Can anyone put a name to the following type of design...
I need to be able to modify the amount/names of data "fields" stored
for an entity so instead of representing the data stored for an entity
in fields associated with that entity you would relate it to an another
entity which would contain a datafield type field and its associated
value, so different rows in the parent table could possibly have
different datafields associated with it.
E.g
The parent table is "person" and it holds common data amongst all
people - it has primary key of personID.
There is another table assoicated with person called "personDetails".
This would have fields "personID", "dataType" and "dataValue". It
might have records like the following:
personID, dataType, dataValue
1,phone,123456
1,email,t...@test.com
1,state,NSW
2,phone,987456321
2,state,VIC
3,phone,789456123
Of course this is just an example - the parent entity could be
anything.
I've seen a few XML files implement this type of design. e.g
<job>
<jobNumber>XYZ12345</jobNumber*>
<jobCreated>12-03-2005</jobCre*ated>
<jobdeatils>
<jobdetail type="WEIGHT">167</jobdetail>
<jobdetail type="WEIGHTMEASURE">KGS</jobd*etail>
<jobdetail type="CUBIC">45</jobdetail>
<jobdetail type="CUBICMEASURE">M3</jobdet*ail>
<jobdetail type="NUMPIECES">345</jobdetai*l>
</jobdetails>
</job>
Hope someone can put a name to this sort of design. I want to research
into this to see how people search effectively in this design and its
performance compared to traditional methods etc etc.
I would be implementing this design in MS SQL and it would be accessed
by an 400-500 users via ASP.NET.
Without fail, whenever I try to access my simple "to-do" list on my ASP.NET 2008 Express page, I get this: Timeout expired. The timeout period elapsed prior to completion of the operation or the server is not responding.This error occurs one time, and then it works ok for a couple of hours. I have seen the help saying to add "Connect Timeout=120" to your connection string, but as a long-time Oracle and Interbase user, I have to say that 2 minutes is FAR FAR too long for a user to have to wait to access 10 rows of simple text data. Most internet users have shut off their browsers or gone over to another site long before that. Or worse, they are clicking reload 55 times. It's like the MSSQL libraries shut down after a time and must be restarted and reinitialized. My question is this: What causes this unacceptable snoring delay (hard-drive sleep mode, caching issues, SQL Server asleep), and what can be done (other than putting my users to sleep for 2 minutes) to make it better?
Does anyone know any good references (web, books etc) about optimizing performance for MSSQL Server 6.5, not seen from a developers perspective but more the admin of the SQL Server?
I`m using a very data comprehensive application and I have the feeling things would run a lot smoother if the database/server was optimized once in a while (like you can do with Access).
I develop my database with SQL Server 2005 Express.I have a member profile, stored in tblMember.In this profile I have a field "Religion" and a field "Country".I COULD store the value of these fields just in those fields, eg Christian in the Religion field and "Sweden" in the Country field.ORI could make a seperate table for each, eg for tblReligion:ReligionID (PK)ReligionName (string)and then in the tblMember make a FK to the PK of this table.but I have many of these kind of fields (where a FK might be needed) in my tblMember.So if I want to search in my members, I will first have to obtain the PK of the other tables.My questions:is this good DB design?Will I get performance problems when I do it like this?Are there better solutions?Thanks ahead!!
Hi, just wondering if anyone noticed the MSSQL Express 2005 is so inconsistent with its performance. I was testing out a query with 2 joins, with the main table having about 13,600,000 records. With the same criteria value, sometimes it finished executing in 3 secs. sometimes almost a 1 min.
Could it be just the volume of the data? This is really driving me crazy!
I have created an internal “e-mail� type system in our business application. The idea was pretty basic have a message table which would hold the data such as To, FROM, blah blah. Then there would be an Inbox table which would have the User Name and the Message.ID from the message table. By joining these two you would have the person’s inbox. Each table has an ID column which is the clustered index, The Inbox table has an additional Index on the User Name. These tables are very busy and large, here are the stats.
Messages – 860,000 rows est. Total Inbox – 2,584,000 rows est. Total
For June there were 144,000 Messages of which 780 went to multiple recipients causing 276,000 Inbox references.
