From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Thu Oct  1 10:27:35 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 11:27:35 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Multi-column Clustered index
Message-ID: <4AC4CA67.9070909@colbyconsulting.com>

I am reading an article about clustered indexes which recommend against setting multi-column 
clustered indexes where possible.  My understanding is that if data is in a clustered index then the 
data can be directly obtained from that index rather than having to go to the table itself.  My 
understanding is also that the organization of a clustered index is much more efficient than the 
organization of the rest of the table.

I commonly have tables where I have:

PK, FName, LName, Addr, City, St, Zip5, Zip4, HashAddr, HashFamily, HashPerson

Doesn't it makes sense to just place every single field in this table in a clustered index.  In that 
case every field of every record is available from the index and thus no retrieval of field data 
would need to go to the table itself.

If it does make sense, is it possible to get rid of the actual table and ONLY have the clustered 
index remain?  Is that possible?

-- 
John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


From robert at webedb.com  Thu Oct  1 13:56:19 2009
From: robert at webedb.com (Robert Stewart)
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 13:56:19 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] SQL Server speed issues
In-Reply-To: <mailman.5.1254416401.5220.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors.c
 om>
References: <mailman.5.1254416401.5220.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors.com>
Message-ID: <200910011856.n91IubaJ000826@databaseadvisors.com>

Here is the code to run as an SP to truncate you log file. Truncate 
is not automatic with shrink.

CREATE PROCEDURE [DBO].[usp_Truncate_Log] AS
BEGIN
      EXEC sp_dboption 'SSMS_BCAM' , 'trunc. log on chkpt.','TRUE'
END
BEGIN
      CHECKPOINT
END
BEGIN
      EXEC sp_dboption 'SSMS_BCAM' , 'trunc. log on chkpt.','FALSE'
END
BEGIN
      DBCC SHRINKFILE(SSMS_Log,1)
END

GO

Replace SSMS_BCAM with the name of your DB
Replace SSMS_Log with the name of the log file.

Running the SP above every-so-often in your code will keep them smaller.

Also, running things so that you can use transactions might allow you 
to commit them more often and reduce the size of the temdb to hold 
all of it before committing it at the end of the process.

The tempdb is where everything is stored. It shrinks back down to the 
600+ meg after it is finished doing what it does. You need to check 
the size of it as you are performing the processing to see how big it 
really gets.


At 12:00 PM 10/1/2009, you wrote:
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:14:14 -0400
>From: jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com>
>Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] SQL Server speed issues - was server
>         locking
>To: Discussion concerning MS SQL Server
>         <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>
>Message-ID: <4AC3AE06.7080407 at colbyconsulting.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>Sorry Robert, I didn't answer the questions.
>
>The log files get huge pretty quickly.  In use I don't really care 
>as that is what they are for.
>However as I have mentioned, the application is really static 
>data.  I get tables of addresses, send
>them out for address validation, pull the resulting data (includes 
>but more than the original
>addresses), process the data and then... just use the data for 
>"quite awhile", then send out for
>address validation again, process the results and then... just use 
>the data for "quite awhile".
>There are zero "transactions" in the normal sense.  The resulting 
>data are read-only for weeks or
>months at a time.
>
>So under normal circumstances I want to use the log files, then "do 
>whatever" to get them to as
>close as possible to zero bytes.  Truncate, shrink, doesn't matter 
>to me as long as it works.
>
>In the past the log files were always 99% available and I just used 
>the shrink wizard.  I do need to
>automate this process so that when the address validation process 
>finishes, it TRUNCATES the log
>file as the final process.  The log file will not be used again for 
>weeks or more so why leave it huge.
>
>  >> How big is your log file?
>
>That depends on what is going on, how many records in the table 
>being processed etc.  For this
>specific process for this specific database, for 20 million records, 
>about 15 GB when it is all
>finished.
>
>  >> Have you truncated it?
>
>Not in so many words.  I have never run any code with the TRUNCATE 
>keyword.  I have always used the
>"shrink files" dialog from inside of SS.  My understanding is that 
>the wizard performed a TRUNCATE
>behind the scenes but who am I to say?  I will almost certainly do 
>so eventually.
>
>  >> How big is your space for the tempdb file?
>
>The temp db runs on a separate raid0 array, two 320g drives, 
>apparently waaaayyyy to big for the
>requirements.  The array is 600 gb and the temp db (after all this 
>horsing around) is currently 640
>mb.  The temp db is the only thing on that array.
>
>My log files run on another array.  Raid1, using two 500gb drives 
>for a total of 500gb available.
>That array is used only for the log files, though all of the log 
>files are on that one array.  At
>this instant the total space used for logs is 16 GB, though I have 
>seen a single log file get as big
>as 100 GB under heaving processing as I am setting up a large (100 
>million record) database.  When
>done I just shrink the log back down though.
>
>The main DATA array is a raid6 array of six 1 tb drives, divided 
>into two 2 tb volumes.  All the
>data files are on one of the two volumes.  The other volume is used 
>for general data storage.  Given
>that both of the two terabyte volumes are on the same array (set of 
>spindles) my understanding is
>that it doesn't matter if they are all on the same volume.
>
>The system drive is on its own array, Raid1, using two 1 tb 
>drives.  That array is divided into two
>volumes, 300g for boot (C:) and 700g for data.  The main SQL Server 
>installation is on that C:
>drive, with the master database etc on that volume.
>
>And then there is a 1 tb backup drive sitting on the end of an ESATA 
>cable in an external enclosure.
>
>All of the RAID arrays are on a single ARECA controller card with 2 
>gigs of RAM onboard.  One thing
>I want to try is to move the raid arrays for the logs and tempdb off 
>to a second controller card
>which I have sitting on the shelf.  That would put it on a separate 
>co-processor, and a separate
>PCI-Express x8 interface to the processor.  Unfortunately that 
>second controller has only a fixed
>256 MB of memory available to it, and I don't know whether to put 
>the data or the logs on the bigger
>card.  And of course just touching stuff that is working is always a risk.
>
>John W. Colby
>www.ColbyConsulting.com
>


From robert at webedb.com  Thu Oct  1 14:02:55 2009
From: robert at webedb.com (Robert Stewart)
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:02:55 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Multi-column Clustered index
In-Reply-To: <mailman.5.1254416401.5220.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors.c
 om>
References: <mailman.5.1254416401.5220.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors.com>
Message-ID: <200910011903.n91J3Df3002314@databaseadvisors.com>

Did you also read that the table is ordered in the same sequence as 
the clustered index?

Try inserting Ansel Adams into your table with a clustered index like 
you have, and it has to move the millions of records in it down 
alphabetically in order to do it.  Disaster for performance.  If you 
have static data where you are not inserting rows or updating columns 
in the clustered index, and, you place in the clustered index on it 
after you are finished getting the data into the table, it might work 
well.  But never for a non-static data source.

No, you cannot get rid of the table and only have the index.


At 12:00 PM 10/1/2009, you wrote:
>Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 11:27:35 -0400
>From: jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com>
>Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Multi-column Clustered index
>To: Dba-Sqlserver <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>
>Message-ID: <4AC4CA67.9070909 at colbyconsulting.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>I am reading an article about clustered indexes which recommend 
>against setting multi-column
>clustered indexes where possible.  My understanding is that if data 
>is in a clustered index then the
>data can be directly obtained from that index rather than having to 
>go to the table itself.  My
>understanding is also that the organization of a clustered index is 
>much more efficient than the
>organization of the rest of the table.
>
>I commonly have tables where I have:
>
>PK, FName, LName, Addr, City, St, Zip5, Zip4, HashAddr, HashFamily, HashPerson
>
>Doesn't it makes sense to just place every single field in this 
>table in a clustered index.  In that
>case every field of every record is available from the index and 
>thus no retrieval of field data
>would need to go to the table itself.
>
>If it does make sense, is it possible to get rid of the actual table 
>and ONLY have the clustered
>index remain?  Is that possible?
>
>--
>John W. Colby
>www.ColbyConsulting.com


From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Thu Oct  1 14:40:07 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 15:40:07 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Multi-column Clustered index
In-Reply-To: <200910011903.n91J3Df3002314@databaseadvisors.com>
References: <mailman.5.1254416401.5220.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors.com>
	<200910011903.n91J3Df3002314@databaseadvisors.com>
Message-ID: <4AC50597.4090109@colbyconsulting.com>

Robert,

That is exactly the situation.  These tables are entirely static, no insertions or deletions ever 
take place.  Once the initial processing, there aren't even any updates.  Read-only.

John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


Robert Stewart wrote:
> Did you also read that the table is ordered in the same sequence as 
> the clustered index?
> 
> Try inserting Ansel Adams into your table with a clustered index like 
> you have, and it has to move the millions of records in it down 
> alphabetically in order to do it.  Disaster for performance.  If you 
> have static data where you are not inserting rows or updating columns 
> in the clustered index, and, you place in the clustered index on it 
> after you are finished getting the data into the table, it might work 
> well.  But never for a non-static data source.
> 
> No, you cannot get rid of the table and only have the index.
> 
> 
> At 12:00 PM 10/1/2009, you wrote:
>> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 11:27:35 -0400
>> From: jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com>
>> Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Multi-column Clustered index
>> To: Dba-Sqlserver <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>
>> Message-ID: <4AC4CA67.9070909 at colbyconsulting.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>> I am reading an article about clustered indexes which recommend 
>> against setting multi-column
>> clustered indexes where possible.  My understanding is that if data 
>> is in a clustered index then the
>> data can be directly obtained from that index rather than having to 
>> go to the table itself.  My
>> understanding is also that the organization of a clustered index is 
>> much more efficient than the
>> organization of the rest of the table.
>>
>> I commonly have tables where I have:
>>
>> PK, FName, LName, Addr, City, St, Zip5, Zip4, HashAddr, HashFamily, HashPerson
>>
>> Doesn't it makes sense to just place every single field in this 
>> table in a clustered index.  In that
>> case every field of every record is available from the index and 
>> thus no retrieval of field data
>> would need to go to the table itself.
>>
>> If it does make sense, is it possible to get rid of the actual table 
>> and ONLY have the clustered
>> index remain?  Is that possible?
>>
>> --
>> John W. Colby
>> www.ColbyConsulting.com
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 
> 


From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Thu Oct  1 20:03:22 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:03:22 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] SQL Server not locking up
Message-ID: <4AC5515A.3070008@colbyconsulting.com>

I am hesitantly declaring victory in the SQL Server war.  I am going to award Nancy Lytle the award 
for the correct solution, with the proviso that she has to give it back if it turns out that the 
wily server misbehaves again.  Since setting Max Degree of Parallelism to 3 I have not been locked 
out again.  Understand that about this same time I also changed processor I/O affinity to only use 
the same three CPUs that I set CPU affinity for.

