I've always thought that many event numbers produced by most applications were simply too short and simple, after all, how can you hope to cover all the eventualities with only 4/5 characters. With the change in Backup Exec in recent versions to much longer event numbers you would think they could tie things down much more specifically, but apparently not.
Looking at an error we've been seeing recently, we're getting this when running a backup :
V-79-57344-33938 - An error occurred on a query to database
So you might think with a possible 1,000,000,000,000 event numbers available that this error would be specific to the problem I'm seeing, and allow me to find more information directly relating to it... of course you'd be wrong.
Clicking on the link provided by the Job History shows me 9 different articles all apparently relating to this one error. 6 of them refer to restore jobs rather than backup jobs, 2 relate to SQL 2005 not 2000 as is the case in this instance, 2 relate to running SQL 7 alongside 2000 which we're not doing and of the 2 which do relate to backups in their titles, the contents either refer to SQL 7 or to you having an incomplete restore operation preventing the backup from running.
Now I realise that producing written content for up to a trillion error numbers would be a mammoth task, but personally if I'm searching for a specific event number and no content exists for it yet I'd prefer to know that, rather than trawl through mountains of knowledge base articles in the hope that one might actually be relevant to my situation! I can always then search using words from the error message to find articles that are similar, and try things from there!