Everything works except getting a persons Inbox can get very slow. To address this we are currently Index Defragging and Re-Indexing. Now these action appear to be correcting the problem but only for a short time which is why we are doing it several times a day.
Solution? I think the problem is that my most used Index (User Name in the Inbox) is not clustered? And I should have a larger Fill Factor than 90%?
Any advice greatly appreciated, the transaction logs are killing me.
I have an opportunity to rebuild a database model with the express purpose of improving query performance. So given the following I have a few questions.
Table A (~500M records) Primary Key Field (int) Field 1 (varchar) Field 2 (varchar) Field 3 (varchar) Field 4 (varchar) Field 5 (varchar)
Table B (1B+ records) Primary Key Field (int) Foreign Key Field (int) Field 1 (varchar) Field 2 (varchar) Field 3 (varchar) Field 4 (varchar) Field 5 (varchar)
* Assumed: Tables are inner joined on all queries. The database is readonly.
-- Most of my lookups are based on querying Field 1 of Table A. The data content of Field 1, Table A is 90% unique. 1) Would it be more beneficial to put the clustered index on Field 1 instead of the PK field in Table A? 2) Can an Identity column be non-clustered? 3) Alternatively, would it be beneficial to build a separate lookup table with just the PK & Field 1 of Table A, with a clustered index on the lookup table Field 1 which I join on Table A? (did that make sense?)
-- I have a secondary lookup that performs queries on Fields 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5 of Table B 1) Would it be more beneficial to create an additional indexed lookup column of the concantenated values of Fields 1-5 of Table B versus a covering index of all 5 columns? 2) Does a clustered index have to be unique? 3) Would a clustered index be more beneficial over Fields 1-5 or the special lookup column versus the PK or FK fields? 4) Would creating a special lookup table with just the requisite fields be more beneficial?
An extra question. The existing data model uses the CHAR datatype for all columns less than 9 characters wide and the columns are set to allow nulls. This requires every select statement to COALESCE() and RTRIM() all these columns. I intend to make all (affected) columns VARCHAR, NOT NULL with a default value of a 0-length string. Will this enhance query performance?
it is used in an web application that seraches for all the rest of the information using an orderid and displays the rest of the details the size of the table currently is about 123000 records that is increasing by 20000 every week.
i have an archive of the same data that has 7,666,000 records that are also going to be placed into the same database.
my question is is that a good idea of doing this? are there any performance issues that i need to be aware of as currently the application runs quite quick?
Hello, we currently have our database (MSSQL 2005) on our web server however to do increased traffic and business we are now moving our database to its own server. I was wondering if anyone here knew of some good ways to setup/tune Windows Server 2003 and SQL 2005 for best performance. MSSQL will be the only application running on the server and want to make sure it is as fast as possible! Thanks in advance!!!
How many result-rows does mssql return should be used asynchronous method to use mssql cursor, can get the best performance in any time in any result offset?
i want to make the cursor fast in any time whatever how many results returned
i was planning to create a database migration tool .. its a certain database of a DMS (document management system) to another DMS (two different DMS)... from DMS using msde 2000 server .. and tranfer to a DMS using a postgre sql or mssql .. depends ..
they have different table structures and names . . :D
i was thing of what language shall i use.. or what language is the best to work on this kind of project :)
Does enabling/disabling Data Execution Prevention have a performanceimpact on SQL 2000 or SQL 2005?For SQL best performance - how should I configure for:Processor Scheduling:Programs or Background servicesMemory Usage:Programs or System Cache
I am a bit new to the MSSQL server. In our application, we use so many SQL queries. To imporve the performance, we used the Database enigine Tuning tool to create the indexes. The older version of the application supports MSSQL 2000 also. To re-create these new indexes, I have an issue in running these "CREATE INDEX" commands as the statements generated for index creation are done in MSSQL 2005. The statements include "INCLUDES" keyword which is supported in MSSQL 2005 but not in MSSQL 2000.
Ex:-
CREATE INDEX IND_001_PPM_PA ON PPM_PROCESS_ACTIVITY
I am currently work on mssql 6.5. On my workstation, I have mssql 6.5 cient software.