And I have had so many problems with this, where it went away and then came back that I am very 
hesitant to declare victory but I did want to report back that the "locking up" issue hasn't 
recurred lately.

Thanks go to everyone who volunteered suggestions.

-- 
John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


From paul.hartland at googlemail.com  Fri Oct  2 03:29:20 2009
From: paul.hartland at googlemail.com (Paul Hartland)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 09:29:20 +0100
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] SQL Server 2005 Update Trigger
Message-ID: <38c884770910020129t28fcca0cj77e1a12d273c0c70@mail.gmail.com>

To all,

Only really done very basic work with triggers on SQL Server, I have an
audit table where the trigger will records updates to & a table where if a
certain column gets updated the trigger will fire, and record on the audit
table.

Is there anyway I can get the name of the stored procedure or the
application that caused the update so that I can also log this in my audit
table.

Thank you in advance for any help on this.

-- 
Paul Hartland
paul.hartland at googlemail.com


From nancy.lytle at gmail.com  Fri Oct  2 06:58:50 2009
From: nancy.lytle at gmail.com (Nancy Lytle)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 06:58:50 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] SQL Server not locking up
In-Reply-To: <4AC5515A.3070008@colbyconsulting.com>
References: <4AC5515A.3070008@colbyconsulting.com>
Message-ID: <BAY134-W2037FF41760FB7657630BC84D20@phx.gbl>


Thanks John.  I know that solution has worked for me, and it is one that is often over looked.  If it ever acts up again you could drop it one more, down to 2.  But hopefully you have hit the sweet spot already.

Nancy Lytle 
N_Lytle at terpalum.umd.edu









 EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD
Join me
 
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 21:03:22 -0400
> From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com
> To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com; dba-vb at databaseadvisors.com; accessd at databaseadvisors.com
> Subject: [dba-SQLServer] SQL Server not locking up
> 
> I am hesitantly declaring victory in the SQL Server war. I am going to award Nancy Lytle the award 
> for the correct solution, with the proviso that she has to give it back if it turns out that the 
> wily server misbehaves again. Since setting Max Degree of Parallelism to 3 I have not been locked 
> out again. Understand that about this same time I also changed processor I/O affinity to only use 
> the same three CPUs that I set CPU affinity for.
> 
> And I have had so many problems with this, where it went away and then came back that I am very 
> hesitant to declare victory but I did want to report back that the "locking up" issue hasn't 
> recurred lately.
> 
> Thanks go to everyone who volunteered suggestions.
> 
> -- 
> John W. Colby
> www.ColbyConsulting.com
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 
 		 	   		  

From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Fri Oct  2 07:13:38 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:13:38 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] SQL Server not locking up
In-Reply-To: <BAY134-W2037FF41760FB7657630BC84D20@phx.gbl>
References: <4AC5515A.3070008@colbyconsulting.com>
	<BAY134-W2037FF41760FB7657630BC84D20@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4AC5EE72.6060905@colbyconsulting.com>

Nancy,

The server (machine) is for SQL Server so it makes sense to give SS as much power as you reasonably 
can.

John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


Nancy Lytle wrote:
> Thanks John.  I know that solution has worked for me, and it is one that is often over looked.  If it ever acts up again you could drop it one more, down to 2.  But hopefully you have hit the sweet spot already.
> 
> Nancy Lytle 
> N_Lytle at terpalum.umd.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD
> Join me
>  
>> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 21:03:22 -0400
>> From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com
>> To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com; dba-vb at databaseadvisors.com; accessd at databaseadvisors.com
>> Subject: [dba-SQLServer] SQL Server not locking up
>>
>> I am hesitantly declaring victory in the SQL Server war. I am going to award Nancy Lytle the award 
>> for the correct solution, with the proviso that she has to give it back if it turns out that the 
>> wily server misbehaves again. Since setting Max Degree of Parallelism to 3 I have not been locked 
>> out again. Understand that about this same time I also changed processor I/O affinity to only use 
>> the same three CPUs that I set CPU affinity for.
>>
>> And I have had so many problems with this, where it went away and then came back that I am very 
>> hesitant to declare victory but I did want to report back that the "locking up" issue hasn't 
>> recurred lately.
>>
>> Thanks go to everyone who volunteered suggestions.
>>
>> -- 
>> John W. Colby
>> www.ColbyConsulting.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> dba-SQLServer mailing list
>> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
>> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>>
>  		 	   		  
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 
> 


From nancy.lytle at gmail.com  Fri Oct  2 07:23:28 2009
From: nancy.lytle at gmail.com (Nancy Lytle)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 07:23:28 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] SQL Server not locking up
In-Reply-To: <4AC5EE72.6060905@colbyconsulting.com>
References: <4AC5515A.3070008@colbyconsulting.com>
	<BAY134-W2037FF41760FB7657630BC84D20@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <BAY134-W1449FD417D9DB06436194B84D20@phx.gbl>


I keep forgetting most people have actual dedicated SQL machines.  My SQL machines are file servers, application servers, IIS servers, and SQL Servers, so there is a lot to spread around.

Just glad you got it working for your needs.

Nancy Lytle 
N_Lytle at terpalum.umd.edu











 EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD
Join me


 
> Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 08:13:38 -0400
> From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com
> To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
> Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] SQL Server not locking up
> 
> Nancy,
> 
> The server (machine) is for SQL Server so it makes sense to give SS as much power as you reasonably 
> can.
> 
> John W. Colby
> www.ColbyConsulting.com
> 
> 
> Nancy Lytle wrote:
> > Thanks John. I know that solution has worked for me, and it is one that is often over looked. If it ever acts up again you could drop it one more, down to 2. But hopefully you have hit the sweet spot already.
> > 
> > Nancy Lytle 
> > N_Lytle at terpalum.umd.edu
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD
> > Join me
> > 
> >> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 21:03:22 -0400
> >> From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com
> >> To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com; dba-vb at databaseadvisors.com; accessd at databaseadvisors.com
> >> Subject: [dba-SQLServer] SQL Server not locking up
> >>
> >> I am hesitantly declaring victory in the SQL Server war. I am going to award Nancy Lytle the award 
> >> for the correct solution, with the proviso that she has to give it back if it turns out that the 
> >> wily server misbehaves again. Since setting Max Degree of Parallelism to 3 I have not been locked 
> >> out again. Understand that about this same time I also changed processor I/O affinity to only use 
> >> the same three CPUs that I set CPU affinity for.
> >>
> >> And I have had so many problems with this, where it went away and then came back that I am very 
> >> hesitant to declare victory but I did want to report back that the "locking up" issue hasn't 
> >> recurred lately.
> >>
> >> Thanks go to everyone who volunteered suggestions.
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> John W. Colby
> >> www.ColbyConsulting.com
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> >> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> >> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> >> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> >>
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > 
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 
 		 	   		  

From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Tue Oct  6 07:37:19 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:37:19 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Top 25 most dangerous programming errors
Message-ID: <4ACB39FF.5030302@colbyconsulting.com>

I just stumbled across this today.  I'll be reading through them to see what i can learn.

http://cwe.mitre.org/top25/

-- 
John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Tue Oct  6 16:34:40 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:34:40 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Transactions
Message-ID: <4ACBB7F0.8090507@colbyconsulting.com>

Is it possible to tell SQL Server to use transactions inside of a single query?

I routinely do things like update a single field for 50 million records.  It might be beneficial to 
be able to tell SQL Server to commit the updates every N million records.  I have no idea whether it 
is possible, or if it is what the results would be but I thought it worth asking the question.

Can it be done?  Would it make any difference.

-- 
John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


From davidmcafee at gmail.com  Tue Oct  6 16:51:10 2009
From: davidmcafee at gmail.com (David McAfee)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 14:51:10 -0700
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Transactions
In-Reply-To: <4ACBB7F0.8090507@colbyconsulting.com>
References: <4ACBB7F0.8090507@colbyconsulting.com>
Message-ID: <8786a4c00910061451g48a9580cs8a8e6d43cf5a91be@mail.gmail.com>

BEGIN TRAN JC1

SELECT Something

INSERT INTO TABLE tblSomeTable
SELECT SOMETHING

UPDATE tblSomewthing SET Something = SOmethingElse


ROLLBACK TRAN JC1
--If everything works as expected, comment above line and uncomment next line
--COMMIT TRAN JC1

On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:34 PM, jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com> wrote:
> Is it possible to tell SQL Server to use transactions inside of a single query?
>
> I routinely do things like update a single field for 50 million records. ?It might be beneficial to
> be able to tell SQL Server to commit the updates every N million records. ?I have no idea whether it
> is possible, or if it is what the results would be but I thought it worth asking the question.
>
> Can it be done? ?Would it make any difference.
>
> --
> John W. Colby
> www.ColbyConsulting.com
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>



From fhtapia at gmail.com  Tue Oct  6 16:59:10 2009
From: fhtapia at gmail.com (Francisco Tapia)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 14:59:10 -0700
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Transactions
In-Reply-To: <8786a4c00910061451g48a9580cs8a8e6d43cf5a91be@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4ACBB7F0.8090507@colbyconsulting.com>
	<8786a4c00910061451g48a9580cs8a8e6d43cf5a91be@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b874372a0910061459v467c9019g672448191244675d@mail.gmail.com>

One minor change, (see below)
also follow this link
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa175920%28SQL.80%29.aspx

-Francisco
http://sqlthis.blogspot.com | Tsql and More...


