cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

DBCC CHECKDB - repair_allow_data_loss

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

I'm facing a problem at SQL2000 with R34.7.

In fact very big one because all the backups available have this error!

Anyone could please advise something to correct this errors?

The log... from DBCC CHECKDB (SID) with no infomsgs...

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4605848) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4608952) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4613352) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4615744) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4618896) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4620016) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4622912) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4623160) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4625960) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4627952) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4628872) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4629752) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4651008) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4654704) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4655080) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4657664) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4664192) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4666176) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4670096) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4670584) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4674544) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4675784) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4682288) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4685960) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4691688) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4692160) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4697312) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4703816) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4712152) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4714472) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4717352) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4719792) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4720416) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4728152) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4730488) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4736304) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4736560) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4742320) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4743896) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4745464) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4747056) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4747776) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4749240) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4754584) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4756608) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4757792) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4760840) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4764896) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4769520) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4772960) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Extent (1:4774752) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

Server: Msg 8964, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Table error: Object ID 2. The text, ntext, or image node at page (1:48220), slot 12, text ID 725687730176 is not referenced.

Server: Msg 8964, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Table error: Object ID 2. The text, ntext, or image node at page (1:48220), slot 13, text ID 725687795712 is not referenced.

Server: Msg 8964, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Table error: Object ID 2. The text, ntext, or image node at page (1:48220), slot 20, text ID 725687861248 is not referenced.

Server: Msg 8964, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Table error: Object ID 2. The text, ntext, or image node at page (1:48220), slot 21, text ID 725687926784 is not referenced.

Server: Msg 8965, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Table error: Object ID 2. The text, ntext, or image node at page (4:1433228), slot 0, text ID 725687795712 is referenced by page (1:48220), slot 13, but was not seen in the scan.

Server: Msg 8965, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

Table error: Object ID 2. The text, ntext, or image node at page (4:1433229), slot 0, text ID 725687926784 is referenced by page (1:48220), slot 21, but was not seen in the scan.

Server: Msg 2575, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

IAM page (1:3264025) is pointed to by the next pointer of IAM page (1:214455) object ID 395148453 index ID 2 but was not detected in thscan.

Server: Msg 2575, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

IAM page (4:582493) is pointed to by the next pointer of IAM page (1:2586641) object ID 395148453 index ID 2 but was not detected in the scan.

Server: Msg 2576, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

IAM page (4:582493) is pointed to by the previous pointer of IAM page (1:214455) object ID 395148453 index ID 2 but was not detected in the scan.

CHECKDB found 51 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors not associated with any single object.

CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 6 consistency errors in table 'sysindexes' (object ID 2).

Server: Msg 2576, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

IAM page (4:1258423) is pointed to by the previous pointer of IAM page (1:2559592) object ID 395148453 index ID 2 but was not detected in the scan.

CHECKDB found 4 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in table 'ACCTIT' (object ID 395148453).

CHECKDB found 55 allocation errors and 6 consistency errors in database 'CCP'.

repair_allow_data_loss is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC CHECKDB (CCP ).

Can anyone advise please.

Thanks in advance.

Cheers

Accepted Solutions (1)

Accepted Solutions (1)

lbreddemann
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

>

> Hi,

>

> I'm facing a problem at SQL2000 with R34.7.

> In fact very big one because all the backups available have this error!

>

> Anyone could please advise something to correct this errors?

>

> The log... from DBCC CHECKDB (SID) with no infomsgs...

>

> Server: Msg 8905, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

> Extent (1:4605848) in database ID 7 is marked allocated in the GAM, but no SGAM or IAM has allocated it.

>

> CHECKDB found 51 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors not associated with any single object.

> CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 6 consistency errors in table 'sysindexes' (object ID 2).

> Server: Msg 2576, Level 16, State 1, Line 1

> IAM page (4:1258423) is pointed to by the previous pointer of IAM page (1:2559592) object ID 395148453 index ID 2 but was not detected in the scan.