However, I would like to install mssql 7.0 server on my nt workstation and work with it to become familiar with 7.0. Can I install mssql 7.0 server on my nt workstation? Can mssql 6.5 client coexist with mssql 7.0 on the same machine if they are in different directories?
Ben writes "I have a sql script that doesn't function very well when it's executed on a SQL 2000 server.
The scrpt looks like this:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- USE [master] GO IF NOT EXISTS (SELECT * FROM master.dbo.syslogins WHERE loginname = N'SSDBUSERNAME') EXEC sp_addlogin N'SSDBUSERNAME', N'SSDBPASSWORD' GO GRANT ADMINISTER BULK OPERATIONS TO [SSDBUSERNAME] GO GRANT AUTHENTICATE SERVER TO [SSDBUSERNAME] GO GRANT CONNECT SQL TO [SSDBUSERNAME] GO GRANT CONTROL SERVER TO [SSDBUSERNAME] GO GRANT CREATE ANY DATABASE TO [SSDBUSERNAME] GO USE [master] GO If EXISTS (Select * FROM master.dbo.syslogins WHERE loginname = N'SSDBUSERNAME') ALTER LOGIN [SSDBUSERNAME] WITH PASSWORD=N'SSDBPASSWORD' GO GRANT ADMINISTER BULK OPERATIONS TO [SSDBUSERNAME] GO GRANT AUTHENTICATE SERVER TO [SSDBUSERNAME] GO GRANT CONNECT SQL TO [SSDBUSERNAME] GO GRANT CONTROL SERVER TO [SSDBUSERNAME] GO GRANT CREATE ANY DATABASE TO [SSDBUSERNAME] GO USE [master] GO IF EXISTS (select * from dbo.sysdatabases where name = 'ISIZ') DROP DATABASE [ISIZ] GO USE [SurveyData] GO exec sp_adduser 'SSDBUSERNAME' GRANT INSERT, UPDATE, SELECT, DELETE TO SSDBUSERNAME GO USE [SurveyManagement] GO exec sp_adduser 'SSDBUSERNAME' GRANT INSERT, UPDATE, SELECT, DELETE TO SSDBUSERNAME ---------------------------------------------------------------
I need to be converted to a script that can be executed on both MSSQL 2000 and MSSQL 2005.
I was wondering if somebody there could help me with this problem?!
I've been tasked to move our production databases on MSSQL 2000 to 2005. I've supported MSSQL since version 6.5 and performed migrations to successor versions.
Current Environment is MSSQL 2000 32-bit with current Service Packs.
I've performed mock migrations on Test servers upgrading all Production instances simultaneously from MSSQL 2000 to 2005 32-bit. The Test environment is identical to Production minus server name, IP etc. Also I have a separate server with MSSQL 2005 installed where I use the DETACH / ATTACH and BACKUP / RESTORE method for migration / acceptance testing. There are approximately 30 databases totaling 70 GB. This has gone as expected and fairly successful. Vendors have been coordinated with to update code and staff for acceptance testing.
I'd prefer going directly to MSSQL 2005 64-bit instead if possible due to memory benefits etc. This is where I'd like some feedback prior to borrowing a 64-bit server for testing.
Upgrade options:
1. Is it better to migrate from MSSQL 2000 32-bit to 2005 64-bit via: a. DETACH / ATTACH b. BACKUP / RESTORE c. Is one method more advantageous relating to the end result? 2. Regarding XP clients, have issues been experienced with the default SQL Server driver or is an alternate recommended for XP clients to connect to a MSSQL 64-bit server databases? 3. If you have performed this migration and have relevant experience please pass them along.
Ok, I'm doing a football database for fixtures and stuff. The problem I am having is that in a fixture, there is both a home, and an away team. The tables as a result are something like this:
It's not exactly like that, but you get the point. The question is, can I do a fixture query which results in one record per fixture, showing both teams details. The first in a hometeam field and the second in an away team field.
Fixture contains the details about the fixture like date and fixture id and has it been played
Team contains team info like team id, name, associated graphic
TeamFixture is the table which links the fixture to it's home and away team.
TeamFixture exists to prevent a many to many type relationship.