On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:51 PM, David McAfee <davidmcafee at gmail.com> wrote:

> BEGIN TRAN JC1
>
> SELECT Something
>
> INSERT INTO TABLE tblSomeTable
> SELECT SOMETHING
>
> UPDATE tblSomewthing SET Something = SOmethingElse
>
> IF @@ERROR <> 0
>
 BEGIN

> ROLLBACK TRAN JC1
>
  END
ELSE
 BEGIN
  COMMIT TRAN JC1
 END

>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:34 PM, jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com>
> wrote:
> > Is it possible to tell SQL Server to use transactions inside of a single
> query?
> >
> > I routinely do things like update a single field for 50 million records.
>  It might be beneficial to
> > be able to tell SQL Server to commit the updates every N million records.
>  I have no idea whether it
> > is possible, or if it is what the results would be but I thought it worth
> asking the question.
> >
> > Can it be done?  Would it make any difference.
> >
> > --
> > John W. Colby
> > www.ColbyConsulting.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>


From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Tue Oct  6 19:39:12 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:39:12 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Transactions
In-Reply-To: <8786a4c00910061451g48a9580cs8a8e6d43cf5a91be@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4ACBB7F0.8090507@colbyconsulting.com>
	<8786a4c00910061451g48a9580cs8a8e6d43cf5a91be@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4ACBE330.8010600@colbyconsulting.com>

No David, this is manually breaking the insert down into X separate insert queries, then wrapping 
each in a transaction.  I am talking about a SINGLE insert or a SINGLE Update SQL Statement where 50 
million records are going to be inserted or updated, but where SQL Server stops every 10 million 
records and performs the insert or update for the first 10 million records, then again 10 million 
records later etc.

John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


David McAfee wrote:
> BEGIN TRAN JC1
> 
> SELECT Something
> 
> INSERT INTO TABLE tblSomeTable
> SELECT SOMETHING
> 
> UPDATE tblSomewthing SET Something = SOmethingElse
> 
> 
> ROLLBACK TRAN JC1
> --If everything works as expected, comment above line and uncomment next line
> --COMMIT TRAN JC1
> 
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:34 PM, jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com> wrote:
>> Is it possible to tell SQL Server to use transactions inside of a single query?
>>
>> I routinely do things like update a single field for 50 million records.  It might be beneficial to
>> be able to tell SQL Server to commit the updates every N million records.  I have no idea whether it
>> is possible, or if it is what the results would be but I thought it worth asking the question.
>>
>> Can it be done?  Would it make any difference.
>>
>> --
>> John W. Colby
>> www.ColbyConsulting.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> dba-SQLServer mailing list
>> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
>> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>>
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 
> 


From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Wed Oct  7 07:23:52 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 08:23:52 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Drop index in another database
Message-ID: <4ACC8858.6080203@colbyconsulting.com>

I am attempting to write a stored procedure that exists in a database of stored procedures.  This 
stored procedure needs to create an index on a table in a database and table which are passed in 
parameters, update a field in that database / table, then drop the index when done.

In studying the drop index syntax it clearly states "in the current database".

Does SQL (the language) not have syntax for dropping an index in a table in a different database 
from the one the SQL statement exists in?

Is it possible to use something like

Use @DBName to cause this to work?

Is there something else I should be doing (other than a different line of work ;)

-- 
John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Wed Oct  7 07:31:10 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 08:31:10 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Drop index in another database
In-Reply-To: <4ACC8858.6080203@colbyconsulting.com>
References: <4ACC8858.6080203@colbyconsulting.com>
Message-ID: <4ACC8A0E.20209@colbyconsulting.com>

Sorry guys, I found it as soon as I pressed send.

Thanks,

John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


jwcolby wrote:
> I am attempting to write a stored procedure that exists in a database of stored procedures.  This 
> stored procedure needs to create an index on a table in a database and table which are passed in 
> parameters, update a field in that database / table, then drop the index when done.
> 
> In studying the drop index syntax it clearly states "in the current database".
> 
> Does SQL (the language) not have syntax for dropping an index in a table in a different database 
> from the one the SQL statement exists in?
> 
> Is it possible to use something like
> 
> Use @DBName to cause this to work?
> 
> Is there something else I should be doing (other than a different line of work ;)
> 


From james at fcidms.com  Wed Oct  7 08:06:46 2009
From: james at fcidms.com (James Barash)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 09:06:46 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Transactions
In-Reply-To: <4ACBB7F0.8090507@colbyconsulting.com>
Message-ID: <12D2F894654B53498DEF840AE12B7BB320AF1D61@fciexchange.fcidms.com>

John:
Yes, it can be done. It can help to keep the transaction log files from getting too large. You just need a way to determine which records have already been updated. The following will update 1,000,000 records per transaction. 

James Barash

Set rowcount 1000000

Declare @rc int
Set @rc=1000000

While @rc=1000000
 Begin

  Begin Transaction

  Update MyTable 
    Set MyField = 0
  From MyTable 
  Where MyField <> 0

  Select @rc=@@rowcount

  Commit Transaction
 End 

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jwcolby
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 5:35 PM
To: Dba-Sqlserver
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Transactions

Is it possible to tell SQL Server to use transactions inside of a single query?

I routinely do things like update a single field for 50 million records.  It might be beneficial to be able to tell SQL Server to commit the updates every N million records.  I have no idea whether it is possible, or if it is what the results would be but I thought it worth asking the question.

Can it be done?  Would it make any difference.

--
John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com




From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Wed Oct  7 09:49:36 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 10:49:36 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Transactions
In-Reply-To: <12D2F894654B53498DEF840AE12B7BB320AF1D61@fciexchange.fcidms.com>
References: <12D2F894654B53498DEF840AE12B7BB320AF1D61@fciexchange.fcidms.com>
Message-ID: <4ACCAA80.10106@colbyconsulting.com>

Cool, thanks James.

John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


James Barash wrote:
> John:
> Yes, it can be done. It can help to keep the transaction log files from getting too large. You just need a way to determine which records have already been updated. The following will update 1,000,000 records per transaction. 
> 
> James Barash
> 
> Set rowcount 1000000
> 
> Declare @rc int
> Set @rc=1000000
> 
> While @rc=1000000
>  Begin
> 
>   Begin Transaction
> 
>   Update MyTable 
>     Set MyField = 0
>   From MyTable 
>   Where MyField <> 0
> 
>   Select @rc=@@rowcount
> 
>   Commit Transaction
>  End 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jwcolby
> Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 5:35 PM
> To: Dba-Sqlserver
> Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Transactions
> 
> Is it possible to tell SQL Server to use transactions inside of a single query?
> 
> I routinely do things like update a single field for 50 million records.  It might be beneficial to be able to tell SQL Server to commit the updates every N million records.  I have no idea whether it is possible, or if it is what the results would be but I thought it worth asking the question.
> 
> Can it be done?  Would it make any difference.
> 
> --
> John W. Colby
> www.ColbyConsulting.com
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 
> 


From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Wed Oct  7 10:19:24 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 11:19:24 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Error logging
Message-ID: <4ACCB17C.8000208@colbyconsulting.com>

I have reached the point where I need to start logging processes (SQL Statements) and any errors 
encountered in my stored procedures.

I typically run stored procedures where I will create a field in a table, create an index to 
facilitate updating that field, update the field, then drop the index.  There can be many processes 
in that stored procedure, 4 or 5 or more.  I want to log after each step.

My concept is to build a ProcessLog table where I log the process itself.  This table would hold 
things like ProcName, ProcMemo, ProcDate, ErrInt, ErrStr.

It seems logical to create a stored procedure to call after each process completes or in the Catch 
statement in order to log errors.  This stored procedure would accept parameters and actually write 
to the log table.

The process steps usually take a long time, often minutes or even tens of minutes, thus the time to 
log each one is not an issue.

I assume that many of you do something similar so I am asking for guidance or advice for how you 
handle this.
-- 
John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


From mikedorism at verizon.net  Wed Oct  7 17:41:44 2009
From: mikedorism at verizon.net (Doris Manning)
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 18:41:44 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Error logging
In-Reply-To: <4ACCB17C.8000208@colbyconsulting.com>
References: <4ACCB17C.8000208@colbyconsulting.com>
Message-ID: <7F79D348C6C84CACA1ECB57B9ADBC6B0@Kermit>

If you check @@Error after each step of the process, you can do it all
within the SP itself.

Doris Manning
Database Administrator
Hargrove Inc. 

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jwcolby
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 11:19 AM
To: Dba-Sqlserver
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Error logging

I have reached the point where I need to start logging processes (SQL
Statements) and any errors encountered in my stored procedures.

I typically run stored procedures where I will create a field in a table,
create an index to facilitate updating that field, update the field, then
drop the index.  There can be many processes in that stored procedure, 4 or
5 or more.  I want to log after each step.

My concept is to build a ProcessLog table where I log the process itself.
This table would hold things like ProcName, ProcMemo, ProcDate, ErrInt,
ErrStr.

It seems logical to create a stored procedure to call after each process
completes or in the Catch statement in order to log errors.  This stored
procedure would accept parameters and actually write to the log table.

The process steps usually take a long time, often minutes or even tens of
minutes, thus the time to log each one is not an issue.

I assume that many of you do something similar so I am asking for guidance
or advice for how you handle this.
--
John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com




From dwaters at usinternet.com  Thu Oct  8 07:08:10 2009
From: dwaters at usinternet.com (Dan Waters)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:08:10 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access - Include Table
	Relationships?
Message-ID: <FD5D6F4624784A549D925CA4004DB36D@danwaters>

Hello Everyone!

