Internal Error 3 in module 9 while upgrading

mohana_cse06

We are getting below error and crashing development environment while converting NAV2009R2 do to NAV2013.
Did anyone have a solution for this?

Description:
Interne fout 3 opgetreden in module 9.

Problem signature:
Problem Event Name: NavisionInternalError
Problem Signature 01: Dynamics NAV Development Environment
Problem Signature 02: 7.0.44969.0
Problem Signature 03: 3
Problem Signature 04: 9
OS Version: 6.1.7601.2.1.0.272.7
Locale ID: 1043

Additional information about the problem:
LCID: 1033

Read our privacy statement online:
http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=104288&clcid=0x0409

If the online privacy statement is not available, please read our privacy statement offline:
C:\Windows\system32\en-US\erofflps.txt

mohana_cse06

Some binary values in the field ‘RecID’ are causing a buffer overflow while reading them, most probably while storing these values in the older version the validation did not run properly.

Peter+is1

Hi,

Could it be that you have problems with a Dutch database and a US/English NAV?

mohana_cse06

Do you mean Dutch localization and US/Wi build client?

Peter+is1

Hi,

I cannot see what you are doing (localization or client) but the error has a description in dutch and I think I see a US locale id and NL(dutch) locale id. Perhaps the two don't mix. Perhaps...

My first step however, would be to run a data consistency check on the 2009... Because I have heard of upgrades failing because of missing/broken relations.

good luck.

mohana_cse06

I have run DBCC check on SQl and no errors.
now We are running table relations test on NAV and it is running from last 4 days..
DB size is 80 Gb and I never know it will take this muck time.

swpolo

Mohana,
Did you find solution for your problem?
Could you please share you exeperience?
Thanks

mohana_cse06

I created a support case to MS and uploaded the bkp.
They are working in it.

mohana_cse06

Some binary values in the field ‘RecID’ are causing a buffer overflow while reading them, most probably while storing these values in the older version the validation did not run properly.