Make sense? Sorry if this turns out to be really easy, just can't get my head around it at the mo!
I would like to create a table called product. My objective is to get list of packages available for each product in data grid view column while selecting each product. Each product may have different packages type (eg:- Nos, CTN, OTR etc). Some product may have two packages and some for 3 packages etc. Quantity in each packages also may be differ ( for eg:- for some CTN may contain 12 nos or in other case 8 nos etc). Prices for each packages also will be different that also need to show. Â How to design the table..Â
Product name  :  Nestle milk | Rainbow milk packages  : CTN,OTR, NOs |
CTN, NOs Price: 50,20,5 | 40,6
(Remarks for your reference):CTN=10nos, OTR=4 nos  | CTN=8 Nos
DB is developed on local computer with MSSQL 2005 Express. My host is on MSSQL 2005 workgroup. Are they compatible, because I am getting errors? Is my approach wrong?
I have tried several approaches.
A) I created a backup of database on my local, then placed a copy on the server. Then I tried to restore through Server Management Studio. I get this error.
TITLE: Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio
------------------------------
An exception occurred while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch. (Microsoft.SqlServer.ConnectionInfo)
------------------------------
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
The backed-up database has on-disk structure version 611. The server supports version 539 and cannot restore or upgrade this database.
RESTORE FILELIST is terminating abnormally. (Microsoft SQL Server, Error: 3169)
For help, click: http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink?ProdName=Microsoft+SQL+Server&ProdVer=08.00.2039&EvtSrc=MSSQLServer&EvtID=3169&LinkId=20476
------------------------------
BUTTONS:
OK
------------------------------
B: I also have tried copying the database. I put it in the same path as the other databases that can be read with server management studio on the server. Then, tried to get to it through server managements studio and it did not appear. So I tried to attach it. Then I received this error:
TITLE: Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio
------------------------------
Attach database failed for Server 'MROACH1'. (Microsoft.SqlServer.Smo)
For help, click: http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink?ProdName=Microsoft+SQL+Server&ProdVer=9.00.2047.00&EvtSrc=Microsoft.SqlServer.Management.Smo.ExceptionTemplates.FailedOperationExceptionText&EvtID=Attach+database+Server&LinkId=20476
------------------------------
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
An exception occurred while executing a Transact-SQL statement or batch. (Microsoft.SqlServer.ConnectionInfo)
------------------------------
Could not find row in sysindexes for database ID 10, object ID 1, index ID 1. Run DBCC CHECKTABLE on sysindexes.
Could not open new database 'LodgingDB'. CREATE DATABASE is aborted. (Microsoft SQL Server, Error: 602)
For help, click: http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink?ProdName=Microsoft+SQL+Server&EvtSrc=MSSQLServer&EvtID=602&LinkId=20476
------------------------------
BUTTONS:
OK
------------------------------
C: I have also tried opening the Database, and back up file through Server Management Studio. without success.
D: I also tried Windows and Software update at microsoft update, but no updates were recommended for Version on Server.
I'm surprised this is so hard. My original data base was created in same family of software. 2005 MS SQL Express. I could use some direct help from someone experienced with this. Am I doing it wrong or are the DB versions incompatible.