I found out how to export data tables from SQL to Access using SSIS.
However, the table relationships did not come across.  

Is there a method in SQL or Access to quickly copy tables from SQL to Access
and include the table relationships?

Thanks!
Dan







From robert at webedb.com  Thu Oct  8 13:45:29 2009
From: robert at webedb.com (Robert Stewart)
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 13:45:29 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access
In-Reply-To: <mailman.5.1255021201.18337.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors. com>
References: <mailman.5.1255021201.18337.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors.com>
Message-ID: <200910081845.n98Ijl90008851@databaseadvisors.com>

http://www.sqlpower.ca/page/download?fileName=http://power-architect.googlecode.com/files/Architect-Setup-Windows-jdbc-0.9.13.exe

may work


At 12:00 PM 10/8/2009, you wrote:
>Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:08:10 -0500
>From: "Dan Waters" <dwaters at usinternet.com>
>Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access - Include Table
>         Relationships?
>To: "'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'"
>         <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>
>Message-ID: <FD5D6F4624784A549D925CA4004DB36D at danwaters>
>Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
>Hello Everyone!
>
>I found out how to export data tables from SQL to Access using SSIS.
>However, the table relationships did not come across.
>
>Is there a method in SQL or Access to quickly copy tables from SQL to Access
>and include the table relationships?
>
>Thanks!
>Dan


From robert at webedb.com  Thu Oct  8 14:11:52 2009
From: robert at webedb.com (Robert Stewart)
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 14:11:52 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access
Message-ID: <200910081912.n98JC8hM014168@databaseadvisors.com>

You might also try Visio Professional.


At 12:00 PM 10/8/2009, you wrote:
>Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:08:10 -0500
>From: "Dan Waters" <dwaters at usinternet.com>
>Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access - Include Table
>         Relationships?
>To: "'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'"
>         <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>
>Message-ID: <FD5D6F4624784A549D925CA4004DB36D at danwaters>
>Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
>Hello Everyone!
>
>I found out how to export data tables from SQL to Access using SSIS.
>However, the table relationships did not come across.
>
>Is there a method in SQL or Access to quickly copy tables from SQL to Access
>and include the table relationships?
>
>Thanks!
>Dan


From dwaters at usinternet.com  Thu Oct  8 15:52:52 2009
From: dwaters at usinternet.com (Dan Waters)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 15:52:52 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access
In-Reply-To: <200910081845.n98Ijl90008851@databaseadvisors.com>
References: <mailman.5.1255021201.18337.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors.com>
	<200910081845.n98Ijl90008851@databaseadvisors.com>
Message-ID: <3CB806116449458895A7BCF04D65CEBF@danwaters>

Hi Rob,

I tried to get this to connect to sqlexpress on my PC, but after an hour
it's still not working.

I'll try again later.

Thanks!

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Robert
Stewart
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 1:45 PM
To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

http://www.sqlpower.ca/page/download?fileName=http://power-architect.googlec
ode.com/files/Architect-Setup-Windows-jdbc-0.9.13.exe

may work


At 12:00 PM 10/8/2009, you wrote:
>Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:08:10 -0500
>From: "Dan Waters" <dwaters at usinternet.com>
>Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access - Include Table
>         Relationships?
>To: "'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'"
>         <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>
>Message-ID: <FD5D6F4624784A549D925CA4004DB36D at danwaters>
>Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
>Hello Everyone!
>
>I found out how to export data tables from SQL to Access using SSIS.
>However, the table relationships did not come across.
>
>Is there a method in SQL or Access to quickly copy tables from SQL to
Access
>and include the table relationships?
>
>Thanks!
>Dan
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com




From accessd at shaw.ca  Fri Oct  9 11:36:26 2009
From: accessd at shaw.ca (Jim Lawrence)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 09:36:26 -0700
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access
In-Reply-To: <3CB806116449458895A7BCF04D65CEBF@danwaters>
References: <mailman.5.1255021201.18337.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors.com>
	<200910081845.n98Ijl90008851@databaseadvisors.com>
	<3CB806116449458895A7BCF04D65CEBF@danwaters>
Message-ID: <F04A269B9CC842B5A367F5C9BDE88E2D@creativesystemdesigns.com>

Hi Dan:

Have you tried your ODBC data source manager yet?

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Dan Waters
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 1:53 PM
To: 'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

Hi Rob,

I tried to get this to connect to sqlexpress on my PC, but after an hour
it's still not working.

I'll try again later.

Thanks!

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Robert
Stewart
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 1:45 PM
To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

http://www.sqlpower.ca/page/download?fileName=http://power-architect.googlec
ode.com/files/Architect-Setup-Windows-jdbc-0.9.13.exe

may work


At 12:00 PM 10/8/2009, you wrote:
>Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:08:10 -0500
>From: "Dan Waters" <dwaters at usinternet.com>
>Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access - Include Table
>         Relationships?
>To: "'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'"
>         <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>
>Message-ID: <FD5D6F4624784A549D925CA4004DB36D at danwaters>
>Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
>Hello Everyone!
>
>I found out how to export data tables from SQL to Access using SSIS.
>However, the table relationships did not come across.
>
>Is there a method in SQL or Access to quickly copy tables from SQL to
Access
>and include the table relationships?
>
>Thanks!
>Dan
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com


_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com



From dwaters at usinternet.com  Fri Oct  9 11:55:54 2009
From: dwaters at usinternet.com (Dan Waters)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 11:55:54 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access
In-Reply-To: <F04A269B9CC842B5A367F5C9BDE88E2D@creativesystemdesigns.com>
References: <mailman.5.1255021201.18337.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors.com><200910081845.n98Ijl90008851@databaseadvisors.com><3CB806116449458895A7BCF04D65CEBF@danwaters>
	<F04A269B9CC842B5A367F5C9BDE88E2D@creativesystemdesigns.com>
Message-ID: <089C94CF380F492F93572A13E86AB171@danwaters>

Hi Jim,

I've tried using the Database Connection Manager in Power Architect with
these the parameters:

Connection Name: 	Express
DB Type:		SQL Server 2005
Host Name:		danwaters\sqlexpress
Port:			1433
JDBC URL:		jdbc:sqlserver://danwaters\sqlexpress:1433

I also enabled TCP/IP for SQL Server.

The first line of the full error message is:
com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerException: The TCP/IP connection to
the host has failed. java.net.ConnectException: Connection refused: connect

How could I use the ODBC Data Source manager to make this connection?

Thanks!
Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Lawrence
Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:36 AM
To: 'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

Hi Dan:

Have you tried your ODBC data source manager yet?

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Dan Waters
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 1:53 PM
To: 'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

Hi Rob,

I tried to get this to connect to sqlexpress on my PC, but after an hour
it's still not working.

I'll try again later.

Thanks!

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Robert
Stewart
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 1:45 PM
To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

http://www.sqlpower.ca/page/download?fileName=http://power-architect.googlec
ode.com/files/Architect-Setup-Windows-jdbc-0.9.13.exe

may work


At 12:00 PM 10/8/2009, you wrote:
>Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:08:10 -0500
>From: "Dan Waters" <dwaters at usinternet.com>
>Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access - Include Table
>         Relationships?
>To: "'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'"
>         <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>
>Message-ID: <FD5D6F4624784A549D925CA4004DB36D at danwaters>
>Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
>Hello Everyone!
>
>I found out how to export data tables from SQL to Access using SSIS.
>However, the table relationships did not come across.
>
>Is there a method in SQL or Access to quickly copy tables from SQL to
Access
>and include the table relationships?
>
>Thanks!
>Dan
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com


_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com

_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com




From accessd at shaw.ca  Fri Oct  9 12:21:08 2009
From: accessd at shaw.ca (Jim Lawrence)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 10:21:08 -0700
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access
In-Reply-To: <089C94CF380F492F93572A13E86AB171@danwaters>
References: <mailman.5.1255021201.18337.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors.com>
	<200910081845.n98Ijl90008851@databaseadvisors.com>
	<3CB806116449458895A7BCF04D65CEBF@danwaters>
	<F04A269B9CC842B5A367F5C9BDE88E2D@creativesystemdesigns.com>
	<089C94CF380F492F93572A13E86AB171@danwaters>
Message-ID: <55C064AB9DBD41EF911DBAC86FC79F68@creativesystemdesigns.com>

Hi Dan:

It sounds, from your description, that everything is local (on your PC),
running (SQL Express is running). 

What I traditional do is:
1. Go to my desktop, right-mouse-click and create a new text file.
2. Rename the extension from txt to udl.
3. Then open the now new udl (ODBC) connection file and create a new
connection and keep testing (test Connnection button) until a connection is
made.
4. After the connection has been made I again rename the file exstention
from udl to txt, open the newly created text file and then copy ands paste
the connection string displayed in my application.

If you are having some issues it may be because your SQL Express port (1433)
is either been renumbered or blocked by your firewall.

For further comments see the following link:

http://www.teratrax.com/articles/connecting_sql_server_express.html

HTH
Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Dan Waters
Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:56 AM
To: 'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

Hi Jim,

I've tried using the Database Connection Manager in Power Architect with
these the parameters:

Connection Name: 	Express
DB Type:		SQL Server 2005
Host Name:		danwaters\sqlexpress
Port:			1433
JDBC URL:		jdbc:sqlserver://danwaters\sqlexpress:1433

I also enabled TCP/IP for SQL Server.

The first line of the full error message is:
com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerException: The TCP/IP connection to
the host has failed. java.net.ConnectException: Connection refused: connect

How could I use the ODBC Data Source manager to make this connection?

Thanks!
Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Lawrence
Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:36 AM
To: 'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

Hi Dan:

Have you tried your ODBC data source manager yet?

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Dan Waters
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 1:53 PM
To: 'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

Hi Rob,

I tried to get this to connect to sqlexpress on my PC, but after an hour
it's still not working.

I'll try again later.

Thanks!

