> > Here are the errors:
>> >
>> > DBCC results for 'tTREE_COMPONENTS'.
>> > Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
>> > Object ID 1467308437, index ID 0: Page (1:251481) could not be
>> > processed.
>> > See other errors for details.
>> > Server: Msg 8944, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
>> > Table error: Object ID 1467308437, index ID 0, page (1:251481), row 44.
>> > Test
>> > (ColumnOffsets <= (nextRec - pRec)) failed. Values are 87 and 57.
>> > There are 663 rows in 16 pages for object 'tTREE_COMPONENTS'.
>> >
>> > DBCC results for 'tACCUMULATORS'.
>> > There are 10234724 rows in 97149 pages for object 'tACCUMULATORS'.
>> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 2 consistency errors in table
>> > 'tACCUMULATORS' (object ID 1467308437).
>> >
>> > DBCC results for 'WATSTARTDATETP'.
>> > Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
>> > Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4: Page (3:224866) could not be
>> > processed.
>> > See other errors for details.
>> >
>> > Server: Msg 8941, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
>> > Table error: Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4, page (3:224866). Test
>> > (sorted
>> > [i].offset >= PAGEHEADSIZE) failed. Slot 159, offset 0x1 is invalid.
>> >
>> > Server: Msg 8942, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
>> > Table error: Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4, page (3:224866). Test
>> > (sorted[i].offset >= max) failed. Slot 0, offset 0x9f overlaps with the
>> > prior
>> > row.
>> > There are 4 rows in 1 pages for object 'WATSTARTDATETP'.
>> >
>> > DBCC results for 'ACCRUALTRAN'.
>> > There are 5919148 rows in 150538 pages for object 'ACCRUALTRAN'.
>> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
>> > 'ACCRUALTRAN' (object ID 1905493917).
>> >
>> > Could it be that our IO subsystem is causing corruption? I am thinking
>> > about running SQLIOSim and SQLIOStress..
>> >
>> > If you could please take a look at the errors and give me your thoughts
>> > it
>> > would be greatly appreciated.
>> >
>> > Thank you in advance,
>> >
>> > Julia
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>|||> I restored the same database backup into a different server and
> ran dbcc checkdb over it - no errors occurred. Something causes
> corruption
> in the database on one particular server.
I agree with Russell's analysis. I think the facts that the corruption only
occurs on one server and manifests itself in different ways ought be enough
proof for the server admins to run hardware diagnostics.
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
http://weblogs.sqlteam.com/dang/
"DBCC CHECKDB - consistency errors"
<DBCCCHECKDBconsistencyerrors@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:064B60C9-080E-4B5D-9657-23FDBD6B0C1A@.microsoft.com...
> Russell, thank you so much for such a quick response. In my company in
> order
> to make the server administrators to run Dell hardware diagnostics I
> basically need to prove that itâ's a bad disk issue, but there are no
> errors
> in the Event Viewer log and I donâ't think we have the smoking gun in SQL
> Server 2000 that would point to the cause of the consistency error?
> "Russell Fields" wrote:
>> Julia,
>> My only suspicion, after reading your description, is that you are
>> probably
>> running into a bad disk or array. And, if so, you need to determine if
>> that
>> is true and fix it right now.
>> RLF
>> "DBCC CHECKDB - consistency errors"
>> <DBCCCHECKDBconsistencyerrors@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:94E38ACE-9F29-4B76-8B3A-2CF1467AC9B2@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hello All,
>> >
>> > After restoring the SQL Server 2000 user database backup into one of
>> > the
>> > SQL
>> > Server 2000 instances I get database consistency errors. I restored
>> > this
>> > database a couple of times and every time I get the errors; however
>> > they
>> > are
>> > not consistent - different types of errors, different tables and
>> > indexes
>> > get
>> > affected. I restored the same database backup into a different server
>> > and
>> > ran dbcc checkdb over it - no errors occurred. Something causes
>> > corruption
>> > in the database on one particular server.
>> >
>> > Here are the errors:
>> >
>> > DBCC results for 'tTREE_COMPONENTS'.
>> > Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
>> > Object ID 1467308437, index ID 0: Page (1:251481) could not be
>> > processed.
>> > See other errors for details.
>> > Server: Msg 8944, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
>> > Table error: Object ID 1467308437, index ID 0, page (1:251481), row 44.
>> > Test
>> > (ColumnOffsets <= (nextRec - pRec)) failed. Values are 87 and 57.
>> > There are 663 rows in 16 pages for object 'tTREE_COMPONENTS'.
>> >
>> > DBCC results for 'tACCUMULATORS'.
>> > There are 10234724 rows in 97149 pages for object 'tACCUMULATORS'.
>> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 2 consistency errors in table
>> > 'tACCUMULATORS' (object ID 1467308437).
>> >
>> > DBCC results for 'WATSTARTDATETP'.
>> > Server: Msg 8928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
>> > Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4: Page (3:224866) could not be
>> > processed.
>> > See other errors for details.
>> >
>> > Server: Msg 8941, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
>> > Table error: Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4, page (3:224866). Test
>> > (sorted
>> > [i].offset >= PAGEHEADSIZE) failed. Slot 159, offset 0x1 is invalid.
>> >
>> > Server: Msg 8942, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
>> > Table error: Object ID 1905493917, index ID 4, page (3:224866). Test
>> > (sorted[i].offset >= max) failed. Slot 0, offset 0x9f overlaps with the
>> > prior
>> > row.
>> > There are 4 rows in 1 pages for object 'WATSTARTDATETP'.
>> >
>> > DBCC results for 'ACCRUALTRAN'.
>> > There are 5919148 rows in 150538 pages for object 'ACCRUALTRAN'.
>> > CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table
>> > 'ACCRUALTRAN' (object ID 1905493917).
>> >
>> > Could it be that our IO subsystem is causing corruption? I am thinking
>> > about running SQLIOSim and SQLIOStress..
>> >
>> > If you could please take a look at the errors and give me your thoughts
>> > it
>> > would be greatly appreciated.
>> >
>> > Thank you in advance,
>> >
>> > Julia
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>