| Previous | Next |
| hrInvalidBackup | hrMissingLogFile |
hrRecoveredWithErrors
Operational meaning
For hrRecoveredWithErrors, the useful interpretation begins with the object and phase that returned the value. The decisive boundary is repair or restore completed far enough to produce output but encountered errors that affect confidence in the result.
The stored Value is 0xC800020F (negative JET error -527; -527). The HRESULT carries failure severity, so output state must be treated according to the individual API contract. Current ESE documentation uses JET_errRecoveredWithErrors for the corresponding published JET condition.
The first useful distinction is that this is not clean success; using the database without validation can conceal lost or inconsistent data. Start by collect every preceding repair event, affected page/table, skipped operation, final database state, and application-level verification results. That separates a reproducible incident from a later generic cleanup or service error.
Before altering files or retrying
Preserve the first result before retries, cleanup, service restart, or file replacement changes the evidence. The diagnostic record should identify the exact API phase and the owner of every handle or artifact involved.
- Code-specific observation: collect every preceding repair event, affected page/table, skipped operation, final database state, and application-level verification results.
- Required log positions: record it together with this result and the timestamp of the first occurrence.
- Database header and state: record it together with this result and the timestamp of the first occurrence.
- Signatures, page size, and hashes: record it together with this result and the timestamp of the first occurrence.
- Backup identity and restore map: record it together with this result and the timestamp of the first occurrence.
Use hashes, lengths, IDs, generation numbers, and redacted samples instead of copying directory contents or sensitive database values into routine logs. For this it investigation, a complete provenance chain is often more useful than a second automatic retry.
Comparison points
It specifically means that this is not clean success; using the database without validation can conceal lost or inconsistent data. Related values below can appear in the same workflow but require a different response:
hrBadBackupDatabaseSize | the backed-up database file length is not aligned to the database page-size boundary expected by ESE |
|---|---|
hrConsistentTimeMismatch | the database last-consistent timestamp does not match the recovery or backup lineage being applied |
hrDatabaseInconsistent | the database is not in a clean transaction-consistent state and requires recovery before normal use |
Keep the original constant and hexadecimal value in telemetry. Replacing it with “backup failed” or “database warning” removes the state information needed to select the next legal API call.
Objects and state involved
| Diagnostic layer | database, patch, log, and backup metadata that establish one recoverable lineage |
|---|---|
| Relevant API surface | hard recovery, database-header inspection, patch application, and post-restore validation |
| Code-specific boundary | repair or restore completed far enough to produce output but encountered errors that affect confidence in the result |
| Narrow corrective direction | preserve the original, validate the recovered copy, and prefer restoration from a known-good backup where available |
A hard-recovery failure leaves the restored database invalid; retry begins from a fresh restored copy., database state, signature, page size, consistent time, and required logs must agree.
Recommended handling
- Record it,
0xC800020F, the API name, the current phase, and all live context or file owners. - Verify the decisive condition by collect every preceding repair event, affected page/table, skipped operation, final database state, and application-level verification results.
- Apply only the narrow correction: preserve the original, validate the recovered copy, and prefer restoration from a known-good backup where available.
- After it, recreate any context invalidated by the failure; do not carry stale HBC, cursor, file, or restore-map state into the retry.
- repeat the smallest non-destructive test that reaches the same boundary, then verify both the return value and the resulting file, cursor, backup, or database state.
Acceptance criteria for a fix
A useful regression test for this HRESULT should force the condition “repair or restore completed far enough to produce output but encountered errors that affect confidence in the result”, call one documented API transition, and assert the exact HRESULT. The corrected the case should change only the decisive precondition and should verify cleanup as well as the primary output. For the result backup or restore path, also prove that the resulting set can be enumerated and that no file handle or context remains active after finalization.
Actions that can make diagnosis worse
- do not attach a dirty or mismatched database as if it were clean.
- do not modify the only backup copy in place.
- do not discard the first lower-level Win32, RPC, or JET result merely because a later cleanup call returned a more familiar error.
Technical references
- JetExternalRestore behavior — API ordering, file semantics, warning/error interpretation, or recovery behavior relevant to it.
- Database header information
- ESE error-code table
- Microsoft JET_ERR enumeration
Looking for a different code? Search another status or error code.