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Robert
Stewart
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 1:45 PM
To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

http://www.sqlpower.ca/page/download?fileName=http://power-architect.googlec
ode.com/files/Architect-Setup-Windows-jdbc-0.9.13.exe

may work


At 12:00 PM 10/8/2009, you wrote:
>Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:08:10 -0500
>From: "Dan Waters" <dwaters at usinternet.com>
>Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access - Include Table
>         Relationships?
>To: "'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'"
>         <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>
>Message-ID: <FD5D6F4624784A549D925CA4004DB36D at danwaters>
>Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
>Hello Everyone!
>
>I found out how to export data tables from SQL to Access using SSIS.
>However, the table relationships did not come across.
>
>Is there a method in SQL or Access to quickly copy tables from SQL to
Access
>and include the table relationships?
>
>Thanks!
>Dan
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com


_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com

_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com


_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com



From dwaters at usinternet.com  Fri Oct  9 13:23:34 2009
From: dwaters at usinternet.com (Dan Waters)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 13:23:34 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access
In-Reply-To: <55C064AB9DBD41EF911DBAC86FC79F68@creativesystemdesigns.com>
References: <mailman.5.1255021201.18337.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors.com><200910081845.n98Ijl90008851@databaseadvisors.com><3CB806116449458895A7BCF04D65CEBF@danwaters><F04A269B9CC842B5A367F5C9BDE88E2D@creativesystemdesigns.com><089C94CF380F492F93572A13E86AB171@danwaters>
	<55C064AB9DBD41EF911DBAC86FC79F68@creativesystemdesigns.com>
Message-ID: <8A51D45628854C3EA7700B9890BF56E8@danwaters>

Thanks Jim - I had forgotten about UDL.

I connected first time with UDL, but Power Architect apparently uses some
kind of JAVA connection method.  I'll have to get help from the folks who
made this program.

Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Lawrence
Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 12:21 PM
To: 'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

Hi Dan:

It sounds, from your description, that everything is local (on your PC),
running (SQL Express is running). 

What I traditional do is:
1. Go to my desktop, right-mouse-click and create a new text file.
2. Rename the extension from txt to udl.
3. Then open the now new udl (ODBC) connection file and create a new
connection and keep testing (test Connnection button) until a connection is
made.
4. After the connection has been made I again rename the file exstention
from udl to txt, open the newly created text file and then copy ands paste
the connection string displayed in my application.

If you are having some issues it may be because your SQL Express port (1433)
is either been renumbered or blocked by your firewall.

For further comments see the following link:

http://www.teratrax.com/articles/connecting_sql_server_express.html

HTH
Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Dan Waters
Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:56 AM
To: 'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

Hi Jim,

I've tried using the Database Connection Manager in Power Architect with
these the parameters:

Connection Name: 	Express
DB Type:		SQL Server 2005
Host Name:		danwaters\sqlexpress
Port:			1433
JDBC URL:		jdbc:sqlserver://danwaters\sqlexpress:1433

I also enabled TCP/IP for SQL Server.

The first line of the full error message is:
com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerException: The TCP/IP connection to
the host has failed. java.net.ConnectException: Connection refused: connect

How could I use the ODBC Data Source manager to make this connection?

Thanks!
Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Lawrence
Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 11:36 AM
To: 'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

Hi Dan:

Have you tried your ODBC data source manager yet?

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Dan Waters
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 1:53 PM
To: 'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

Hi Rob,

I tried to get this to connect to sqlexpress on my PC, but after an hour
it's still not working.

I'll try again later.

Thanks!

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Robert
Stewart
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 1:45 PM
To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access

http://www.sqlpower.ca/page/download?fileName=http://power-architect.googlec
ode.com/files/Architect-Setup-Windows-jdbc-0.9.13.exe

may work


At 12:00 PM 10/8/2009, you wrote:
>Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:08:10 -0500
>From: "Dan Waters" <dwaters at usinternet.com>
>Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Export from SQL to Access - Include Table
>         Relationships?
>To: "'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'"
>         <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>
>Message-ID: <FD5D6F4624784A549D925CA4004DB36D at danwaters>
>Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
>Hello Everyone!
>
>I found out how to export data tables from SQL to Access using SSIS.
>However, the table relationships did not come across.
>
>Is there a method in SQL or Access to quickly copy tables from SQL to
Access
>and include the table relationships?
>
>Thanks!
>Dan
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com


_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com

_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com


_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com

_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com




From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Wed Oct 14 08:03:27 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 09:03:27 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] BCP error too generic
Message-ID: <4AD5CC1F.4030606@colbyconsulting.com>

I am getting a failure to import (BCP) some line in a file.  When that happens the process just 
fails with an error

"cannot fetch a row from OLE DB provider "BULK" for linked server "(null)"

Is there any way to get the row number that triggered the failure?  Or anything else even slightly 
more useful than this pretty darned useless error message?

-- 
John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


From mwp.reid at qub.ac.uk  Wed Oct 14 08:10:59 2009
From: mwp.reid at qub.ac.uk (Martin Reid)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 14:10:59 +0100
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] BCP error too generic
In-Reply-To: <4AD5CC1F.4030606@colbyconsulting.com>
References: <4AD5CC1F.4030606@colbyconsulting.com>
Message-ID: <631CF83223105545BF43EFB52CB0829502AC4D9752@EX2K7-VIRT-2.ads.qub.ac.uk>

http://blog.cybner.com.au/2007/09/cannot-fetch-row-from-ole-db-provider.html



Martin WP Reid
Information Services
The Library at Queen's
Tel : 02890976174
Email : mwp.reid at qub.ac.uk
________________________________________
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jwcolby [jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com]
Sent: 14 October 2009 14:03
To: Dba-Sqlserver
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] BCP error too generic

I am getting a failure to import (BCP) some line in a file.  When that happens the process just
fails with an error

"cannot fetch a row from OLE DB provider "BULK" for linked server "(null)"

Is there any way to get the row number that triggered the failure?  Or anything else even slightly
more useful than this pretty darned useless error message?

--
John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com


From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Wed Oct 14 08:43:29 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 09:43:29 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] BCP error too generic
In-Reply-To: <631CF83223105545BF43EFB52CB0829502AC4D9752@EX2K7-VIRT-2.ads.qub.ac.uk>
References: <4AD5CC1F.4030606@colbyconsulting.com>
	<631CF83223105545BF43EFB52CB0829502AC4D9752@EX2K7-VIRT-2.ads.qub.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <4AD5D581.6000306@colbyconsulting.com>

Yea, I saw this and about 47 million other posts for this error message.  It appears that if 
ANYTHING (and I do mean ANYTHING) goes wrong in the import, BCP fails with this error message.  The 
data I am trying to import is just full of trash.  empty fields, rows without the correct number of 
fields etc.  It is no wonder BCP complains.

I was just hoping to get more info but it seems that is a dream.

John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


Martin Reid wrote:
> http://blog.cybner.com.au/2007/09/cannot-fetch-row-from-ole-db-provider.html
> 
> 
> 
> Martin WP Reid
> Information Services
> The Library at Queen's
> Tel : 02890976174
> Email : mwp.reid at qub.ac.uk
> ________________________________________
> From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jwcolby [jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com]
> Sent: 14 October 2009 14:03
> To: Dba-Sqlserver
> Subject: [dba-SQLServer] BCP error too generic
> 
> I am getting a failure to import (BCP) some line in a file.  When that happens the process just
> fails with an error
> 
> "cannot fetch a row from OLE DB provider "BULK" for linked server "(null)"
> 
> Is there any way to get the row number that triggered the failure?  Or anything else even slightly
> more useful than this pretty darned useless error message?
> 
> --
> John W. Colby
> www.ColbyConsulting.com
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 
> 


From robert at webedb.com  Wed Oct 14 12:26:00 2009
From: robert at webedb.com (Robert Stewart)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:26:00 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] BCP error too generic
In-Reply-To: <mailman.5.1255539601.7491.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors.c
 om>
References: <mailman.5.1255539601.7491.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors.com>
Message-ID: <200910141726.n9EHQKGn014296@databaseadvisors.com>

BCP will only import clean, structured data.


At 12:00 PM 10/14/2009, you wrote:
>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 09:43:29 -0400
>From: jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com>
>Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] BCP error too generic
>To: Discussion concerning MS SQL Server
>         <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>
>Message-ID: <4AD5D581.6000306 at colbyconsulting.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>Yea, I saw this and about 47 million other posts for this error 
>message.  It appears that if
>ANYTHING (and I do mean ANYTHING) goes wrong in the import, BCP 
>fails with this error message.  The
>data I am trying to import is just full of trash.  empty fields, 
>rows without the correct number of
>fields etc.  It is no wonder BCP complains.
>
>I was just hoping to get more info but it seems that is a dream.
>
>John W. Colby


From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Wed Oct 14 12:38:49 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:38:49 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] BCP error too generic
In-Reply-To: <200910141726.n9EHQKGn014296@databaseadvisors.com>
References: <mailman.5.1255539601.7491.dba-sqlserver@databaseadvisors.com>
	<200910141726.n9EHQKGn014296@databaseadvisors.com>
Message-ID: <4AD60CA9.3060808@colbyconsulting.com>

Yea, so I see.

John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


Robert Stewart wrote:
> BCP will only import clean, structured data.
> 
> 
> At 12:00 PM 10/14/2009, you wrote:
>> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 09:43:29 -0400
>> From: jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com>
>> Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] BCP error too generic
>> To: Discussion concerning MS SQL Server
>>         <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>
>> Message-ID: <4AD5D581.6000306 at colbyconsulting.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>> Yea, I saw this and about 47 million other posts for this error 
>> message.  It appears that if
>> ANYTHING (and I do mean ANYTHING) goes wrong in the import, BCP 
>> fails with this error message.  The
>> data I am trying to import is just full of trash.  empty fields, 
>> rows without the correct number of
>> fields etc.  It is no wonder BCP complains.
>>
>> I was just hoping to get more info but it seems that is a dream.
>>
>> John W. Colby
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 
> 


From stuart at lexacorp.com.pg  Wed Oct 14 14:21:18 2009
From: stuart at lexacorp.com.pg (Stuart McLachlan)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 05:21:18 +1000
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] BCP error too generic
In-Reply-To: <4AD5D581.6000306@colbyconsulting.com>
References: <4AD5CC1F.4030606@colbyconsulting.com>,
	<631CF83223105545BF43EFB52CB0829502AC4D9752@EX2K7-VIRT-2.ads.qub.ac.uk>,
	<4AD5D581.6000306@colbyconsulting.com>
Message-ID: <4AD624AE.27767.10E63D27@stuart.lexacorp.com.pg>

If it's a delimited text file, I'd build my own pre-procesor to check and possibly clean up the 
file.

