sqlclient: existing connection was forcibly closed

[Database Administrator]

i just made the switch from OLEDB to SqlClient in my .Net apps.

now with SqlClient often my db calls throw the following exception:

System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: A transport-level error has occurred
when sending the request to the server. (provider: TCP Provider, error: 0 -
An existing connection was forcibly closed by the remote host.) at
System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.OnError(SqlExc eption exception, Boolean
breakConnection) at...

this happens when the load (or call rate) increases. I don't think its
anything I am doing unless I am missing a connect option.

my production environment is:
client side
Windows Server 2003 sp2
..net 2.0

server side
Windows Server 2003 sp2
Sql Server 2005 sp2

Also, on my development machine running Vista, it does not appear that this
happens.

[Database Administrator]

Some associated links:
http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/...4053&SiteID=17

http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=239593


This is what someone else who had this issue did:
>>
I went into the Sql Server Configuration Manager, Sql Native Client
Configuration -> Protocols and disabled Shared Memory and made the TCP/IP
protocol #1 in order. Then just restarted the Sql Service and it all
started
working!
<<

--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP

"pb" wrote in message
news:1CF8C7D3-F472-46CF-8F8F-467545DA869F@microsoft.com...
>
> i just made the switch from OLEDB to SqlClient in my .Net apps.
>
> now with SqlClient often my db calls throw the following exception:
>
> System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: A transport-level error has occurred
> when sending the request to the server. (provider: TCP Provider, error:
> 0 -
> An existing connection was forcibly closed by the remote host.) at
> System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.OnError(SqlExc eption exception,
> Boolean
> breakConnection) at...
>
> this happens when the load (or call rate) increases. I don't think its
> anything I am doing unless I am missing a connect option.
>
> my production environment is:
> client side
> Windows Server 2003 sp2
> .net 2.0
>
> server side
> Windows Server 2003 sp2
> Sql Server 2005 sp2
>
> Also, on my development machine running Vista, it does not appear that
> this
> happens.
>
>
>

[Database Administrator]

Hi,

May be this can help also

http://blogs.msdn.com/sql_protocols/...eShooting.aspx

Thanks
Omar

"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:

> Some associated links:
> http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/...4053&SiteID=17
>
> http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=239593
>
>
> This is what someone else who had this issue did:
> >>
> I went into the Sql Server Configuration Manager, Sql Native Client
> Configuration -> Protocols and disabled Shared Memory and made the TCP/IP
> protocol #1 in order. Then just restarted the Sql Service and it all
> started
> working!
> <<
>
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "pb" wrote in message
> news:1CF8C7D3-F472-46CF-8F8F-467545DA869F@microsoft.com...
> >
> > i just made the switch from OLEDB to SqlClient in my .Net apps.
> >
> > now with SqlClient often my db calls throw the following exception:
> >
> > System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: A transport-level error has occurred
> > when sending the request to the server. (provider: TCP Provider, error:
> > 0 -
> > An existing connection was forcibly closed by the remote host.) at
> > System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.OnError(SqlExc eption exception,
> > Boolean
> > breakConnection) at...
> >
> > this happens when the load (or call rate) increases. I don't think its
> > anything I am doing unless I am missing a connect option.
> >
> > my production environment is:
> > client side
> > Windows Server 2003 sp2
> > .net 2.0
> >
> > server side
> > Windows Server 2003 sp2
> > Sql Server 2005 sp2
> >
> > Also, on my development machine running Vista, it does not appear that
> > this
> > happens.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

[Database Administrator]

I saw that post regarding flipping off Shared Memory. I tried it and it
seems to work.

I wonder:
-does Microsoft know about this?
and
-Why aren't more people seeing it?

The box that runs my SQL Server instance also runs a series of processes
that access the db, these processes might automatically use the shared memory
model vs. TCP (although I am not changing the connectstr, I still specify
TCP). Perhaps my situation is more stressful than others causing this bug to
appear.


"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:

> Some associated links:
> http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/...4053&SiteID=17
>
> http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=239593
>
>
> This is what someone else who had this issue did:
> >>
> I went into the Sql Server Configuration Manager, Sql Native Client
> Configuration -> Protocols and disabled Shared Memory and made the TCP/IP
> protocol #1 in order. Then just restarted the Sql Service and it all
> started
> working!
> <<
>
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "pb" wrote in message
> news:1CF8C7D3-F472-46CF-8F8F-467545DA869F@microsoft.com...
> >
> > i just made the switch from OLEDB to SqlClient in my .Net apps.
> >
> > now with SqlClient often my db calls throw the following exception:
> >
> > System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: A transport-level error has occurred
> > when sending the request to the server. (provider: TCP Provider, error:
> > 0 -
> > An existing connection was forcibly closed by the remote host.) at
> > System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.OnError(SqlExc eption exception,
> > Boolean
> > breakConnection) at...
> >
> > this happens when the load (or call rate) increases. I don't think its
> > anything I am doing unless I am missing a connect option.
> >
> > my production environment is:
> > client side
> > Windows Server 2003 sp2
> > .net 2.0
> >
> > server side
> > Windows Server 2003 sp2
> > Sql Server 2005 sp2
> >
> > Also, on my development machine running Vista, it does not appear that
> > this
> > happens.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

[Database Administrator]

Yes generally the applications on the same box will use shared memory when
they can and if you have a lot of activity here it may be the issue.

--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP

"pb" wrote in message
news:A1D168B9-A615-4D77-B3EA-710A80BA6201@microsoft.com...
>I saw that post regarding flipping off Shared Memory. I tried it and it
> seems to work.
>
> I wonder:
> -does Microsoft know about this?
> and
> -Why aren't more people seeing it?
>
> The box that runs my SQL Server instance also runs a series of processes
> that access the db, these processes might automatically use the shared
> memory
> model vs. TCP (although I am not changing the connectstr, I still specify
> TCP). Perhaps my situation is more stressful than others causing this bug
> to
> appear.
>
>
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
>
>> Some associated links:
>> http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/...4053&SiteID=17
>>
>> http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=239593
>>
>>
>> This is what someone else who had this issue did:
>> >>
>> I went into the Sql Server Configuration Manager, Sql Native Client
>> Configuration -> Protocols and disabled Shared Memory and made the TCP/IP
>> protocol #1 in order. Then just restarted the Sql Service and it all
>> started
>> working!
>> <<
>>
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>>
>> "pb" wrote in message
>> news:1CF8C7D3-F472-46CF-8F8F-467545DA869F@microsoft.com...
>> >
>> > i just made the switch from OLEDB to SqlClient in my .Net apps.
>> >
>> > now with SqlClient often my db calls throw the following exception:
>> >
>> > System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: A transport-level error has
>> > occurred
>> > when sending the request to the server. (provider: TCP Provider, error:
>> > 0 -
>> > An existing connection was forcibly closed by the remote host.) at
>> > System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.OnError(SqlExc eption exception,
>> > Boolean
>> > breakConnection) at...
>> >
>> > this happens when the load (or call rate) increases. I don't think its
>> > anything I am doing unless I am missing a connect option.
>> >
>> > my production environment is:
>> > client side
>> > Windows Server 2003 sp2
>> > .net 2.0
>> >
>> > server side
>> > Windows Server 2003 sp2
>> > Sql Server 2005 sp2
>> >
>> > Also, on my development machine running Vista, it does not appear that
>> > this
>> > happens.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>