Shamil Salakhetdinov
shamil at smsconsulting.spb.ru
Wed May 19 16:01:36 CDT 2010
Hi John -- I suppose all you do with dynamic SQL can be done using UDFs and partitioned views. Not 100% sure about the latter as I have never used them. But I'd bet there exist more effective and more manageable than using dynamic SQL solution for your set of tasks - all within T-SQL for MS SQL 2008. Sorry, I cannot comment more/participate actively in this thread as I'm rather busy here with my customers' work but I will follow this thread with interest.. Thank you. -- Shamil -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jwcolby Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 12:19 AM To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving; Sqlserver-Dba Subject: [AccessD] dynamic sql Guys, I use dynamic SQL a lot. I have received feedback from others on these groups that "there is never a valid reason for dynamic SQL", there is always a safer "better" way to do this. I would like to lay out what I do and get some feedback on exactly how I would do what I am doing without using dynamic SQL. A couple of examples. I build an entire database for an order for my client. Each database has some fairly specific stuff, as well as data for that order, which I may need to use again for another order. IOW, I select X records, send a small subset of those records off to a client, then months down the road may need to send another subset of those records. Each order is based on selection criteria, and that criteria is different for each order. So I build a table on-the-fly. I have a common set of fields, then I have the selection fields. I then pull all of the data from a view into that custom table. So I have a view. I use code to get the names of the fields in that view and I build a table which has exactly the same fields as the view contains, using dynamic SQL. I use the view to then append the data into the table. Since the table has the same fields as the view, it basically just appends right in. Using dynamic SQL I am able to build any select query I need and build a table which exactly matches that view. Another example. I have many different databases which contain millions of name / address / demographic fields. For example I have a table of 20 million people who have children, with fields for whether they children in specific age brackets. I have another database with 12 million records of people who have cats and / or dogs. Another where... Each of these databases has a name / address component (fields) which are standardized (by me) so that the name / address field names are identical. I then have stored procedures which build name / address tables, append the name / address components out of the central table into a temp table in sorted order, grab just 2 million record chunks, and BCP the records out to files on disk for address validation. There is a similar set of stored procedures where I pull the resulting validated address fields back in to SQL Server into the same database and perform other processing inside of the database. Because I have standardized the field names, I can use dynamic SQL in stored procedures to pass in the name of the database and a table or view name for the export piece and the import piece as well. There are probably 5-10 stored procedures which perform the export process as well as a like number which performs the import. In fact I used to have "hard coded" stored procedures in each database which did this stuff, but maintenance was a nightmare. If I needed to change anything I had to go into each database and modify the stored procedures on a case by case basis. I now have a "master" database where I store my stored procedures and I can simply pass in the parameters to the stored procedure to tell it what database / view to use. One place to edit, one place to go to make modifications. So that gives an overview of some of the ways that I use dynamic SQL. I am looking for the "Why I shouldn't" and what my alternatives are, or comments on when and why dynamic SQL is useful (as I find it useful) and how to go about making the resulting dynamic SQL safe(r) to use. Thanks, -- John W. Colby www.ColbyConsulting.com -- AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com