Something to:
Read in a line.
SPLIT it into an array 
Check the number of fields using UBOUND
Step through the fields validating as necessary.
As a minimum, log the faulty line number and errors encountered.

You could knock something up to to do this in Access in five minutes,

If you want something to do it a lot faster for the big files in your database friom hell, send 
me a copy of your final Access procedure and I'll build a PBWin app for you to do the same 
thing in a fraction of the time.

Cheers,
Stuart


On 14 Oct 2009 at 9:43, jwcolby wrote:

> Yea, I saw this and about 47 million other posts for this error message.  It appears that if 
> ANYTHING (and I do mean ANYTHING) goes wrong in the import, BCP fails with this error message.  The 
> data I am trying to import is just full of trash.  empty fields, rows without the correct number of 
> fields etc.  It is no wonder BCP complains.
> 
> I was just hoping to get more info but it seems that is a dream.
> 
> John W. Colby
> www.ColbyConsulting.com
> 
> 
> Martin Reid wrote:
> > http://blog.cybner.com.au/2007/09/cannot-fetch-row-from-ole-db-provider.html
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Martin WP Reid
> > Information Services
> > The Library at Queen's
> > Tel : 02890976174
> > Email : mwp.reid at qub.ac.uk
> > ________________________________________
> > From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jwcolby [jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com]
> > Sent: 14 October 2009 14:03
> > To: Dba-Sqlserver
> > Subject: [dba-SQLServer] BCP error too generic
> > 
> > I am getting a failure to import (BCP) some line in a file.  When that happens the process just
> > fails with an error
> > 
> > "cannot fetch a row from OLE DB provider "BULK" for linked server "(null)"
> > 
> > Is there any way to get the row number that triggered the failure?  Or anything else even slightly
> > more useful than this pretty darned useless error message?
> > 
> > --
> > John W. Colby
> > www.ColbyConsulting.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > 
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 




From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Fri Oct 23 06:46:09 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 07:46:09 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] process suspended
Message-ID: <4AE19781.2090601@colbyconsulting.com>

I have these stored procedures I run from Access, multi-step processes that import and export data 
from SQL Server.  The code which executes these SPs run in Access running on the SQL server.  I 
started an UPDATE process last night that I would have expected to complete by this morning but it 
is not complete.

I found this thing called sp_who2 active which reports all active processes, very cool.

The UPDATE process running on Azul, started by Microsoft Office 2003 (Access AFAICT) is status 
SUSPENDED.  However if I click execute over and over for this sp_who2 thing it shows cpu activity 
and disk i/o going on this process.

So what does suspended mean?  Do I need to do something to unsuspend the process?  Will it finish 
even though it is suspended?

-- 
John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Wed Oct 28 11:31:50 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:31:50 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] View not updatable because
Message-ID: <4AE871F6.2060004@colbyconsulting.com>

I have never figured out how to do the following...

I have a table which contains records that I need to delete.  I create a view that joins that table 
to another table on the PKID.  The second table has a set of records which I need to delete out of 
the first table, then append into the first table.  IOW the matching records in the first table have 
have been updated and I need to delete them, then append in the updated records.

I get an error message:

"view or function MyFunction is not updatable because the modification affects multiple base tables."

This is a simple view witj two tables, joined on the PKID, all fields selected in the table that 
needs records updated (deleted), NO fields selected in the second table.

What am I doing wrong?

-- 
John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Wed Oct 28 11:38:30 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:38:30 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] View not updatable because
In-Reply-To: <4AE871F6.2060004@colbyconsulting.com>
References: <4AE871F6.2060004@colbyconsulting.com>
Message-ID: <4AE87386.8040700@colbyconsulting.com>

What I have found on GOOGLE is that the FROM clause can only reference a single table.  But if I am 
going to select records by a join, then by definition the where clause will reference more than one 
table.

HELP!!!

TIA.

John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


jwcolby wrote:
> I have never figured out how to do the following...
> 
> I have a table which contains records that I need to delete.  I create a view that joins that table 
> to another table on the PKID.  The second table has a set of records which I need to delete out of 
> the first table, then append into the first table.  IOW the matching records in the first table have 
> have been updated and I need to delete them, then append in the updated records.
> 
> I get an error message:
> 
> "view or function MyFunction is not updatable because the modification affects multiple base tables."
> 
> This is a simple view witj two tables, joined on the PKID, all fields selected in the table that 
> needs records updated (deleted), NO fields selected in the second table.
> 
> What am I doing wrong?
> 


From Betsy.Powlen at stanleyassociates.com  Wed Oct 28 11:54:10 2009
From: Betsy.Powlen at stanleyassociates.com (Powlen, Betsy)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:54:10 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Audit table - How to capture user who deleted record
Message-ID: <2A419A21A2A23243A9E7851EEDBDC1220179C47C@OP-S-EX-2.stanleyassociates.com>

Hello everyone,
I'm creating an audit table for our application. I had no problem with
the trigger for an insert or update, but when a user deletes a record I
can't figure out how to capture that user. 
I can't use system_user, that only shows the user name we created to
access the application.
Any ideas?
 
Betsy Powlen
Stanley Associates
3800 Fettler Park Drive
Dumfries, VA  22025
Office: (703) 441-4965
Cell:    (540) 498-0836
betsy.powlen.ctr at usmc.mil <blocked::mailto:betsy.powlen.ctr at usmc.mil> 
betsy.powlen at stanleyassociates.com
 
 


From dwaters at usinternet.com  Wed Oct 28 12:08:42 2009
From: dwaters at usinternet.com (Dan Waters)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:08:42 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Audit table - How to capture user who deleted
	record
In-Reply-To: <2A419A21A2A23243A9E7851EEDBDC1220179C47C@OP-S-EX-2.stanleyassociates.com>
References: <2A419A21A2A23243A9E7851EEDBDC1220179C47C@OP-S-EX-2.stanleyassociates.com>
Message-ID: <339C2FFB9D164D7D84B8DFAE7A4E712C@danwaters>

Hi Betsey,

If people are logging in with a user name and password, then you can use
'CurrentUser'.  This is an access function.

Otherwise, you can get the PC Name that someone is using with this function:
'Environ("ComputerName")'.

Good Luck!
Dan`

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Powlen,
Betsy
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:54 AM
To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Audit table - How to capture user who deleted
record

Hello everyone,
I'm creating an audit table for our application. I had no problem with
the trigger for an insert or update, but when a user deletes a record I
can't figure out how to capture that user. 
I can't use system_user, that only shows the user name we created to
access the application.
Any ideas?
 
Betsy Powlen
Stanley Associates
3800 Fettler Park Drive
Dumfries, VA  22025
Office: (703) 441-4965
Cell:    (540) 498-0836
betsy.powlen.ctr at usmc.mil <blocked::mailto:betsy.powlen.ctr at usmc.mil> 
betsy.powlen at stanleyassociates.com
 
 
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com



From Betsy.Powlen at stanleyassociates.com  Wed Oct 28 12:36:42 2009
From: Betsy.Powlen at stanleyassociates.com (Powlen, Betsy)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:36:42 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Audit table - How to capture user who
	deletedrecord
In-Reply-To: <339C2FFB9D164D7D84B8DFAE7A4E712C@danwaters>
Message-ID: <2A419A21A2A23243A9E7851EEDBDC1220179C47D@OP-S-EX-2.stanleyassociates.com>

Thanks, Dan. The problem is, people aren't directly users on the
database. The actual user data is on another database and they go
through a bunch of security hoops to get to the main application. From
there, there is a link to our application.   Normally, whenever we need
a user name, we use a parameter, but apparently that doesn't work with
triggers. The only way I can think off hand is to update the table with
the session id first, but was wondering if that is too big of a strain
on the system as we will be implementing this on all our editable
tables.
Thoughts?


Betsy Powlen
Stanley Associates
3800 Fettler Park Drive
Dumfries, VA  22025
Office: (703) 441-4965
Cell:    (540) 498-0836
betsy.powlen.ctr at usmc.mil
betsy.powlen at stanleyassociates.com
 

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Dan
Waters
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 1:09 PM
To: 'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Audit table - How to capture user who
deletedrecord

Hi Betsey,

If people are logging in with a user name and password, then you can use
'CurrentUser'.  This is an access function.

Otherwise, you can get the PC Name that someone is using with this
function:
'Environ("ComputerName")'.

Good Luck!
Dan`

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Powlen,
Betsy
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:54 AM
To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Audit table - How to capture user who deleted
record

Hello everyone,
I'm creating an audit table for our application. I had no problem with
the trigger for an insert or update, but when a user deletes a record I
can't figure out how to capture that user. 
I can't use system_user, that only shows the user name we created to
access the application.
Any ideas?
 