> CHECKDB found 4 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors in table 'ACCTIT' (object ID 395148453).

> CHECKDB found 55 allocation errors and 6 consistency errors in database 'CCP'.

> repair_allow_data_loss is the minimum repair level for the errors found by DBCC CHECKDB (CCP ).

>

DON'T do repair_allow_data_loss unless the support team tells you exaclty to do that.

Open a support message at SAP (BC-DB-MSS) right away and have this issue analyzed.

regards,

Lars

Former Member
0 Kudos

Thank you Lars.

But another big problem is that the client doesn´t have a valid contract anymore!

They don't even have "S" user to marktplace!!!

lbreddemann
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

But another big problem is that the client doesn´t have a valid contract anymore!

They don't even have "S" user to marktplace!!!

Well, sorry, but that's really their decision now.

They surely will get all possible help from SAP when they decide to buy a maintenance contract.

But without, I'm afraid they will have to turn somewhere else to get help.

regards,

Lars

(Senior Support Consultant II

SAP Active Global Support - Netweaver Web Application Server

Just in case this was unclear somehow...)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Roger,

this is not a SAP related error but a SQL Server related error that could have happened on any DB. Most likely the cause for this is malfunctioning hardware. You stated above that ALL your backups have the same error. In this case you can not expect any help from SAP or Microsoft - no matter if you have a valid support contract or not. Let me quote SAP Note 142731:

Use the option REPAIR_ALLOW_DATA_LOSS only if you have no other choice - that is, if all the backups are corrupt. Neither Microsoft nor SAP can guarantee that this type of repair will function correctly or achieve the desired results. Even a REPAIR_ALLOW_DATA_LOSS may not repair all corruptions. Sometimes you may have to execute this a second or third time. A REPAIR_ALLOW_DATA_LOSS may delete more data than is necessary. For this reason, it is essential that you back up your database before and after a REPAIR_ALLOW_DATA_LOSS.

Please have a look at Note 142731 and decide yourself. Make sure that you guys find out what the root cause for this error was and correct it. Other than that it always a good idea to have a valid support contract with SAP. Every thing else is shortsighted!

Regards,

Sven

lbreddemann
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

>. You stated above that ALL your backups have the same error. In this case you can not expect any help from SAP or Microsoft - no matter if you have a valid support contract or not.

Hello Sven,

sorry, but that is just plain wrong.

SAP takes every effort to help customers in these situations if there really is no alternative.

I've done such data rescue actions quite some times now.

It's without any guarantee - right.

It's expensive and time consuming - right.

But neither SAP nor it's database partners ever let a customer 'out in the rain'.

For emergency cases (you know, priority Very High calls, trucks not moving ... factories standstill... this kind of emergency...) we always followed the "help-first-discuss-costs-later" approach.

For us a customer that lives on is worth a lot more than one that died because it did not get the necessary help.

Technically it's correct - there will be data loss, no question about that.

But usually only tiny bits of data are lost and with the help of database and applicaton experts it's possible to figure out what's missing and eventually to reconstruct it.

regards,

Lars

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Lars,

Technically it's correct - there will be data loss, no question about that.

That is what my answer was all about.

But neither SAP nor it's database partners ever let a customer 'out in the rain'.

For emergency cases (you know, priority Very High calls, trucks not moving ... factories standstill... this kind of emergency...) we always followed the "help-first-discuss-costs-later" approach.

For us a customer that lives on is worth a lot more than one that died because it did not get the necessary help.

That's why I wrote:

Other than that it always a good idea to have a valid support contract with SAP. Every thing else is shortsighted!

I made no complains about SAP or Microsoft support! It is just my technical evaluation of this special case. Sorry, I don't get your point.

Sven

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Lars, hi Sven.

Guys please don´t get upset.

Thanks all for your help.

Answers (0)