Error 17883

Hi ~
I realize that this has been posted on, but I am confused. We are
getting an error in our event logs at odd times (not at backup times or
anything) with the infamous Error: 17883, Severity: 1, State: 0 Process
0:0 (e54) UMS Context 0x121CA9A0 appears to be non-yielding on
Scheduler 3, or a variant there of.. and so far, the only solution
that I can see for this problem on a Win2K server running SQL 2000 SP4
is to downgrade to SQL 2000 sp3a... I can't really see this as a valid
option though, as this would open the server to known security flaws,
etc... correct? Are there any other options?Hi
17883 errors have been around since SP3 (the error was introduced to show
issues that were there, but were not detectable by users).
More and more have been fixed in the various hotfixes since then. It is best
for you to open a case with Microsoft Support so that they can sort the
problem out for you.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"shandain@.gmail.com" wrote:

> Hi ~
> I realize that this has been posted on, but I am confused. We are
> getting an error in our event logs at odd times (not at backup times or
> anything) with the infamous Error: 17883, Severity: 1, State: 0 Process
> 0:0 (e54) UMS Context 0x121CA9A0 appears to be non-yielding on
> Scheduler 3, or a variant there of.. and so far, the only solution
> that I can see for this problem on a Win2K server running SQL 2000 SP4
> is to downgrade to SQL 2000 sp3a... I can't really see this as a valid
> option though, as this would open the server to known security flaws,
> etc... correct? Are there any other options?
>|||I had this error after MS05-027 applied. Removing MS05-027 fixed the
problem. It happened on 2 DL380 G2 Compaq servers with exac same h/w. All
drivers were up-to-date. Engineers from MS admitted it was a rare bug
reported only by 2 customers. Since it affected only 2 customers MS didn't
want to think of a fix and asked us to seal the port 454.
<shandain@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1125535239.274678.73180@.o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Hi ~
> I realize that this has been posted on, but I am confused. We are
> getting an error in our event logs at odd times (not at backup times or
> anything) with the infamous Error: 17883, Severity: 1, State: 0 Process
> 0:0 (e54) UMS Context 0x121CA9A0 appears to be non-yielding on
> Scheduler 3, or a variant there of.. and so far, the only solution
> that I can see for this problem on a Win2K server running SQL 2000 SP4
> is to downgrade to SQL 2000 sp3a... I can't really see this as a valid
> option though, as this would open the server to known security flaws,
> etc... correct? Are there any other options?
>|||I met this error on SP3a after moving to SAN. Now we are trying to install
SP4 to fix this issue. You can find my post on Sept 1. Are you running on
SAN?
Bill
"shandain@.gmail.com" wrote:

> Hi ~
> I realize that this has been posted on, but I am confused. We are
> getting an error in our event logs at odd times (not at backup times or
> anything) with the infamous Error: 17883, Severity: 1, State: 0 Process
> 0:0 (e54) UMS Context 0x121CA9A0 appears to be non-yielding on
> Scheduler 3, or a variant there of.. and so far, the only solution
> that I can see for this problem on a Win2K server running SQL 2000 SP4
> is to downgrade to SQL 2000 sp3a... I can't really see this as a valid
> option though, as this would open the server to known security flaws,
> etc... correct? Are there any other options?
>|||How do i remove MS05-027 as it is not showing up in the add remove programs.
(I'm not sure if i have removed it but i am still getting the 17883 errors
when trying to backup databases)
"ME" wrote:

> I had this error after MS05-027 applied. Removing MS05-027 fixed the
> problem. It happened on 2 DL380 G2 Compaq servers with exac same h/w. Al
l
> drivers were up-to-date. Engineers from MS admitted it was a rare bug
> reported only by 2 customers. Since it affected only 2 customers MS didn'
t
> want to think of a fix and asked us to seal the port 454.
>
> <shandain@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1125535239.274678.73180@.o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
>