Betsy Powlen
Stanley Associates
3800 Fettler Park Drive
Dumfries, VA  22025
Office: (703) 441-4965
Cell:    (540) 498-0836
betsy.powlen.ctr at usmc.mil <blocked::mailto:betsy.powlen.ctr at usmc.mil>
betsy.powlen at stanleyassociates.com
 
 
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com

_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com




From davidmcafee at gmail.com  Wed Oct 28 12:49:52 2009
From: davidmcafee at gmail.com (David McAfee)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 10:49:52 -0700
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Audit table - How to capture user who
	deletedrecord
In-Reply-To: <2A419A21A2A23243A9E7851EEDBDC1220179C47D@OP-S-EX-2.stanleyassociates.com>
References: <339C2FFB9D164D7D84B8DFAE7A4E712C@danwaters>
	<2A419A21A2A23243A9E7851EEDBDC1220179C47D@OP-S-EX-2.stanleyassociates.com>
Message-ID: <8786a4c00910281049t1cc490e6s36fa9f92e1ecc840@mail.gmail.com>

How do you mark edits or insertions?

One thing to do is never to allow deletions. Instead mark a record as
"deleted" and filter it from views.

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Powlen, Betsy
<Betsy.Powlen at stanleyassociates.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Dan. The problem is, people aren't directly users on the
> database. The actual user data is on another database and they go
> through a bunch of security hoops to get to the main application. From
> there, there is a link to our application. ? Normally, whenever we need
> a user name, we use a parameter, but apparently that doesn't work with
> triggers. The only way I can think off hand is to update the table with
> the session id first, but was wondering if that is too big of a strain
> on the system as we will be implementing this on all our editable
> tables.
> Thoughts?
>
>
> Betsy Powlen
> Stanley Associates
> 3800 Fettler Park Drive
> Dumfries, VA ?22025
> Office: (703) 441-4965
> Cell: ? ?(540) 498-0836
> betsy.powlen.ctr at usmc.mil
> betsy.powlen at stanleyassociates.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Dan
> Waters
> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 1:09 PM
> To: 'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'
> Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Audit table - How to capture user who
> deletedrecord
>
> Hi Betsey,
>
> If people are logging in with a user name and password, then you can use
> 'CurrentUser'. ?This is an access function.
>
> Otherwise, you can get the PC Name that someone is using with this
> function:
> 'Environ("ComputerName")'.
>
> Good Luck!
> Dan`
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Powlen,
> Betsy
> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:54 AM
> To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
> Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Audit table - How to capture user who deleted
> record
>
> Hello everyone,
> I'm creating an audit table for our application. I had no problem with
> the trigger for an insert or update, but when a user deletes a record I
> can't figure out how to capture that user.
> I can't use system_user, that only shows the user name we created to
> access the application.
> Any ideas?
>
> Betsy Powlen
> Stanley Associates
> 3800 Fettler Park Drive
> Dumfries, VA ?22025
> Office: (703) 441-4965
> Cell: ? ?(540) 498-0836
> betsy.powlen.ctr at usmc.mil <blocked::mailto:betsy.powlen.ctr at usmc.mil>
> betsy.powlen at stanleyassociates.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>



From Betsy.Powlen at stanleyassociates.com  Wed Oct 28 14:08:06 2009
From: Betsy.Powlen at stanleyassociates.com (Powlen, Betsy)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 15:08:06 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Audit table - How to capture user
	whodeletedrecord
In-Reply-To: <8786a4c00910281049t1cc490e6s36fa9f92e1ecc840@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2A419A21A2A23243A9E7851EEDBDC1220179C47E@OP-S-EX-2.stanleyassociates.com>

We don't mark anything. We want to use a trigger to populate the history table using the virtual INSERTED and DELETED tables. Works great for inserts and updates, but modified_by doesn't get tracked anywhere on a delete. On an insert or update it gets tracked in the INSERTED table.
I don't have any issue with records being deleted in that table, I just need to keep track of who does what.
We're going to try a workaround using the SPID that's in our LoginTrack table. Hoping that will give us what we need.
Thanks for all your ideas! 
Betsy
 
-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of David McAfee
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 1:50 PM
To: Discussion concerning MS SQL Server
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Audit table - How to capture user whodeletedrecord

How do you mark edits or insertions?

One thing to do is never to allow deletions. Instead mark a record as "deleted" and filter it from views.

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Powlen, Betsy <Betsy.Powlen at stanleyassociates.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Dan. The problem is, people aren't directly users on the 
> database. The actual user data is on another database and they go 
> through a bunch of security hoops to get to the main application. From 
> there, there is a link to our application. ? Normally, whenever we 
> need a user name, we use a parameter, but apparently that doesn't work 
> with triggers. The only way I can think off hand is to update the 
> table with the session id first, but was wondering if that is too big 
> of a strain on the system as we will be implementing this on all our 
> editable tables.
> Thoughts?
>
>
> Betsy Powlen
> Stanley Associates
> 3800 Fettler Park Drive
> Dumfries, VA ?22025
> Office: (703) 441-4965
> Cell: ? ?(540) 498-0836
> betsy.powlen.ctr at usmc.mil
> betsy.powlen at stanleyassociates.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Dan 
> Waters
> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 1:09 PM
> To: 'Discussion concerning MS SQL Server'
> Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Audit table - How to capture user who 
> deletedrecord
>
> Hi Betsey,
>
> If people are logging in with a user name and password, then you can 
> use 'CurrentUser'. ?This is an access function.
>
> Otherwise, you can get the PC Name that someone is using with this
> function:
> 'Environ("ComputerName")'.
>
> Good Luck!
> Dan`
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of 
> Powlen, Betsy
> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:54 AM
> To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
> Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Audit table - How to capture user who deleted 
> record
>
> Hello everyone,
> I'm creating an audit table for our application. I had no problem with 
> the trigger for an insert or update, but when a user deletes a record 
> I can't figure out how to capture that user.
> I can't use system_user, that only shows the user name we created to 
> access the application.
> Any ideas?
>
> Betsy Powlen
> Stanley Associates
> 3800 Fettler Park Drive
> Dumfries, VA ?22025
> Office: (703) 441-4965
> Cell: ? ?(540) 498-0836
> betsy.powlen.ctr at usmc.mil <blocked::mailto:betsy.powlen.ctr at usmc.mil>
> betsy.powlen at stanleyassociates.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>

_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com




From fhtapia at gmail.com  Wed Oct 28 14:54:17 2009
From: fhtapia at gmail.com (Francisco Tapia)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:54:17 -0700
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] View not updatable because
In-Reply-To: <4AE87386.8040700@colbyconsulting.com>
References: <4AE871F6.2060004@colbyconsulting.com>
	<4AE87386.8040700@colbyconsulting.com>
Message-ID: <AAE238EB-61C7-47A2-AB67-51CE9B2A32D4@gmail.com>

I think you want to write up your statement as a delete statement, not  
adelete from view but a delete from a table does that make sense?
The result is that you'd use a sproc (stored procedure) to help delte  
records and not a standard statement.

Sent from my mobile

On Oct 28, 2009, at 9:38 AM, jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com>  
wrote:

> What I have found on GOOGLE is that the FROM clause can only  
> reference a single table.  But if I am
> going to select records by a join, then by definition the where  
> clause will reference more than one
> table.
>
> HELP!!!
>
> TIA.
>
> John W. Colby
> www.ColbyConsulting.com
>
>
> jwcolby wrote:
>> I have never figured out how to do the following...
>>
>> I have a table which contains records that I need to delete.  I  
>> create a view that joins that table
>> to another table on the PKID.  The second table has a set of  
>> records which I need to delete out of
>> the first table, then append into the first table.  IOW the  
>> matching records in the first table have
>> have been updated and I need to delete them, then append in the  
>> updated records.
>>
>> I get an error message:
>>
>> "view or function MyFunction is not updatable because the  
>> modification affects multiple base tables."
>>
>> This is a simple view witj two tables, joined on the PKID, all  
>> fields selected in the table that
>> needs records updated (deleted), NO fields selected in the second  
>> table.
>>
>> What am I doing wrong?
>>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>


From Elizabeth.J.Doering at wellsfargo.com  Wed Oct 28 15:10:47 2009
From: Elizabeth.J.Doering at wellsfargo.com (Elizabeth.J.Doering at wellsfargo.com)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 15:10:47 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] View not updatable because
In-Reply-To: <AAE238EB-61C7-47A2-AB67-51CE9B2A32D4@gmail.com>
References: <4AE871F6.2060004@colbyconsulting.com>
	<4AE87386.8040700@colbyconsulting.com>
	<AAE238EB-61C7-47A2-AB67-51CE9B2A32D4@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4838EC790FF778449985FC3B8A47F8714485F86F00@MSGCMSV21011.ent.wfb.bank.corp>

Try something like this:

Delete from MyTable1 where PK in (select PK from MyTable2)  

Not as quick as you will like.  But it will do what you want. 

HTH, 

Liz 

 

This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation.


-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Francisco Tapia
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 2:54 PM
To: Discussion concerning MS SQL Server
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] View not updatable because

I think you want to write up your statement as a delete statement, not  
adelete from view but a delete from a table does that make sense?
The result is that you'd use a sproc (stored procedure) to help delte  
records and not a standard statement.

Sent from my mobile

On Oct 28, 2009, at 9:38 AM, jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com>  
wrote:

> What I have found on GOOGLE is that the FROM clause can only  
> reference a single table.  But if I am
> going to select records by a join, then by definition the where  
> clause will reference more than one
> table.
>
> HELP!!!
>
> TIA.
>
> John W. Colby
> www.ColbyConsulting.com
>
>
> jwcolby wrote:
>> I have never figured out how to do the following...
>>
>> I have a table which contains records that I need to delete.  I  
>> create a view that joins that table
>> to another table on the PKID.  The second table has a set of  
>> records which I need to delete out of
>> the first table, then append into the first table.  IOW the  
>> matching records in the first table have
>> have been updated and I need to delete them, then append in the  
>> updated records.
>>
>> I get an error message:
>>
>> "view or function MyFunction is not updatable because the  
>> modification affects multiple base tables."
>>
>> This is a simple view witj two tables, joined on the PKID, all  
>> fields selected in the table that
>> needs records updated (deleted), NO fields selected in the second  
>> table.
>>
>> What am I doing wrong?
>>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com




From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Wed Oct 28 15:18:08 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:18:08 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] View not updatable because
In-Reply-To: <4838EC790FF778449985FC3B8A47F8714485F86F00@MSGCMSV21011.ent.wfb.bank.corp>
References: <4AE871F6.2060004@colbyconsulting.com>	<4AE87386.8040700@colbyconsulting.com>	<AAE238EB-61C7-47A2-AB67-51CE9B2A32D4@gmail.com>
	<4838EC790FF778449985FC3B8A47F8714485F86F00@MSGCMSV21011.ent.wfb.bank.corp>
Message-ID: <4AE8A700.6090903@colbyconsulting.com>

Thanks Liz.