Hello Everyone,I have a very complex performance issue with our production database.Here's the scenario. We have a production webserver server and adevelopment web server. Both are running SQL Server 2000.I encounted various performance issues with the production server with aparticular query. It would take approximately 22 seconds to return 100rows, thats about 0.22 seconds per row. Note: I ran the query in singleuser mode. So I tested the query on the Development server by taking abackup (.dmp) of the database and moving it onto the dev server. I ranthe same query and found that it ran in less than a second.I took a look at the query execution plan and I found that they we'rethe exact same in both cases.Then I took a look at the various index's, and again I found nodifferences in the table indices.If both databases are identical, I'm assumeing that the issue is relatedto some external hardware issue like: disk space, memory etc. Or couldit be OS software related issues, like service packs, SQL Serverconfiguations etc.Here's what I've done to rule out some obvious hardware issues on theprod server:1. Moved all extraneous files to a secondary harddrive to free up spaceon the primary harddrive. There is 55gb's of free space on the disk.2. Applied SQL Server SP4 service packs3. Defragmented the primary harddrive4. Applied all Windows Server 2003 updatesHere is the prod servers system specs:2x Intel Xeon 2.67GHZTotal Physical Memory 2GB, Available Physical Memory 815MBWindows Server 2003 SE /w SP1Here is the dev serers system specs:2x Intel Xeon 2.80GHz2GB DDR2-SDRAMWindows Server 2003 SE /w SP1I'm not sure what else to do, the query performance is an order ofmagnitude difference and I can't explain it. To me its is a hardware oroperating system related issue.Any Ideas would help me greatly!Thanks,Brian T*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
Hello Everyone,I have a very complex performance issue with our production database.Here's the scenario. We have a production webserver server and adevelopment web server. Both are running SQL Server 2000.I encounted various performance issues with the production server witha particular query. It would take approximately 22 seconds to return100 rows, thats about 0.22 seconds per row. Note: I ran the query insingle user mode. So I tested the query on the Development server bytaking a backup (.dmp) of the database and moving it onto the devserver. I ran the same query and found that it ran in less than asecond.I took a look at the query execution plan and I found that they we'rethe exact same in both cases.Then I took a look at the various index's, and again I found nodifferences in the table indices.If both databases are identical, I'm assumeing that the issue isrelated to some external hardware issue like: disk space, memory etc.Or could it be OS software related issues, like service packs, SQLServer configuations etc.Here's what I've done to rule out some obvious hardware issues on theprod server:1. Moved all extraneous files to a secondary harddrive to free up spaceon the primary harddrive. There is 55gb's of free space on the disk.2. Applied SQL Server SP4 service packs3. Defragmented the primary harddrive4. Applied all Windows Server 2003 updatesHere is the prod servers system specs:2x Intel Xeon 2.67GHZTotal Physical Memory 2GB, Available Physical Memory 815MBWindows Server 2003 SE /w SP1Here is the dev serers system specs:2x Intel Xeon 2.80GHz2GB DDR2-SDRAMWindows Server 2003 SE /w SP1I'm not sure what else to do, the query performance is an order ofmagnitude difference and I can't explain it. To me its is a hardware oroperating systemrelated issue.Any Ideas would help me greatly!Thanks,Brian T
Hey guys, im trying to write an application to connect to a database on a mssql server using asp.net. Thus far any code i've seen and tried seems to not recognize the ODBC connections, so i was hoping you guys can offer some suggestions. For the example lets say the server is mssql9.aaa.com the db name is xyz with a username of welsh_welsh and the password is q with a table named abc in the database. How exactly would you go about connecting. The code i've tried so far is below: <% "Data Source = mssql9.aaa.com;Initial Catalog = xyz;UserID = welsh_welsh;Password = q;" %> The error i get from the sever is Description: An error occurred during the compilation of a resource required to service this request. Please review the following specific error details and modify your source code appropriately. Compiler Error Message: BC30035: Syntax error.
Im trying to write a very basic stored porcedure that looks up some data and performs simple calculations, the results of which are then saved (updated) to a specific table. To be more specific, I use the avg function in a simple select statement to average some figures based on a where clause: SELECT AVG(exactskip)FROM HistoryWHERE Exact = '023' ...This should return 425.66, but it returns either 425 or 425.0000. The results which are returned and being saved are being shown as a rounded integer or shown with 4 zeros after the decimal. I know it should be ending with a decimal in almost all cases. The column in the table that the result are being saved to is formated as smallmoney. The column in the table whos data is being averaged is set as an integer. Question, how can I make the avg function calculate the decimal values and save the appropriate decimal results. What changes do I need to make to my select statement. Any help would be appreciated. I am still very new to all this, so please be specific and somewhat step by step in any reply Thanks Scott
I have an SQL 2000 server set up that runs perfectly, and an IIS set up that runs perfectly but I can not get the webpage to read data from the dbase. Is there a connection that I have to make or a program I have to load? The page is a .asp page, and when I run the page that should connectI do not get any errors in the dbase at all, so I can only imagine that it is not even seeing an attemptat a connection. Any help is appreciated.