John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


Elizabeth.J.Doering at wellsfargo.com wrote:
> Try something like this:
> 
> Delete from MyTable1 where PK in (select PK from MyTable2)  
> 
> Not as quick as you will like.  But it will do what you want. 
> 
> HTH, 
> 
> Liz 
> 
>  
> 
> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Francisco Tapia
> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 2:54 PM
> To: Discussion concerning MS SQL Server
> Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] View not updatable because
> 
> I think you want to write up your statement as a delete statement, not  
> adelete from view but a delete from a table does that make sense?
> The result is that you'd use a sproc (stored procedure) to help delte  
> records and not a standard statement.
> 
> Sent from my mobile
> 
> On Oct 28, 2009, at 9:38 AM, jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com>  
> wrote:
> 
>> What I have found on GOOGLE is that the FROM clause can only  
>> reference a single table.  But if I am
>> going to select records by a join, then by definition the where  
>> clause will reference more than one
>> table.
>>
>> HELP!!!
>>
>> TIA.
>>
>> John W. Colby
>> www.ColbyConsulting.com
>>
>>
>> jwcolby wrote:
>>> I have never figured out how to do the following...
>>>
>>> I have a table which contains records that I need to delete.  I  
>>> create a view that joins that table
>>> to another table on the PKID.  The second table has a set of  
>>> records which I need to delete out of
>>> the first table, then append into the first table.  IOW the  
>>> matching records in the first table have
>>> have been updated and I need to delete them, then append in the  
>>> updated records.
>>>
>>> I get an error message:
>>>
>>> "view or function MyFunction is not updatable because the  
>>> modification affects multiple base tables."
>>>
>>> This is a simple view witj two tables, joined on the PKID, all  
>>> fields selected in the table that
>>> needs records updated (deleted), NO fields selected in the second  
>>> table.
>>>
>>> What am I doing wrong?
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dba-SQLServer mailing list
>> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
>> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 
> 


From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Wed Oct 28 15:25:34 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:25:34 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] View not updatable because
In-Reply-To: <4838EC790FF778449985FC3B8A47F8714485F86F00@MSGCMSV21011.ent.wfb.bank.corp>
References: <4AE871F6.2060004@colbyconsulting.com>	<4AE87386.8040700@colbyconsulting.com>	<AAE238EB-61C7-47A2-AB67-51CE9B2A32D4@gmail.com>
	<4838EC790FF778449985FC3B8A47F8714485F86F00@MSGCMSV21011.ent.wfb.bank.corp>
Message-ID: <4AE8A8BE.5080105@colbyconsulting.com>

 > Not as quick as you will like.  But it will do what you want.

Actually that was BLAZING fast!  Seven seconds to delete a million rows.

John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


Elizabeth.J.Doering at wellsfargo.com wrote:
> Try something like this:
> 
> Delete from MyTable1 where PK in (select PK from MyTable2)  
> 
> Not as quick as you will like.  But it will do what you want. 
> 
> HTH, 
> 
> Liz 
> 
>  
> 
> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Francisco Tapia
> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 2:54 PM
> To: Discussion concerning MS SQL Server
> Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] View not updatable because
> 
> I think you want to write up your statement as a delete statement, not  
> adelete from view but a delete from a table does that make sense?
> The result is that you'd use a sproc (stored procedure) to help delte  
> records and not a standard statement.
> 
> Sent from my mobile
> 
> On Oct 28, 2009, at 9:38 AM, jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com>  
> wrote:
> 
>> What I have found on GOOGLE is that the FROM clause can only  
>> reference a single table.  But if I am
>> going to select records by a join, then by definition the where  
>> clause will reference more than one
>> table.
>>
>> HELP!!!
>>
>> TIA.
>>
>> John W. Colby
>> www.ColbyConsulting.com
>>
>>
>> jwcolby wrote:
>>> I have never figured out how to do the following...
>>>
>>> I have a table which contains records that I need to delete.  I  
>>> create a view that joins that table
>>> to another table on the PKID.  The second table has a set of  
>>> records which I need to delete out of
>>> the first table, then append into the first table.  IOW the  
>>> matching records in the first table have
>>> have been updated and I need to delete them, then append in the  
>>> updated records.
>>>
>>> I get an error message:
>>>
>>> "view or function MyFunction is not updatable because the  
>>> modification affects multiple base tables."
>>>
>>> This is a simple view witj two tables, joined on the PKID, all  
>>> fields selected in the table that
>>> needs records updated (deleted), NO fields selected in the second  
>>> table.
>>>
>>> What am I doing wrong?
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dba-SQLServer mailing list
>> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
>> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 
> 


From jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com  Fri Oct 30 14:40:37 2009
From: jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com (jwcolby)
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:40:37 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] How does a clustered index really work
Message-ID: <4AEB4135.20107@colbyconsulting.com>

I need more information about how a clustered index really works.  I work with some fairly large 
tables, in this specific case 67 million records.  The table has a PKID (Identity) as well as a PK 
from another table (foreign key).  It then has name / address fields, plus about 8 non name / 
address fields.

I have come to the conclusion that I need to update this table about once a month or so (address 
validation stuff).  The updates will affect a smallish subset of the total records, perhaps a 
million or so records, maybe less (about 2% of the total records, once a month).

I have read that using a clustered index speeds up any operations that pull data ONLY from fields in 
the clustered index because of the way the data is stored on disk.  My understanding is that those 
fields are stored contiguously, whereas other indexed fields are stored in leaf nodes in a b-tree. 
I  understand a b-tree, though the knowledge is old.

Because of some of the processes I run I am wondering whether I should take the hit of placing the 
PK/FK fields plus the name / address fields in a clustered index.  I use just those fields a LOT. 
There are some additional fields that I use sporadically.  Other than the PK/FK  and NAME fields, 
all the other fields may be updated, though as I mentioned, rarely more than about 2% of the total 
records.

My understanding is that IF the changes in the data in the clustered index cause the ORDER of the 
data to change, then the updates to those fields would be slow, but if the order never changes then 
clustered index field updates aren't particularly slow.

Am I right so far?

Because the first field in the clustered index would be the Identity field, the ORDER of the records 
will NEVER change.  Thus my read is that I can safely store any of the other fields I want without 
worrying about causing that particular performance hit on updates.

Question, because of the storage method on disk, are the updates to clustered index fields FASTER 
than they would be otherwise, IOW getting at the data is faster, the order doesn't change so the 
update proceeds faster?

I am a SQL Server wannabe.  I use it a LOT but at the same time I never see myself becoming an 
expert, never mind a guru.  Is there something I can read about this subject that addresses my 
level, that I could fairly easily get my questions about this answered?

TIA for your patient responses.  ;)

-- 
John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com


From jlawrenc1 at shaw.ca  Sat Oct 31 04:48:19 2009
From: jlawrenc1 at shaw.ca (Jim Lawrence)
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 02:48:19 -0700
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] How does a clustered index really work
In-Reply-To: <4AEB4135.20107@colbyconsulting.com>
References: <4AEB4135.20107@colbyconsulting.com>
Message-ID: <26DCFC3DF79C44CBAF26EEC8AD4C772A@creativesystemdesigns.com>

Hi John:

This explanation works for me:

http://weblogs.sqlteam.com/mladenp/archive/2007/09/18/Back-To-Basics-What-is
-a-Clustered-and-a-Non-Clustered.aspx

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jwcolby
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 12:41 PM
To: Dba-Sqlserver
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] How does a clustered index really work

I need more information about how a clustered index really works.  I work
with some fairly large 
tables, in this specific case 67 million records.  The table has a PKID
(Identity) as well as a PK 
from another table (foreign key).  It then has name / address fields, plus
about 8 non name / 
address fields.

I have come to the conclusion that I need to update this table about once a
month or so (address 
validation stuff).  The updates will affect a smallish subset of the total
records, perhaps a 
million or so records, maybe less (about 2% of the total records, once a
month).

I have read that using a clustered index speeds up any operations that pull
data ONLY from fields in 
the clustered index because of the way the data is stored on disk.  My
understanding is that those 
fields are stored contiguously, whereas other indexed fields are stored in
leaf nodes in a b-tree. 
I  understand a b-tree, though the knowledge is old.

Because of some of the processes I run I am wondering whether I should take
the hit of placing the 
PK/FK fields plus the name / address fields in a clustered index.  I use
just those fields a LOT. 
There are some additional fields that I use sporadically.  Other than the
PK/FK  and NAME fields, 
all the other fields may be updated, though as I mentioned, rarely more than
about 2% of the total 
records.

My understanding is that IF the changes in the data in the clustered index
cause the ORDER of the 
data to change, then the updates to those fields would be slow, but if the
order never changes then 
clustered index field updates aren't particularly slow.

Am I right so far?

Because the first field in the clustered index would be the Identity field,
the ORDER of the records 
will NEVER change.  Thus my read is that I can safely store any of the other
fields I want without 
worrying about causing that particular performance hit on updates.

Question, because of the storage method on disk, are the updates to
clustered index fields FASTER 
than they would be otherwise, IOW getting at the data is faster, the order
doesn't change so the 
update proceeds faster?

I am a SQL Server wannabe.  I use it a LOT but at the same time I never see
myself becoming an 
expert, never mind a guru.  Is there something I can read about this subject
that addresses my 
level, that I could fairly easily get my questions about this answered?

TIA for your patient responses.  ;)

-- 
John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com